The subjects that you can’t even bring up without getting downvoted, banned, fired, expelled, cancelled etc.

    • I’d call it a cultural artifact. We used to get married very young. In some cultures the kids are introduced to sex by the grandparents. And of course in our own culture the ideal of sexy beauty is a supermodel who looks like a 13 year old boy. It’s a whirlwind wrapped in a psychosis for sure.

    • I chalk this up to not having a word to describe folks suffering from the condition as opposed to predators acting on their condition (or even predators just abusing children regardless of attraction). For a ton of people they use the word pedophile to mean someone who sexually abuses children. Because as soon as nuanced discussion about “pedophiles who don’t abuse kids” come up, people accuse you of “defending pedophiles” but they use it to mean “defending people who abuse children.”

  • On lemmy?

    • Two-space indent (as superior to tab indent)

    • Hey, by the way, your comment was kinda racist

    • I’m a new user and why isn’t this more like reddit

    • I’m pretty okay with capitalism, actually

    • Here’s video without text summary (NB: this one is, IMO, entirely deserving of downvotes)

  • All drugs should be legal and regulated.

    Is it worth it, drug warriors? All the unnecessary deaths at the hands of police/gangs/cartels and unregulated drugs of a unknown potency? Was it worth sacrificing all our civil liberties on the vain funeral pyre that is the United States of America?

    When humanity is victorious in the drug war and all drugs are legalized, will drug users criminalize sobriety?

    Will people high as fuck demand everyone to piss in a plastic cup to make sure they are high?

    Will drug users ruin sober people’s lives with felonies and time in prison with hardened criminals?

    Will drug users dissolve civil liberties and prop up a bipartisan police state that gives cops a license to kill?

    NO!

    Who would want to do that to someone? To a fellow human for doing what they want with their own bodies? Prohibitionists… that’s who. And we are not them

    Nothing lasts forever drug warriors. Tick tock. We will be free one day, and you will wail and moan and your cries will fall on deaf ears.

    Get fucked prohibitionists. Feel fortunate we want justice, not retribution.

    Now playing The War on Drugs - Red Eyes

  •  rez   ( @accarezzu@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    19
    edit-2
    19 days ago
    • “Why doesn’t this site have more in common with reddit, which it’s more or less a clone of?”
    • Can’t bring up Trans people existing (without a weirdo downvoting you, of course)
    • Can’t be critical of… a certain religion without getting jumped by keyboard warriors and called a Genocide Supporter
    • Don’t even get me started on whatever the heck is with the Hexbear folks…
    • Lemmy is, at times, a bit of an echo chamber
    • For what it’s worth, I’ve personally never found it controversial to talk about in person. And this includes in countries where it’s a prosecuted crime.

      Copying is not theft, artificial scarcity in the digital world is a tragedy, and I intentionally avoid paying middle-men distributors (like streaming services and record companies) for art.

      • Speed limit is the speed limit. End of.

        If someone wants to go above the speed limit in the fast lane, then they’re contravening road rules.

        No matter what social norm people believe there to be, it doesn’t have precedence over the speed limits.

        In a case where the the car in front is going slower than the speed limit, it would be good etiquette though to move over.

        •  mub   ( @mub@lemmy.ml ) 
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          In the UK it goes lanes 1, 2, 3. You stay in lane 1. Lane 2 and 3 are for passing only.

          You will often see members of the lane 2 owners club just cruising along in lane 2 but this effectively closes lane 1 (undertaking is illegal and very unsafe).

          Sitting in lane 3 closes the entire motorway.

          I agree there is a speed limit. But the law says you cannot just sit in lane 2 or 3 if you are not overtaking someone. They even updated the law recently. If you hog lane 2 or 3 the police can report you and the penalty is 3 points and £100 fine

          People who sit in lane 3 at 69mph are breaking the law and likely to cause an accident by forcing people to pass on the wrong side out of frustration (yes illegal but they will do it) and this is why they are over taking lanes, not just cruising lanes.

          Never be the reason someone else does something stupid on the road. Always do the safest thing.

          • Interesting to see how different that is from Australia. In your example only lane 3 is a passing lane, and “undertaking” isn’t a thing, it’s completely legal to overtake in any lane.

            1. Often people use those lanes to speed. If a car ahead is overtaking at or within a reasonable range of the speed limit, but not at the speed the speeder wants to travel. The speeder must be patient, they don’t get to dictate what manoeuvres are happening ahead.

            2. The argument you present at the end isn’t logical,

            … Always do the safest thing.

            I can largely agree with this sentiment, but you say before,

            People who sit in lane 3 at 69mph are breaking the law and likely to cause an accident by forcing people to pass on the wrong side out of frustration (yes illegal but they will do it)…

            If undercutting is the most unsafe thing for the person behind to do in the situation, then as your sentiment captures, the frustrated party undercutting are still in the wrong.

            They are in the wrong because, they have failed to ‘always do the safest thing’ in the given situation.

            1. Never be the reason someone else does something stupid on the road.

            Nice sentiment again, but it implicitly assigns a rigid cause and effect regime to a situation where the ‘frustrated party’ behind has their own agency and likely as much training. There is no necessity that they undercut, it is a choice the party behind makes. The cause does not necessitate that effect, at best it could contribute.

            In essence the sentiment shifts the blame from the person causing a potential accident (the undercutter), to the person ahead who, at worst, is causing poor traffic conditions.

            •  mub   ( @mub@lemmy.ml ) 
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              18 days ago

              Like I said undertaking is bad. No excuse for doing it, except where it is legal. If someone goes under speed limit in lane 3 you can undertake I believe, though I would still be super cautious.

              Obviously speeding is illegal, and I’m not suggesting anyone should support do so. But we should let the police deal with it.

              Just to clarify, you don’t think it is ok to sit in lane 2 or 3 at the speed limit if there is room to move over ? Not doing so is also illegal in the UK.

              While the majority of people stay within the law (+/- 10%) there are enough people behaving badly on the roads that you should always take that into consideration.

              This is a great example of the is/ought problem. You can try your best to make the “ought” true, but don’t neglect what reality “is”. On the road that means; assume there is an idiot nearby, and drive in a way that keeps you safe from their shit.

              • You are correct. If the flow of traffic in lane 1 or 2 is faster than the flow of traffic in lane 2 or 3 then it is okay to pass. Intentionally changing lane temporarily to pass a car on the inside is illegal.

                The other poster confused your point.

                If someone in lane 3 is going 69 and overtaking someone then there’s no reason to pass them, and probably isn’t safe or legal given there is, by definition, a car on the inside lane already.

    • Thank you, even if the some people believe there is a specific lane to constantly edge ahead of poor slow drivers, that is not the ideal lane to be the fastest car in. People merge on from left a lot more than you notice. I live in a city that has a nearly equal amounts of merges from left.