67
Show comments
15 comments
Well, they’re not pretending it’s not about buying and selling women, now.
Well, they’re not pretending it’s not about buying and selling women, now.
Agreed. At least they're being honest instead of pretending that 99% of prostitutes are voluntary Happy Hookers and the trafficking victims are just rare anomalies
Agreed. At least they're being honest instead of pretending that 99% of prostitutes are voluntary Happy Hookers and the trafficking victims are just rare anomalies
I am convinced that banning people on the internet is a fetish. These people become moderators on reddit so they can get off on banning people. Pathetic little power trip. "Your First Amendment has no power here! Be gone!"
I am convinced that banning people on the internet is a fetish. These people become moderators on reddit so they can get off on banning people. Pathetic little power trip. "Your First Amendment has no power here! Be gone!"
Lol, I think so too. If you question your ban they will put you on mute and say stop harassing the mods.
Lol, I think so too. If you question your ban they will put you on mute and say stop harassing the mods.
They wouldn't be wrong.. The first amendment as it is written could never be applied to getting banned from websites. And if there was legislation surrounding website banning practices, wouldn't spaces like Ovarit also be affected because perhaps we wouldn't be allowed to ban males from posting? (I'm not arguing, I just find this to be a really interesting topic)
They wouldn't be wrong.. The first amendment as it is written could never be applied to getting banned from websites. And if there was legislation surrounding website banning practices, wouldn't spaces like Ovarit also be affected because perhaps we wouldn't be allowed to ban males from posting? (I'm not arguing, I just find this to be a really interesting topic)
No, no. Banned people don't say they literally have 1A rights to post whatever and wherever, they complain about censorship and the lack of free speech. These words refer to things which are (1) objectively bad and (2) defined independently of the United States and their legislation.
And scaredy-faces primates tend to respond with "lololol 1A dosn't apply here", often in conjunction with this terrible comic by Randall Munroe, one of the gods of the scaredy-face primate pantheon, completely and perhaps deliberately missing the point.
When people are deplatformed on private platforms, the US constitution doesn't give them the right to free speech, but the humanitarian value of free speech is absolutely being violated, and when bad things are happening and end up being legal, it's only right and proper to complain and to campaign to change the law (specifically regulate the goddamn banks).
No, no. Banned people don't say they literally have 1A rights to post whatever and wherever, they complain about *censorship* and the *lack of free speech*. These words refer to things which are (1) objectively bad and (2) defined independently of the United States and their legislation.
And scaredy-faces primates tend to respond with "lololol 1A dosn't apply here", often in conjunction with [this terrible comic](https://xkcd.com/1357/) by Randall Munroe, one of the gods of the scaredy-face primate pantheon, completely and perhaps deliberately missing the point.
When people are deplatformed on private platforms, the US constitution doesn't give them the *right* to free speech, but the *humanitarian value* of free speech is absolutely being violated, and when bad things are happening and end up being legal, it's only right and proper to complain and to campaign to change the law (specifically regulate the goddamn banks).
That makes a lot of sense. It still makes me wonder though, what would the implications be for spaces that are meant to be curated for certain groups? So imagine for example that reddit has to allow gender critical viewpoints on their platform. Does that mean that ovarit would have to allow men or TRAs? I know this is all hypothetical and there isn't a solid answer for this, but still.
That makes a lot of sense. It still makes me wonder though, what would the implications be for spaces that are meant to be curated for certain groups? So imagine for example that reddit has to allow gender critical viewpoints on their platform. Does that mean that ovarit would have to allow men or TRAs? I know this is all hypothetical and there isn't a solid answer for this, but still.
“I can’t imagine the horrors of slavery. Humans aren't commodities to be bought and sold.”
“Sounds laborer-negative. Very uncool.”
>“I can’t imagine the horrors of slavery. Humans aren't commodities to be bought and sold.”
>“Sounds laborer-negative. Very uncool.”
"I wish we could eliminate child labor. Children shouldn't waste their childhood slaving away at a job to enrich their parents financially"
"OMG why do you hate children you childphobic CERF!!!"
"I wish we could eliminate child labor. Children shouldn't waste their childhood slaving away at a job to enrich their parents financially"
"OMG why do you hate children you childphobic CERF!!!"
Reddit mods are gods in their own minds. They must lead very sad lives if they can't handle that not everyone views sex positive as be as hedonistic and depraved as possible!
Reddit mods are gods in their own minds. They must lead very sad lives if they can't handle that not everyone views sex positive as be as hedonistic and depraved as possible!
/o/AntiKink NSFW
1013 subscribers
This community is for the analysis of BDSM, fetish and other sex practices which cause harm to the participants, especially from a feminist perspective.
Many of these practices coincide with or evolve into abuse.
Rules:
No Kink Apologia
Be Respectful
Engage in Good Faith
Rules are explained in the stickied post, "Read This First"
Created by maeven
That sub is a hellhole. I made the mistake of reading it when I was still a virgin, and it traumatized me.