It isn't that the Left, or indeed "everyone", projects. It's that everyone has lenses and biases with which they view the world.
I see some saucy Misty art (or whatever underage v& is popular these days) and shrug. Fictional. The only real tragedy is that The Pokemon Company isn't being paid for such mass use of their intellectual property.
Someone else sees it, and says "this image makes people want to harm real-world children". Well, the only people that they could know the thoughts of is themself. It's certainly not supported by data, which actually shows the opposite fun fact, it's a purely emotional argument, with emotions generating from within the self.
Always watch for people who define a horrible negative trait, and then include themselves (overtly or subtly) in the overarching category they're describing.
The opposite political side showcase of this is the gay pastors. The ones going "God says gays gonna go to hell, take it up with Him, I don't make the laws." appeal to authority or data, not emotion or self. Meanwhile, the ones going "those gays seduce good men away from the righteous path with their sexual ways, did I mention that pastors are good men on righteous paths?"... Probably gonna be found in a gay bar at some point, arguing from an emotive and personal lens stance.
That the biggest voices in shutting down art they don't like "to protect the children" are the same biggest voices advocating for "drag queen show you dick to kids dance hour" tells me everything about the righteousness of their cause.
They're just moving this crap around. They reduce the number of older men trying to sleep with underage girls, and replace it with older trying to convince underage kids to amputate their genitals.
It's like a power vacuum or something, you get rid of one group and a new even worse moves into their previous spot.
It isn't that the Left, or indeed "everyone", projects. It's that everyone has lenses and biases with which they view the world.
I see some saucy Misty art (or whatever underage v& is popular these days) and shrug. Fictional. The only real tragedy is that The Pokemon Company isn't being paid for such mass use of their intellectual property.
Someone else sees it, and says "this image makes people want to harm real-world children". Well, the only people that they could know the thoughts of is themself. It's certainly not supported by data, which actually shows the opposite fun fact, it's a purely emotional argument, with emotions generating from within the self.
Always watch for people who define a horrible negative trait, and then include themselves (overtly or subtly) in the overarching category they're describing.
The opposite political side showcase of this is the gay pastors. The ones going "God says gays gonna go to hell, take it up with Him, I don't make the laws." appeal to authority or data, not emotion or self. Meanwhile, the ones going "those gays seduce good men away from the righteous path with their sexual ways, did I mention that pastors are good men on righteous paths?"... Probably gonna be found in a gay bar at some point, arguing from an emotive and personal lens stance.
That the biggest voices in shutting down art they don't like "to protect the children" are the same biggest voices advocating for "drag queen show you dick to kids dance hour" tells me everything about the righteousness of their cause.
They're just moving this crap around. They reduce the number of older men trying to sleep with underage girls, and replace it with older trying to convince underage kids to amputate their genitals.
It's like a power vacuum or something, you get rid of one group and a new even worse moves into their previous spot.