Fictional things are fictional, real things are real. Once we clear up all real crimes, then we can prosecute fictional people for murdering other fictional people in simulated video game or animation environments. Or slandering them. Or shagging them. Or burning them. Or removing their souls to power a giant moon-cannon. Whatever war crime or normal crime is occurring right now in fiction-land by fiction-people to other fiction-people.
Until the last grooming gang is rounded up, the last illegal alien quarantined, the last mugger brought in, the last spraypainting vandal under house arrest... I think there's bigger priorities than worrying about the actions of fictional entities. In fact, I'd go farther: There's still homeless, income inequality, wildfire seasons, food safety audits... There's still tax codes pertaining to events a hundred years back that could be streamlined.
There's a LONG list of things I feel like we should be more concerned about, than fictional crimes committed by fictional people against other fictional people, no matter how large, or how niche, an audience there is to view that entirely fictional event.
And then you run into the fact that once you have a law that lets you arrest that guy for that drawing, who interprets and enforces the law comes into question. Given how many leftists are calling Pragmata a pedo game for instance, once the wrong people assume power, some of those ten who just say "kill the pedo" are going to be finding themselves against the very same wall for making or playing a game that showed a White man being a good father to a young White girl.
You make laws that let you deal out real world punishments for drawings that are fundamentally not hurting anyone, but are gross or run against decent sensibilities, sooner or later someone will be in power who says your sensibilities are the ones that are gross and will deal out those punishments to you.
We already see this happening with laws that are actually just and right. There are laws against murder that should apply to everyone, but with get a leftist judge in power, and you get White men getting life in prison while a black gets let out of jail 32 times and gets 6 months if convicted. We have laws about adults having sex with minors, and if it's a man having sex with a girl, he gets 30 years in prison, but if it's a woman having sex with a boy, she gets a year probation.
Sooner or later your "arrest a guy who drew a 30-year-old man ass-raping an 8-year-old girl." law will end up getting used to arrest the guy who makes the next Pragmata, and ironically not used to actually arrest the guy drawing the ass-rape.
I agree with you except for the partisanship. I assure you that if a guy draws a picture of a 30-year-old ass-raping an 8-year old, there are roughly the same number of conservative Christians who want him shot in the head as there are blue-haired liberals.
It's one of the two bipartisan panics: pedophiles and AI. Those are the two issues where the parties are united and don't give a flying fuck about principles like free expression.
The blue haired liberals are the ones cheering and clapping for public parades with nude men waving their cock and balls in front of children and having children attend troon strip shows. Your argument holds no water in real life.
Soooo in response, the red-hat conservatives want to kill everyone who draws something reminiscent of sexuality? You're kind of proving my point, friend.
I am most certainly not your friend. And this statement "Soooo in response, the red-hat conservatives want to kill everyone who draws something reminiscent of sexuality?" is a meaningless string of words and nowhere close to a cogent argument.
You're my friend whether you like it or not. We're fellow outcasts from polite society, and that makes us friends.
And you know as well as I do that the red-hats want to stomp out displays of sexuality. They want porn banned every bit as much as the blue-hairs want it banned. The blue-hairs want it banned because it objectifies women, and the red-hats want it banned because it offends God.
Counterpoint, it most certainly does not make you two, or you and I, or him and I, or any other grouping you imagine, friends.
We are cohabitants here, certainly, but the purity spirals and ideological purges have ousted so many from larger locales that we have people here who agree on many issues but disagree fundamentally and vehemently on a number of others.
Some of us are friends of convenience, certainly, but the general group relations are, at best, those of associates. We may be pulling the rope, but it's only vaguely in the same direction, and we're bickering and bitching the whole way through.
This isnt really an argument of anything except pro-anarchism. Which if that's how you meant it good for you.
But if it isnt, it hold no water, it's built on the same essential foundation as "some people are intersex therefore gender is a spectrum"
Declaring that because there are Grey areas and difficulties in defining overlap between borderline definitions isnt an argument against the existence of those definition, only an observation of our failure in ability to observe them perfectly.
The 30 yo in th3 example being punished for that would be just. Declaring that injustice can be meted out by organization using justice as a smokescreen doesn't negate that.
So, to be clear, you want a person to sit down with a pencil and a sheet of paper and be able to draw something that gets them sent to prison as a sex offender?
You know that is literally prison for wrong think, right?
Lets test some edge cases.
Does stick figure art count? What if it is clearly labeled with ages?
How about drawing midgets? Does that count for prison time?
What about skinny midgets? What about badly drawn skinny midgets?
How about fantasy races like Gnomes? What about Grogu? He is tiny, but he is 50, but he is a child?
So, to be clear, you want a person to sit down with a pencil and a sheet of paper and be able to draw something that gets them sent to prison as a sex offender?
What? That's exactly the opposite of what I want.
What I want is for nobody to go to prison for drawing on paper.
What most people want is to arrest and execute all the pedos, even if the most they've actually done is drawn pictures with a pencil.
It's one of the rare bipartisan issues. Most of the guys on this forum, as well as most of the guys on Reddit, just say "kill the pedo" and temporarily suspend any beliefs they have about free speech or expression.
Fictional things are fictional, real things are real. Once we clear up all real crimes, then we can prosecute fictional people for murdering other fictional people in simulated video game or animation environments. Or slandering them. Or shagging them. Or burning them. Or removing their souls to power a giant moon-cannon. Whatever war crime or normal crime is occurring right now in fiction-land by fiction-people to other fiction-people.
Until the last grooming gang is rounded up, the last illegal alien quarantined, the last mugger brought in, the last spraypainting vandal under house arrest... I think there's bigger priorities than worrying about the actions of fictional entities. In fact, I'd go farther: There's still homeless, income inequality, wildfire seasons, food safety audits... There's still tax codes pertaining to events a hundred years back that could be streamlined.
There's a LONG list of things I feel like we should be more concerned about, than fictional crimes committed by fictional people against other fictional people, no matter how large, or how niche, an audience there is to view that entirely fictional event.
Hear hear.
It's a tough one, because most people want there to be some provision to arrest a guy who drew a 30-year-old man ass-raping an 8-year-old girl.
There are some people who say "drawing should always be free speech," but for every one of those, there are ten who just say "kill the pedo."
And then you run into the fact that once you have a law that lets you arrest that guy for that drawing, who interprets and enforces the law comes into question. Given how many leftists are calling Pragmata a pedo game for instance, once the wrong people assume power, some of those ten who just say "kill the pedo" are going to be finding themselves against the very same wall for making or playing a game that showed a White man being a good father to a young White girl.
You make laws that let you deal out real world punishments for drawings that are fundamentally not hurting anyone, but are gross or run against decent sensibilities, sooner or later someone will be in power who says your sensibilities are the ones that are gross and will deal out those punishments to you.
We already see this happening with laws that are actually just and right. There are laws against murder that should apply to everyone, but with get a leftist judge in power, and you get White men getting life in prison while a black gets let out of jail 32 times and gets 6 months if convicted. We have laws about adults having sex with minors, and if it's a man having sex with a girl, he gets 30 years in prison, but if it's a woman having sex with a boy, she gets a year probation.
Sooner or later your "arrest a guy who drew a 30-year-old man ass-raping an 8-year-old girl." law will end up getting used to arrest the guy who makes the next Pragmata, and ironically not used to actually arrest the guy drawing the ass-rape.
I agree with you except for the partisanship. I assure you that if a guy draws a picture of a 30-year-old ass-raping an 8-year old, there are roughly the same number of conservative Christians who want him shot in the head as there are blue-haired liberals.
It's one of the two bipartisan panics: pedophiles and AI. Those are the two issues where the parties are united and don't give a flying fuck about principles like free expression.
The blue haired liberals are the ones cheering and clapping for public parades with nude men waving their cock and balls in front of children and having children attend troon strip shows. Your argument holds no water in real life.
Soooo in response, the red-hat conservatives want to kill everyone who draws something reminiscent of sexuality? You're kind of proving my point, friend.
I am most certainly not your friend. And this statement "Soooo in response, the red-hat conservatives want to kill everyone who draws something reminiscent of sexuality?" is a meaningless string of words and nowhere close to a cogent argument.
You're my friend whether you like it or not. We're fellow outcasts from polite society, and that makes us friends.
And you know as well as I do that the red-hats want to stomp out displays of sexuality. They want porn banned every bit as much as the blue-hairs want it banned. The blue-hairs want it banned because it objectifies women, and the red-hats want it banned because it offends God.
That's not how friendship works you retarded faggot.
Counterpoint, it most certainly does not make you two, or you and I, or him and I, or any other grouping you imagine, friends.
We are cohabitants here, certainly, but the purity spirals and ideological purges have ousted so many from larger locales that we have people here who agree on many issues but disagree fundamentally and vehemently on a number of others.
Some of us are friends of convenience, certainly, but the general group relations are, at best, those of associates. We may be pulling the rope, but it's only vaguely in the same direction, and we're bickering and bitching the whole way through.
He didn't prove your point at all. You're fucking dumb lol
He's offended by displays of sexuality. He'd no doubt like to shut them down.
I don't think he gets to act astonished when people want to shut down original works that deal with sexuality.
This isnt really an argument of anything except pro-anarchism. Which if that's how you meant it good for you.
But if it isnt, it hold no water, it's built on the same essential foundation as "some people are intersex therefore gender is a spectrum"
Declaring that because there are Grey areas and difficulties in defining overlap between borderline definitions isnt an argument against the existence of those definition, only an observation of our failure in ability to observe them perfectly.
The 30 yo in th3 example being punished for that would be just. Declaring that injustice can be meted out by organization using justice as a smokescreen doesn't negate that.
So, to be clear, you want a person to sit down with a pencil and a sheet of paper and be able to draw something that gets them sent to prison as a sex offender?
You know that is literally prison for wrong think, right?
Lets test some edge cases.
Does stick figure art count? What if it is clearly labeled with ages?
How about drawing midgets? Does that count for prison time?
What about skinny midgets? What about badly drawn skinny midgets?
How about fantasy races like Gnomes? What about Grogu? He is tiny, but he is 50, but he is a child?
And you trust judges to be fair about this?
What? That's exactly the opposite of what I want.
What I want is for nobody to go to prison for drawing on paper.
What most people want is to arrest and execute all the pedos, even if the most they've actually done is drawn pictures with a pencil.
It's one of the rare bipartisan issues. Most of the guys on this forum, as well as most of the guys on Reddit, just say "kill the pedo" and temporarily suspend any beliefs they have about free speech or expression.
That is much more clear.
Thank you.