5 ms·

Goddamn, I really really didn’t expect that level of extreme creepiness. The honey thing was weird, but the “sassy” policewoman thing? Wow. If you walked in on

Goddamn, I really really didn’t expect that level of extreme creepiness. The honey thing was weird, but the “sassy” policewoman thing? Wow. If you walked in on someone watching that, you’d be seriously concerned. Again, my asmptiom going into this was “oh boy, Internet moralizing and outrage again,” but it’s... incredibly sketchy. At best.

whatshisface 8y ago
Moralizing has gotten a bad rap over the past couple decades, to the point of being almost completely declawed in progressive circles, but one can only hope that morals will grow their claws back soon enough for stuff like this to be stopped. No matter how liberal you are, you're shooting you a future self in the foot if you profess a unconditional disregard of moralizing, because eventually you may discover that you do actually have morals. All it takes to get enligtened is for something bad enough to get spread around. Edit: don't get misled by thinking I'm using the Twitter/Cable News vernacular, by liberal I mean "permissive," and by progressive I mean "in favor of changing things." Those categories could apply to the forces in any culture, even historical cultures.
- thundergolfer 8y ago
  Where have you gotten the impression the 'progressives' and 'liberals' would have any qualms about calling out how dodgy these videos are?
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    By "liberal" I mean more liberal than average, which requires pushing back or at least not supporting at least one taboo. By doing so you put yourself at risk of dismantling your own ability to keep any taboos around, even the ones that actually are right. I'm not talking about political groups; by any measure in urban areas the political group called liberals would be just "normal," or "average." Progressive doesn't mean "Democrat," a Democrat in a blue county that believes things should be the same tomorrow as they are today is by definition a conservative.
    - iad 8y ago
      What are these lost taboos you're referring to? It sounds like you're saying people ought to go back to being homophobic, for example, because it will save us from a slippery slope to pedophilia?
      - PavlovsCat 8y ago
        What slope? Some people are already there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vux3-uFNtLw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vux3-uFNtLw
        iad 8y ago
        Some people have always been there. That doesn't mean they got there because not being homophobic is a slippery slope. Your video seems to be about a pedophile who is upset that the LGBT community isn't inclusive of pedophilia. I don't understand what point you were trying to make by linking that.
        PavlovsCat 8y ago
        The point is that that some people are already using the good ideas like tolerance about what people do in the bedroom to sneak outright pedophilia in there. Where you see someone complaining that not everybody accepts it, I first and foremostly see someone who does accept the argument they are making, otherwise they wouldn't be making it. That doesn't not count just because not everybody on the planet agrees with them. And if you think that's just the one person that exists, rather than an example for many persons that exist, that's a very bold assumption. And in Germany for example, there is quite the long and sordid history regarding that, among other things with people trying to legalize "consentual" [sic] sexual relations between minors and adults, but I don't know if there is anything thorough in the English language about it: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A4dophilie-Debatte_(1970er_und_1980er_Jahre) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A4dophilie-Debatte_(1970e... And that was directly in the wake of working against discrimination of homosexuality. For some naive people, it all fell under the umbrella of "being different sexually", and for pedophiles, that was how they tried to get a foot in the door. This sentence > Die Debatte über die Legalisierung pädosexueller Akte ist historisch eng verbunden mit der Forderung nach Abschaffung des § 175 (StGB) translates to > the debate about the legalization of pedosexual acts is historically tightly connected with the demand to get rid of [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph_175 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph_175 ] Or hey, this http://www.taz.de/!5143954/ http://www.taz.de/!5143954/ An article about an article that appeard in 1979 in the taz, declaring pedophilia is a victimless crime in the title. One sentence from that: > Bei einem Blick in die Archive wird klar: Teile des linksalternativen Milieus sympathisierten mit Pädophilen - zumindest boten sie ihnen einen ideologischen Rahmen. translates to > A look into the archives makes it obvious that parts of the alternative left scene sympathized with pedophiles - at least they provided an ideological framework to them. So, that already happened. And it absolutely was fueled by being overzealous about being liberal and progressive -- that's not what made anyone a pedophile, but that's how some people fell for the schemes of pedophiles, and let themselves and their networks be used. That's a fact. I'm not familiar with similar things in North America but I wouldn't outright bet on not finding anything if I had the nerve to go looking, which I don't at this time. edit: there's ignorance, and there's active suppression of information. what a cesspool.
  - PavlovsCat 8y ago
    Just look at all the comments calling it out getting downvoted into oblivion, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168083 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168083 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168256 They don't say what they disagree with, but they punish the poster. That's much more active than just having a qualm about calling something out, it's attacking people who call it out. And of course, this thread isn't very active to begin with, yet is already getting flagged by many, even jumped from the second page back to the first, but will still remain penalized and at best at bottom of page 1 for a little while [edit: nope, vanished from page 1 in the time it took me to write the rest of this comment, there you go]. Again, apart from the people who have qualms calling anything out, additional activity to suppress the calling out that takes place. That's not an impression, that's a fact. More generally, consider how 'pointing out that something could be rephrased as "think of the children"' is some kind of mic-drop killer argument for many here, as if that would automatically disqualify anything, like a Nazi comparison does in the minds of some: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22think%20of%20the%20children%22&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22think%20of%20the%20children...
- gotocake 8y ago
  I think it can be helpful to move away from pat generalizations like “progressive” or “liberal” for the most part. I have no doubt that if we first met while I was talking about my views on gender equality and redistribution of wealth you’d label me that way. If we first met while I was talking about my views on defense you’d label me right wing. If I was talking about my views on respecting trans people I’d be left again, but if we chatted about my views on Israel I’d be back on the right. I’m a passionate environmentalist who is passionately pro-nuclear, an atheist who is fascinated by and full of respect for faith. I don’t think I’m unusual either, I think most people are defined by more than one stance, and I don’t think relative morality is the province of left or right. You’re making a good point about the merits of accepting the moral dimensions of life, don’t let politics dilute that message. Progressive, Conservative... only a crazy person is just one of those things.
flerbnerbferble 8y ago
Yeah. That is some fuckin perved out shit. And, you know, the people who think shit like this is normal or reasonable just need to stay the fuck away from children of any age. But would I throw people in prison? Convict them of crimes for things in this neighborhood? This horrible (really fucking dark) gray area? That a person would toe the line, isn’t a reason to ruin their lives. Genres of video, such as this, could be eradicated and most people would be happier to have never seen it. I hate it when I wind up clicking my way deeper and deeper into odd corners where freakish spectacles lurk, after a marathon of internet surfing. But there’s a new freak show uncovering boundaries that we were unaware of yesterday, and it’s happening each week, with something new. The norms of the 20th century barely exist anymore. And some harm has come of this. And when it’s not in the expected places, we have no script to read aloud and guide us. The bullshit artistry is knowingly thick in this instance. What’s the worst part? The people consuming the videos, or the enablers handling the production of them? I think one take away from stories like this is that, with new technology and the alterations to the social landscape that it brings, we can create precise greyscale of infinite dimensions and gradation, that we never get a chance at black or white smoking gun decision making, and we might forever be confused, in a fog or haze or mist of nonsense. So, what’s next? We probably just need to bring the axe down when it feels good and not think twice. It’s just gonna be a messy, ragged edge sometimes. In this case? No one needs to be treated like a criminal, and it’s hard to justify silencing weirdness, since it stifles the vibrance of any community, and yet... I’d not shed one tear at the loss of something as sacharine and disingenuous as this.

whatshisface 8y ago

Moralizing has gotten a bad rap over the past couple decades, to the point of being almost completely declawed in progressive circles, but one can only hope that morals will grow their claws back soon enough for stuff like this to be stopped. No matter how liberal you are, you're shooting you a future self in the foot if you profess a unconditional disregard of moralizing, because eventually you may discover that you do actually have morals. All it takes to get enligtened is for something bad enough to get spread around. Edit: don't get misled by thinking I'm using the Twitter/Cable News vernacular, by liberal I mean "permissive," and by progressive I mean "in favor of changing things." Those categories could apply to the forces in any culture, even historical cultures.

thundergolfer 8y ago
Where have you gotten the impression the 'progressives' and 'liberals' would have any qualms about calling out how dodgy these videos are?
- whatshisface 8y ago
  By "liberal" I mean more liberal than average, which requires pushing back or at least not supporting at least one taboo. By doing so you put yourself at risk of dismantling your own ability to keep any taboos around, even the ones that actually are right. I'm not talking about political groups; by any measure in urban areas the political group called liberals would be just "normal," or "average." Progressive doesn't mean "Democrat," a Democrat in a blue county that believes things should be the same tomorrow as they are today is by definition a conservative.
  - iad 8y ago
    What are these lost taboos you're referring to? It sounds like you're saying people ought to go back to being homophobic, for example, because it will save us from a slippery slope to pedophilia?
    - PavlovsCat 8y ago
      What slope? Some people are already there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vux3-uFNtLw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vux3-uFNtLw
      - iad 8y ago
        Some people have always been there. That doesn't mean they got there because not being homophobic is a slippery slope. Your video seems to be about a pedophile who is upset that the LGBT community isn't inclusive of pedophilia. I don't understand what point you were trying to make by linking that.
        PavlovsCat 8y ago
        The point is that that some people are already using the good ideas like tolerance about what people do in the bedroom to sneak outright pedophilia in there. Where you see someone complaining that not everybody accepts it, I first and foremostly see someone who does accept the argument they are making, otherwise they wouldn't be making it. That doesn't not count just because not everybody on the planet agrees with them. And if you think that's just the one person that exists, rather than an example for many persons that exist, that's a very bold assumption. And in Germany for example, there is quite the long and sordid history regarding that, among other things with people trying to legalize "consentual" [sic] sexual relations between minors and adults, but I don't know if there is anything thorough in the English language about it: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A4dophilie-Debatte_(1970er_und_1980er_Jahre) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A4dophilie-Debatte_(1970e... And that was directly in the wake of working against discrimination of homosexuality. For some naive people, it all fell under the umbrella of "being different sexually", and for pedophiles, that was how they tried to get a foot in the door. This sentence > Die Debatte über die Legalisierung pädosexueller Akte ist historisch eng verbunden mit der Forderung nach Abschaffung des § 175 (StGB) translates to > the debate about the legalization of pedosexual acts is historically tightly connected with the demand to get rid of [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph_175 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph_175 ] Or hey, this http://www.taz.de/!5143954/ http://www.taz.de/!5143954/ An article about an article that appeard in 1979 in the taz, declaring pedophilia is a victimless crime in the title. One sentence from that: > Bei einem Blick in die Archive wird klar: Teile des linksalternativen Milieus sympathisierten mit Pädophilen - zumindest boten sie ihnen einen ideologischen Rahmen. translates to > A look into the archives makes it obvious that parts of the alternative left scene sympathized with pedophiles - at least they provided an ideological framework to them. So, that already happened. And it absolutely was fueled by being overzealous about being liberal and progressive -- that's not what made anyone a pedophile, but that's how some people fell for the schemes of pedophiles, and let themselves and their networks be used. That's a fact. I'm not familiar with similar things in North America but I wouldn't outright bet on not finding anything if I had the nerve to go looking, which I don't at this time. edit: there's ignorance, and there's active suppression of information. what a cesspool.
- PavlovsCat 8y ago
  Just look at all the comments calling it out getting downvoted into oblivion, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168083 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168083 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19168256 They don't say what they disagree with, but they punish the poster. That's much more active than just having a qualm about calling something out, it's attacking people who call it out. And of course, this thread isn't very active to begin with, yet is already getting flagged by many, even jumped from the second page back to the first, but will still remain penalized and at best at bottom of page 1 for a little while [edit: nope, vanished from page 1 in the time it took me to write the rest of this comment, there you go]. Again, apart from the people who have qualms calling anything out, additional activity to suppress the calling out that takes place. That's not an impression, that's a fact. More generally, consider how 'pointing out that something could be rephrased as "think of the children"' is some kind of mic-drop killer argument for many here, as if that would automatically disqualify anything, like a Nazi comparison does in the minds of some: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22think%20of%20the%20children%22&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22think%20of%20the%20children...
gotocake 8y ago
I think it can be helpful to move away from pat generalizations like “progressive” or “liberal” for the most part. I have no doubt that if we first met while I was talking about my views on gender equality and redistribution of wealth you’d label me that way. If we first met while I was talking about my views on defense you’d label me right wing. If I was talking about my views on respecting trans people I’d be left again, but if we chatted about my views on Israel I’d be back on the right. I’m a passionate environmentalist who is passionately pro-nuclear, an atheist who is fascinated by and full of respect for faith. I don’t think I’m unusual either, I think most people are defined by more than one stance, and I don’t think relative morality is the province of left or right. You’re making a good point about the merits of accepting the moral dimensions of life, don’t let politics dilute that message. Progressive, Conservative... only a crazy person is just one of those things.

flerbnerbferble 8y ago

Yeah. That is some fuckin perved out shit. And, you know, the people who think shit like this is normal or reasonable just need to stay the fuck away from children of any age. But would I throw people in prison? Convict them of crimes for things in this neighborhood? This horrible (really fucking dark) gray area? That a person would toe the line, isn’t a reason to ruin their lives. Genres of video, such as this, could be eradicated and most people would be happier to have never seen it. I hate it when I wind up clicking my way deeper and deeper into odd corners where freakish spectacles lurk, after a marathon of internet surfing. But there’s a new freak show uncovering boundaries that we were unaware of yesterday, and it’s happening each week, with something new. The norms of the 20th century barely exist anymore. And some harm has come of this. And when it’s not in the expected places, we have no script to read aloud and guide us. The bullshit artistry is knowingly thick in this instance. What’s the worst part? The people consuming the videos, or the enablers handling the production of them? I think one take away from stories like this is that, with new technology and the alterations to the social landscape that it brings, we can create precise greyscale of infinite dimensions and gradation, that we never get a chance at black or white smoking gun decision making, and we might forever be confused, in a fog or haze or mist of nonsense. So, what’s next? We probably just need to bring the axe down when it feels good and not think twice. It’s just gonna be a messy, ragged edge sometimes. In this case? No one needs to be treated like a criminal, and it’s hard to justify silencing weirdness, since it stifles the vibrance of any community, and yet... I’d not shed one tear at the loss of something as sacharine and disingenuous as this.