6 ms·

They are just taking advantage of lonely men, this idea is predatory in nature and shouldn't be celebrated.

by 9HZZRfNlpR 6y ago

hackinthebochs 6y ago
Are the men becoming less lonely from the interaction? Then they are getting their money's worth for a service.
- luckylion 6y ago
  Do they stay on the system and continue to pay? Then I'd argue they're not becoming less lonely. It looks more like regular addiction, money buys you a hit, but you'll soon be back to craving more, especially when your general (social) life isn't providing a lot of positivity.
  - hackinthebochs 6y ago
    Most things people enjoy in life you would be hard pressed to find a distinction between it an addiction.
  - austhrow743 6y ago
    What your describing as regular addiction sounds a lot like any and every service anyone pays for. You're not getting a thing as is, you pay for thing, you get thing, if you stop paying for thing it goes away. You could slap any service in there.
    - luckylion 6y ago
      Yes, sure, "we're all addicted to oxygen" etc. When you stop paying for Netflix, you're usually not feeling it emotionally. You might be a bit more bored at night, but that's about it. It seems different when you're paying for pseudo relationships.
- zo1 6y ago
  You could argue the same about Gambling, and yet we as a Society have put measures in to place to prevent such brain-mechanisms from being exploited and abused for monetary gain... despite the individuals feeling like they are "getting their money's worth". Also, see Loot Boxes, same thing.
  - hackinthebochs 6y ago
    The difference is that gambling or loot boxes aren't fulfilling a human need. Human connection is a human need. Unless you're offering a solution to the problem that these services are addressing, you're not creating net good in the world, you're just eliminating an accessible way these people have to met a human need.
    - zo1 6y ago
      Loot boxes and gambling could arguably be fulfilling a human need as well. Just depends on your definition of human need. Happiness is a human need and loot-boxes and gambling definitely give that to people on some level. Further, we need not go into "human need" territory at all. We as a society have also put measures in to place to prevent the vulnerable from being exploited despite their objections (e.g. age of consent / alcohol and smoking age consumption laws). My take on it, despite being libertarian-minded, is that we should ban/regulate these sorts of things that can have detrimental, generational-impacts on the viability of our society. These individuals should be going out, socializing, eventually fulfilling someone else's need for companionship at the same time as their own, and then procreating to further society. As much as it fulfills their immediate needs, it's a patch that is arguably non-viable in the long term for them and the wider society.
      - hackinthebochs 6y ago
        >Loot boxes and gambling could arguably be fulfilling a human need as well. No. There is a categorical difference between a first-order human need and an nth-order need. >we should ban/regulate these sorts of things that can have detrimental, generational-impacts on the viability of our society. This is absurdly paternalistic. This new moralism is frightening. There was a time when religious moralizing dominated society. We finally broke free from that and now the left is replacing it with secular moralizing. Some people seem to have an intrinsic need to control the behavior of others, the justification is mostly ad-hoc. I am immediately suspicious of any offered moral precept that has zero cost to the advocate. For someone with no problem socializing or finding new friends, I'm sure it seems like a great idea to you. It turns out few people actually believe in freedom, they just want freedom from other people's arbitrary rules.
bawolff 6y ago
Are the men underaged? Mentally incompetent? Is there some other reason that hapless men must be protected from these temptations, but selling them, say, netflix is ok?
- liability 6y ago
  Is netflix okay? How many times have you heard the word 'binge' to describe Netflix consumption habits? The language of addiction being used in such a carefree manner as though there's nothing wrong with it makes me uncomfortable and is one of the reasons I cancelled my account.

They are just taking advantage of lonely men, this idea is predatory in nature and shouldn't be celebrated.

hackinthebochs 6y ago

Are the men becoming less lonely from the interaction? Then they are getting their money's worth for a service.

luckylion 6y ago
Do they stay on the system and continue to pay? Then I'd argue they're not becoming less lonely. It looks more like regular addiction, money buys you a hit, but you'll soon be back to craving more, especially when your general (social) life isn't providing a lot of positivity.
- hackinthebochs 6y ago
  Most things people enjoy in life you would be hard pressed to find a distinction between it an addiction.
- austhrow743 6y ago
  What your describing as regular addiction sounds a lot like any and every service anyone pays for. You're not getting a thing as is, you pay for thing, you get thing, if you stop paying for thing it goes away. You could slap any service in there.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    Yes, sure, "we're all addicted to oxygen" etc. When you stop paying for Netflix, you're usually not feeling it emotionally. You might be a bit more bored at night, but that's about it. It seems different when you're paying for pseudo relationships.
zo1 6y ago
You could argue the same about Gambling, and yet we as a Society have put measures in to place to prevent such brain-mechanisms from being exploited and abused for monetary gain... despite the individuals feeling like they are "getting their money's worth". Also, see Loot Boxes, same thing.
- hackinthebochs 6y ago
  The difference is that gambling or loot boxes aren't fulfilling a human need. Human connection is a human need. Unless you're offering a solution to the problem that these services are addressing, you're not creating net good in the world, you're just eliminating an accessible way these people have to met a human need.
  - zo1 6y ago
    Loot boxes and gambling could arguably be fulfilling a human need as well. Just depends on your definition of human need. Happiness is a human need and loot-boxes and gambling definitely give that to people on some level. Further, we need not go into "human need" territory at all. We as a society have also put measures in to place to prevent the vulnerable from being exploited despite their objections (e.g. age of consent / alcohol and smoking age consumption laws). My take on it, despite being libertarian-minded, is that we should ban/regulate these sorts of things that can have detrimental, generational-impacts on the viability of our society. These individuals should be going out, socializing, eventually fulfilling someone else's need for companionship at the same time as their own, and then procreating to further society. As much as it fulfills their immediate needs, it's a patch that is arguably non-viable in the long term for them and the wider society.
    - hackinthebochs 6y ago
      >Loot boxes and gambling could arguably be fulfilling a human need as well. No. There is a categorical difference between a first-order human need and an nth-order need. >we should ban/regulate these sorts of things that can have detrimental, generational-impacts on the viability of our society. This is absurdly paternalistic. This new moralism is frightening. There was a time when religious moralizing dominated society. We finally broke free from that and now the left is replacing it with secular moralizing. Some people seem to have an intrinsic need to control the behavior of others, the justification is mostly ad-hoc. I am immediately suspicious of any offered moral precept that has zero cost to the advocate. For someone with no problem socializing or finding new friends, I'm sure it seems like a great idea to you. It turns out few people actually believe in freedom, they just want freedom from other people's arbitrary rules.

bawolff 6y ago

Are the men underaged? Mentally incompetent? Is there some other reason that hapless men must be protected from these temptations, but selling them, say, netflix is ok?

liability 6y ago
Is netflix okay? How many times have you heard the word 'binge' to describe Netflix consumption habits? The language of addiction being used in such a carefree manner as though there's nothing wrong with it makes me uncomfortable and is one of the reasons I cancelled my account.