6 ms·

moral panic

by reedf1 7mo ago

moral panic

nephihaha 7mo ago
I'm old fashioned, I draw the line at dead people, incest (even "stepincest"), children and animals.
- piva00 7mo ago
  You control other people's fantasies? I understand and agree with children, and bestiality being off-limits due to the non-consenting nature of any sexual interaction with them but a fantasy re-enacted by actors about incest/stepincest or even playing dead people? Why do you care? It's someone else's kink, not yours, you wouldn't like if the majority of people thought your vanilla sex kinks are off-limits (no more missionary for you, it's disgusting!).
  - nephihaha 7mo ago
    People fantasise about a lot of things (not just sexual), but that doesn't mean they are right. There are reasons beyond sex why incest (even with non-blood relatives) and bestiality are off the table. Not because of "vanilla" as you put it, but because they come with other costs. As does unprotected sex with multiple strangers, another stupid trope promoted in porn.
    - lores 7mo ago
      Don't forget driving, the most dangerous thing one can do in the West. It sounds be the first thing to be banned, really, the costs are just too enormous.
      - nephihaha 7mo ago
        Western governments see car owners, smokers and drinkers as a steady income stream while preaching against them. I was on a bus yesterday which took three times as long as it should have done. An hour and a half on a bus, and I still got in late despite setting out early. That was in a city. If you live outside a city, the public transport is even worse. I've missed job interviews, dates, other transport connections etc due to public transport. So yes, there are costs to that too.
    - piva00 7mo ago
      What reasons? You don't expand on it, you just say there are reasons why you agree on banning a type of fantasy to be produced between consenting adults, so other adults can consume and fulfill a kink. So far nothing in that statement makes it comparable to bestiality or child porn, at all, why is that for you? Think answering this can move this conversation forward...
      - nephihaha 7mo ago
        You seem to think that because someone has a kink or a fantasy that it automatically makes it okay, and we "shouldn't judge". If I consented before death for people to use my corpse for sexual purposes, than that does not make necrophilia healthy.
- mft_ 7mo ago
  Children and animals can’t consent and are relatively helpless, so must be protected. Real incest leads to a high risk of developmental problems for subsequent children, so a ban makes sense. Logically, none of these arguments apply to “step-incest”.
  - nephihaha 7mo ago
    Incest isn't just about genetics. People have adult godparents, foster children, adopted siblings and a whole load of other relations without genetic connections being involved. There are power dynamics and a whole load of other reasons it isn't right.
    - mft_ 7mo ago
      All very fair points; I was thinking (but didn't specify) of the step-brother/sister relationship as mentioned in other comments. And just to be clear, I'm not an especial advocate here! I'm just interested as always in establishing clear logical rules that can then be applied fairly.)
  - benj111 7mo ago
    You say animals can't consent, but in the uk it's illegal for the ladies to have sex with male animals. That must imply some sort of consent. This also raises interesting moral questions for the farming industry. Did those animals you're breeding consent?
    - mft_ 7mo ago
      (Your question doesn't make sense, but) A quick search shows that sex with an animal is definitely illegal in the UK [0] whether it's a male or a female human involved. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/69 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/69
      - benj111 7mo ago
        Yes. But a male animal getting an erection implies some kind of consent? And if it doesn't? What about farms breeding livestock? Society has decided that you can rape a pig for profit, but not for pleasure. So is it really about consent? Or puritanism?
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
bill_joy_fanboy 7mo ago
the word you're looking for isn't "panic"; it's "indignation" ;)

moral panic

by reedf1 7mo ago

moral panic

nephihaha 7mo ago

I'm old fashioned, I draw the line at dead people, incest (even "stepincest"), children and animals.

piva00 7mo ago
You control other people's fantasies? I understand and agree with children, and bestiality being off-limits due to the non-consenting nature of any sexual interaction with them but a fantasy re-enacted by actors about incest/stepincest or even playing dead people? Why do you care? It's someone else's kink, not yours, you wouldn't like if the majority of people thought your vanilla sex kinks are off-limits (no more missionary for you, it's disgusting!).
- nephihaha 7mo ago
  People fantasise about a lot of things (not just sexual), but that doesn't mean they are right. There are reasons beyond sex why incest (even with non-blood relatives) and bestiality are off the table. Not because of "vanilla" as you put it, but because they come with other costs. As does unprotected sex with multiple strangers, another stupid trope promoted in porn.
  - lores 7mo ago
    Don't forget driving, the most dangerous thing one can do in the West. It sounds be the first thing to be banned, really, the costs are just too enormous.
    - nephihaha 7mo ago
      Western governments see car owners, smokers and drinkers as a steady income stream while preaching against them. I was on a bus yesterday which took three times as long as it should have done. An hour and a half on a bus, and I still got in late despite setting out early. That was in a city. If you live outside a city, the public transport is even worse. I've missed job interviews, dates, other transport connections etc due to public transport. So yes, there are costs to that too.
  - piva00 7mo ago
    What reasons? You don't expand on it, you just say there are reasons why you agree on banning a type of fantasy to be produced between consenting adults, so other adults can consume and fulfill a kink. So far nothing in that statement makes it comparable to bestiality or child porn, at all, why is that for you? Think answering this can move this conversation forward...
    - nephihaha 7mo ago
      You seem to think that because someone has a kink or a fantasy that it automatically makes it okay, and we "shouldn't judge". If I consented before death for people to use my corpse for sexual purposes, than that does not make necrophilia healthy.
mft_ 7mo ago
Children and animals can’t consent and are relatively helpless, so must be protected. Real incest leads to a high risk of developmental problems for subsequent children, so a ban makes sense. Logically, none of these arguments apply to “step-incest”.
- nephihaha 7mo ago
  Incest isn't just about genetics. People have adult godparents, foster children, adopted siblings and a whole load of other relations without genetic connections being involved. There are power dynamics and a whole load of other reasons it isn't right.
  - mft_ 7mo ago
    All very fair points; I was thinking (but didn't specify) of the step-brother/sister relationship as mentioned in other comments. And just to be clear, I'm not an especial advocate here! I'm just interested as always in establishing clear logical rules that can then be applied fairly.)
- benj111 7mo ago
  You say animals can't consent, but in the uk it's illegal for the ladies to have sex with male animals. That must imply some sort of consent. This also raises interesting moral questions for the farming industry. Did those animals you're breeding consent?
  - mft_ 7mo ago
    (Your question doesn't make sense, but) A quick search shows that sex with an animal is definitely illegal in the UK [0] whether it's a male or a female human involved. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/69 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/69
    - benj111 7mo ago
      Yes. But a male animal getting an erection implies some kind of consent? And if it doesn't? What about farms breeding livestock? Society has decided that you can rape a pig for profit, but not for pleasure. So is it really about consent? Or puritanism?
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]

bill_joy_fanboy 7mo ago

the word you're looking for isn't "panic"; it's "indignation" ;)