Is impersonal opinion an oxymoron?
Is impersonal opinion an oxymoron?
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
i volunteer as tributeOriginally Posted by lungs
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Oh the [] drama.
Yeah... people... urges... jokes... butt hurts... age differences... over loaded emotions... can't we just castrate ourselves = long term solution.
Anyways Se base is evident in her.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Are all the American-Italian girls so ghetto trashy? They should come to Italy and learn some elegance lol. No really, she's cute in a Snooki sorta way. Oh, and SEE.
Any x-American culture becomes like that. I saw a gypsy-american show on youtube and there was a 14-year old girl who had arranged a party because her parents wanted her to get a husband. The girl was wearing the most trashy stripper outfits and this was supposed to be a gypsy tradition, and theres a lot of gypsies here and Ive never seen them wear anything like that lol. Gypsies wear old looking home made long skirts.
In my country you have the old long skirts scarf wearing gypsies and young'un stripper ghetto ones: ) You're right it's mostly immigrants subculture thing. The second and third generations of (uneducated) parents often have the bling bling trashy style. They're also often tough acting as an overcompensation, but that's understandable.
lol wtf are you talking about? I didn't say anything that would qualify me as an asshole. You can get off your high horse and keep that kind of remarks to yourself. You make so many assumptions based on nothing. How does what I said support crimes and who are you to say who is reasonable and who is not? Do you even realise what you are saying? You might be some kind of fairy princess in your head or to some people here but to me you are just condescending. You can't just flaunt your ethics around thinking that people have to bow down to it. At least miss me with that BS please, I didn't ask for it.@Number 9 large @YXPR both of your posts are creepy toward her.Pedophilia and punching people is wrong and harmful, try to make up your minds it's not healthy for you either. It's not about her, it's you. It's also not "just words", it supports real crimes. It also makes you assholes no reasonable person finds funny/edgy/relatable/powerful/respectable/cool/strong/sexy or lovable. You're only lowering yourself.
Hm I see you liking their shit @Cosmic Teapot @kalinoche, pay more attention you're only making it acceptable.
I already know how the replies to this post will look like but at least think about it before ya'll either get defensive or start attacking this which is neither surprising given your uneducated and violent, egocentric mentality. Now go ahead throw more offenses, come on.
lol yall are bored and horny. this is the power of SEE.... making forum strangers boner swordfight across the planet
Context matters you know. The punch if the face was a reference to Se HA if you read well. It's like you are just looking for any occasion to make yourself look virtuous even if you have make idiotic assumptions and discredit other people. This is fucked up and very sad. Awful.
And I still can't believe that you called that guy a rapist. Words have meanings you know...
Please do discuss further. Or is it enough to just demonize people and then move on like it was ok to do so?
No to those as well.
What you do is called the "Handmaiden".
Hold on. He found her attractive and then found out she was 14, felt weird about it and made a joke. There's no raping going on here. You'd probably react similarly if you found out one of those guys you crush on was underage, yes? You might want to save the outrage for real crimes, there are enough of them.
I agree with @Chae 's stance actually. I find the attitude conveyed by the OP creepy upon reading it more carefully (read to the end of the first original post...). It may have been accidental, but it still shouldn't be condoned.
No offense but IEEs have habit to swing around these causes- unpredictable folks in issues like this.
**Takes my grain of salt**
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
The attitude conveys pedophilia and rape culture which is the cause of crime, rage for actions that are already carried out don't change anything. Prevention is key and people take it lightly (as is the case on a forum, it matters more than you'd think), that is sad. Well, you're only concerned if it concerns you. "Til it happens to you"
Yes, precisely. That's what being a supporter is.
Wondered about that as well, but yes, absolutely.
Faking being outraged is just a classical Attention Whore move. Attention is what she wanted, what she got, and the only thing that seems to matter to her even though she hides it behind pseudo-humanist values.
Quit fucking whining.
You joked along with someone who was talking about his pants tingling at an underaged girl (this is a public internet forum... not the corner of a pub with your bros) and you talked about punching a woman (a younger, weaker girl than YOU actually) in the face. Are you even a man?
Shut up @ everyone. Chae has a point. Stop being so defensive, and if you can't see it, re-assess yourselves. She's only being vocal because she has to be in order to get the idea through your thick skulls.
.
Last edited by dot; 02-22-2020 at 09:12 AM.
I didn't joke along with anybody I barely read what he wrote and simply posted about the typing (which was the original topic of the thread). But here again you guys just make stupid assumptions.
It's nice that you want to defend your friend but please make sense. The part about the punch was simply in reference to Se HA. It has nothing to do with being a man or woman. Violence would be a bad thing towards a man or a woman anyway. Your comment about me not being a man is retarded and actually sexist.
We reacted so strongly towards what she said because she directly went for our character and it is annoying. She shouldn't have done that point blank period.
You can't just go for other people's character like it's nothing. It is not pleasant being called an asshole or a rapist and I have no problem speaking up about it, even if it equals being less of a man to you. You can keep your stupid remarks to yourself too.
Even if she genuinely felt offended about what we said, there is a way to say thing without being such a judgmental prick. And this applies to you too.
PS I didn't mean to like your post, it was not on purpose.
hurrrr durrrrr
P.S. I think you're an SEI.
You shouldn't be able to freely harrass someone for being attracted to someone else. I mean you can, like @Chae does, but it would be on unfair grounds. It's pretty common knowledge that people can't control what they like/don't like, or feel sexually attacted to, for that matter. You can find it creepy, yes, but bullying someone because of it is unreasonable, and inhumane.
Besides I'm sure I'm not the only older guy who finds her attractive. She's biologically mature, so yeah... Does it matter that she's 14? It doesn't to the part of my brain that looks for sexually attractive females. If she were 18 I would've believed it aswel.
Does this mean I am going to have sex with 14 year olds if they are biologically mature, like Chae says?
Of course not, because there's another part of my brain that thinks of the consequences before acting (yay evolution).
Would I do it if it wasn't illegal and if she was okay with it? Yes, I see no problems here, it's just consensual sex between two individuals, no one gets hurt.
Yes you could argue that she ''doesn't know what she is doing'' at that age, then again if she wanted it at that age, what's the problem exactly. We all do things we regret later, besides who says she will regret it later? You can't know that. I know I would've loved to have fucked a 22 year old as a 14 year old myself.
Also, a 22 year old also doesn't know what he is doing compared to a 4 year old, yet they are allowed to have sex with eachother without problems, so that's that argument debunked.
Anyways, don't harrass me for finding her sexual, it's an unfair thing to do. You can't harrass people for having thoughts/urges, that's limiting others freedom because of values you value.
Rule number 1 of life; nobody has moral highground when opinions clash. Because opinions in themselves are not objective (so not factual). The only thing that matters is, are you hurting other people with your actions? If not, leave people alone please.
Nobody can pick and choose what they are attracted to. It's like condemning people who are homosexual, they can't help it, and as long as they don't hurt other people what's the problem, exactly? Christians seem to think differently, as does Chae seems to think about my post, but who gave them the moral highground to dictate what others get to do/think? Why is Chae's opinion better than mine? It is not based on fact, just some random value.
I didn't hurt anybody, neither did homosexuals so she just needs to shut the fuck up and let people express themselves in a nonhurtful way, just like Christians just need to allow homosexuals people to marry.
It's none of their business what homosexuals do. It's also none of Chae's business what I find attactive. Why do they care so much? Can't they just focus on themselves and leave people be?
Why do a lot of people always feel the urge to impose their opinions on others? Don't they see that that has been a cause for a large number of wars?
Am I going to compare Chae to ****** now? Yes.
Is it okay to hate jews? Yes, it's just an opinion and you are entitled to yours, as is everybody to theirs.
Is it okay to kill/harrass jews? No, because that would limit their freedom
Is it okay to be sexually attracted to underaged girls? Yes
Is it okay to rape underaged girls? No, that would limit their freedom.
Is it okay to have consensual sex with underaged girls? (and I mean actual consensual sex, not manipulating a girl into begrudgingly having sex with you and regretting it later) Yes, because nobody's freedom has been limited.
Is it okay to debate people on whether they are sexually attracted to minors is a good thing? Of course.
Is it okay to verbally harrass them over it? No, that is limiting to their verbal freedom.
That your morals and values dictate your life, fine, but dont try to limit other people's freedom just because you believe in some stupid cause (e.g. marriage should only be for heterosexuals, or ''sex with underaged girls is always wrong''.)
Let people have free minds. You're just making people afraid to be honest with eachother, afraid to be condemned to being ''the bad guy or girl''.
Nobody gets better from this in the long run.
It's fearmongering, all it creates is a culture of fear to speak up. Who wants to live in that? It makes for people becoming sanctimonious, because the thoughts are going to be there, either way, we just pretend they aren't there, because of fear of harrass.
Honesty is one of the highest virtues for me, as is freedom, even if it means stating a truth that nobody likes to hear. It isn't about what you like to hear, it's about the truth. Truth can only be adressed when heard. Therefore it is in everybody's advantage if we advocate freedom of speech, any freedom of speech, not just about what Chae, or christians find socially acceptable, because again, who are they to decide what's acceptable and what's not?
Taboos are stupid, just as harrassing other people because they have different values than you.
A lot of wars could be prevented if people just let other people be, and not try to control others people's minds. Because
1. you can't change people's minds based on moral nonfactual ''this is good'' and ''this is bad'' arguments
2. all you create is unrest and make yourself look like a bigot
Thank you
Look at all these fucking textwall rationalizations from people.
You talked about your dick tingling in reference to a 14 year old girl in public and didn't have the sense to filter yourself @Number 9 large . Sex with minors is immoral and illegal. It was distasteful. The end. You don't need to whinge and textwall and be harassed, just show you get the point and it's over.
And you are wrong once again. But go on thinking you are so smart. You clearly are not.
Okay!
No. Your rambling doesn't help either and I can't take you seriously if you use "SJW" and "tumblr" to explain the phenomenonThat shows your limited knowledge and stereotypical silencing approach. But that's nothing new. See the purpose of this instead: not tolerating harmful positions - that is all. The opposite of clipping wings is letting a person do and opine what they want but it's not funny anymore when it attacks someone else - this is the original offense, everything else is just backfiring. If you were in her stead, you'd be glad to have a person call it out. If inhumane behavior like this is not tolerated, at some point consequences and change follow - it takes time, you only see instant results and reactions. I have limited problems when you see me this way and will continue as usual, my place is up to me to determine no matter what emotional reaction there is.
It's just essential that you don't end up endorsing the dangerous stuff they've written for obvious reasons.
While she may be biologically mature, it doesn't mean she's mentally/emotionally mature. Just like a person can't sign a contract under a certain age, there are some decisions that people need to have greater maturity to make. Sex is one of those things, and it is taking advantage of someone even if they agree to it if they're not ready to make such a decision. Just like manipulating someone into a contract or having them make a decision drunk would be wrong - it's using someone's age or ignorance against them and to your advantage.
That reaction is gold, you're the best
This is a very broad view of consent. The verbal skills to say the word "yes" aren't what constitute the ability to consent. If that were the case, you could go much younger than 14 without moral issue.
The sex I regret from age 14 is very qualitatively different from the bad sex Ive had as an adult. My reasons for having it were different, the power dynamic was different, I was less easily intimidated and awed by adult men, I was more capable of processing decisions. The law isn't in place for no reason; it was carefully created because teenagers and adults are different.Yes you could argue that she ''doesn't know what she is doing'' at that age, then again if she wanted it at that age, what's the problem exactly. We all do things we regret later, besides who says she will regret it later? You can't know that. I know I would've loved to have fucked a 22 year old as a 14 year old myself.
Comparing a 14 yr old to a 22 yr old is disingenuous and an obviously false analogy. Have you not changed at all since the age of 14?Also, a 22 year old also doesn't know what he is doing compared to a 4 year old, yet they are allowed to have sex with eachother without problems, so that's that argument debunked.
Sex between teenagers and adults contains a power dynamic that is inherently manipulative even if the adult respects the teenager and doesn't feeeeel that way about it. It's just the nature of where they both are cognitively and it can't be changed with good intentions.Is it okay to have consensual sex with underaged girls? (and I mean actual consensual sex, not manipulating a girl into begrudgingly having sex with you and regretting it later) Yes, because nobody's freedom has been limited.
I frequently have a similar immediate reaction to things that you do and I usually agree with the core of where you're coming from wrt social issues but find myself ambivalent about getting on board because of the way its carried out. It would probably be fair to say the op was an issue because it was normalizing the sexualization of young teenagers but what good does it do to call him a rapist? When you meet reality on its own terms you become harder to dismiss.
I find the honesty of the op - even if it's upsetting - to be conducive to further discussion in which problems can actually be wrestled with. ("Not everything that is faced can be changed. But nothing can be changed until it is faced.") I struggle more with vague "if it walks like a duck" sort of commentary that people find easier to ignore (so I look crazy sometimes for getting upset with upstanding citizens lol) because I think censorship and toeing the line serves as a mask/shield while the same problems continue. Which is why I find the silencing approach counterproductive. As long as there's gonna be a spider on my ceiling I wanna at least keep the lights on so I know where it is, u know?
Anyway I respect your willingness to take stances that are unpopular in the group you're in and I appreciate that you give a shit about these things.
I said "people like you [with beliefs like you]" to him, it's about the potential to be a rapist. People picked it out deliberately to displace blame, you probably know how this works so I didn't care, it's obvious there is no criminal evidence. Get on board as you like, to each their own responsibility. You could just say it makes you uncomfortable instead of going in the Chae way but ultimately you already have a stance that's helpful. It can go both ways when ditching political correctness, either attitudes amplify or issues can be sorted out. You see the former is happening so I see reason to point things out in the first place. Given the intense reactions, there is a social fruit to harvest. Thank you and likewise, I know your heart and it's good the way you think.
I become "unacceptable" in your eyes when your stances do (this increases exponentially), and apologies belong to the latter. It was not respectful, implying it's crazy/embarrassing/pretentious - no offense taken there though, it's just mirroring. You both do well remembering who the real offenders were instead of trying to downplay our criticism of them. See how it affects you in your lives. But I know, this is too much cognitive dissonance and willful ignorance, I wish we could stick together instead but you make it impossible. I'd be willing if you just saw that it's not good and we don't need this here. Or would you write these comments?
.
Last edited by dot; 02-22-2020 at 09:10 AM.
The movement is a lot older, this is the legacy of African-American communities and Suffragettes standing up. Now I don't care about what you have against Delta as well, it's simply because you aren't in favor right now.
Independent thinking is useless if you don't act, that is theneeded so there are actions to efficiently prevent discrimination and violence. If you help marginalized people, what's the issue, you're already on a good path that alters society. You don't require the 100% accordance that you think I want to force, just the core drive should at least overlap and I see that you do share it so I am glad you'd want to make a collective difference, too
Last edited by Hot Scalding Gayser; 04-04-2021 at 01:59 AM. Reason: User privacy requested
I agree that giving consent can be given in multiple ways, not just by saying yes or no. If you're 14, you know what ''Yes'' means, and you know what ''No'' means. So if you said any of them I don't see any room for ambiguity. Hell, if you're 2, you probably already know the difference between yes and no, it's the first things you learn.
The sex you regret at age 20 and age 60 is also very qualitatively different from eachother. What's your point, that we should disallow sex for people under the age of 60?
The power dynamic will always be different per individual case. Even adults have relations that are unequal in power dynamics (e.g. benefactor, supervision) and they aren't disallowed either. The question is, where do you put the bar? Who is the law to state what people can handle and what not?
They are different from adults, yes. But how do you know where to put the line?
Who is the law to say that sex between an 18 year old and a 82 year old is acceptable, but sex between a 14 year old and a 22 year old is forbidden?
I'm pretty sure the 22 year old and 14 year old have more in common than the 18 year old and 82 year old, yet the former is forbidden and the latter is allowed. So your law is not consistent, therefore flawed.
I have changed since I was 14, yes. I will also have changed when I will be 80. Yet, when I am 80, I suddenly am able to have sex with 18 year olds, as if there is no power dynamic difference there. Then why, according to the law, am I allowed to have sex with 18 year olds as an 80 year old, but not have sex with a biologically mature 14 year old as a 22 year old? As if 18 year olds know suddenly know all the pros and cons of having sex with older people. The law is ridiculous, overgeneralizing.
How do you know. Also how do you know that adult relations aren't based on manipulation? Should we also forbid all adults from engaging in relationships with eachother then, to protect people that will be cheated on, or get manipulated into doing things they don't want in their marriage, for example? Should we ban marriage, because people might, when they get older, find that they married the wrong person? No, we let them marry, with the risk of regretting it later. Then why don't we let minors have consensual sex with majors, with the risk of regretting it later?
Both power dynamics and regrets don't magically go away once you turn 18, so why are we protecting 14 year olds from them, but not everyone above 18? Shouldn't we disallowed sex completely then, for everybody? Lol?
I agree there probably are more cognitive differences between minors and majors, but my point still stands. We all know people who are 70 are much wiser than when they were just legal, and would've made different choices if they could go back.
We all have our regrets, and saying someone cannot make their own decision just because they are young and may regret it later seems very patronizing of youngsters. As if you know better. Everybody is in the same boat here, we are born, fuck around a bit, then die. Nobody knows shit. Yes we may have regrets, but from mistakes and regrets you learn. Who is the law to prohibit people from learning from their mistakes? Who is the law to say that having consensual sex with an adult as a teenager is a mistake at all? Maybe it's one of the better experiences of their life.
I know I wouldn't have had a problem fucking some 22 year old when I was 14. In fact I'd rather have fucked some 22 year old than another 14 undeveloped 14 year old. In fact, I still am into older women, am I not allowed to? Do I magically know better now than when I was 14? Maybe I will come to regret all the older women I've fucked by now. But it is still a decision I've made when I was 22, so yea, deal with it. We can't prohibit 22 year olds from acting, even if they don't know shit in the world, so why prohibit 14 year olds from doing the same.
Nobody can look into the future, so how do you know the minor will regret it? This law is based on the presumption that minors having consensual sex with adults is automatically wrong, which it isn't. Therefore the law is flawed, because it gives no room for exceptions, and overgeneralizes adults to be rapists and minors to be victims, who don't know what the fuck they're doing. Nobody knows what they're doing. Nobody has moral highground. We are all born here, do random shit, then die. Make the most of it, and don't try to prohibit other peoples freedom while we're at it.
The world would be a nicer place if people would just live and let live, so long as you don't hurt others (which consensual sex isn't), or limit their freedom in some way.
Should we develop an IQ test then, to see who is eligible to fuck and who isn't? Lol. Maybe we should ban people with down syndrome from fucking, because they don't know how to give consent, right?
To be honest, from reading briefly here since there's a lot of textwalls, I have to agree with @MaviTilki. What was said in the OP was unnecessary and creepy but I know it was in a joking light and he wouldn't actually try have sex with a 14 year old. I think the way that this is being handled is all wrong, though, because this whole callout feels more like a performance than anything. Also dishing out callouts like these but rarely ever getting a callout back but being unable to handle it when it happens doesn't help. I don't like to bring socionics into it but it might really just take another Delta NF to understand this since everyone else seems confused too. I did used to do callouts on people myself when I was younger but it was never so publicly focused.
It also really distracts threads to be doing this in multiple threads so I think there should be one thread solely created for this kind of thing. It would also be easier to just keep it to as little posts as possible instead of replying to every single reaction and only feeding into some kind of public bonfire. Or even just telling a mod "Hey, this part of this post is inappropriate and should be removed". Etc.
Hopefully you don't hate me for this @ChaeI just wanted to address the confusion and diversion and excessive attention this all brings. I don't think you are wrong to do this I just think the delivery could be better and that there is exaggerations to it.
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
People's capacity for empathy apparently doesn't fully develop until mid to late 20s too... just putting it out there...
But if you don't try to get it and use that reasoning it will never develop :| @Number 9 large
Knowing that you're 22 yourself makes it much less creepy and weird. But lots of people probably didn't know that before (also be careful of what you say on the internet). Regardless, laws like that are put into place for the protection of vulnerable people and your age relative to theirs is irrelevant in the sense of their protection. It's like protecting people from drinking and driving -- people's brains are significantly less developed at that younger age, hormones are on the rage, and I also have had experiences like lungs that make me see that I was more easily able to be taken advantage of emotionally (IQ is irrelevant). Maybe if you haven't had experiences like that you wouldn't understand it, and I can also see why you think it would be morally ambiguous. Nobody is trying to harass you here, everyone is just trying to put effort into making you and others have some understanding of a moral way to treat others and why in their own way.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote