(You can edit posts on Lemmy).

Huh, thank you, this was extremely interesting!

Yeah because historically corporations have shown themselves to be super reluctant to use force, especially not when explicitly encouraged to by the government…

Yeah, it’s not really a direct comparison. Bridges in Iran are generally badly damaged like this (real examples):

But the Francis Scott Key bridge is fully just gone for the entire load-bearing span and needs to be rebuilt.

GOG was worth supporting for that reason ( until their recent little Nazi incident…) but Epic is far worse for the games industry than anything steam has ever done. Holding games hostage exclusive to try and force people to use their shitty platform is much worse than steam saying the steam price has to match the lowest price off-steam…

… What in the fuck? No.

Because the quality you get with 3D printers is still far below what is produced with injection molding or pressure cast resin, really. 3D printing is great, but there’s still huge advances to be made in both FDM and the various SLA-like systems. Oh that and razer fanboys are all fundementally broken.

Honestly, I doubt it. I think they just hadn’t realized that having an unpopular opinion on lemmy doesn’t make them special or mean people will respect them for admitting it.

Now they’re all scandalized about being banned from a buncha DB0 comms after parroting a shitload of phobic talking points for several hours and like… Nah, if you walk and talk and steal soundbites from racist transphobes, kinda shouldn’t be surprised when you aren’t given the chance to actually be racist and transphobic. That’s the price of committing to a hateful opinion - you’re allowed to have it just as much as other people are allowed to make sure you can’t spread it in their communities.

Spaces on lemmy are protected quite fiercely, and as the communities are quite close-knit, that protection can have a far-reaching impact. There’s no all-high set of admins you can appeal to, which benefits us in that we can have incredibly diverse sets of opinions, but at the cost of ensuring that what you say should be something you truly are committed to. As the man said, “I believe in freedom. Not many people do, although they will, of course, protest otherwise. And no practical definition of freedom would be complete without the freedom to take the consequences. Indeed, it is the freedom upon which all the others are based.”

This is the third time you’ve told me you’re done with this conversation, and yes, I am indeed aware that it’s because you’ve realized the inherent hypocrisy of your argument and are attempting to save face by doubling down and then storming off. That’s very common behavior, and I’ll happily take the win for decent human behavior, even if that comes in the form of a transparently patronizing concession that you’ve saved face. So in that spirit: Well done! You’ve bested me! Congratulations!

I think that if Karoline Leavitt had said the same thing, you would push back to her rhetoric just as I’m doing here and that trying to make this into an argument over someone’s right to an opinion is an intellectually dishonest way to approach this conversation.

People who want to have sex with imaginary creatures or toasters or clouds aren’t a protected class.

You need to let go of the idea that all furries are sexually attracted to animals, and only wear fursuits for sexual reasons. It’s both wrong, and it’s making you spit out the kind of gauche rhetoric that even 4chan has moved on from. Furries don’t all want to fuck animals - and the existence of porn does not describe the motivations of the group the porn is aimed at. If that were true, no stepsister in the world would ever be safe, and no black men would be more than a walking sex drive.

You’re not racist or bigoted towards gay people, but you are using the exact same chains of reasoning that racists and bigots use to justify their racist bigotry. You can dislike furry porn all you want, and that’s fine - really, nobody is going to hold that against you. But before you fall further down this chain of justifying your hate for an extremely queer-heavy group, you need to separate your distaste for the porn from the reality that the furry community is incredibly vast, on the whole overwhelmingly supportive and beyond everything a diverse group people, and that treating them as one sex-obsessed monolithic group of creepy weirdos is doing them and yourself as a decent human being a serious disservice.

No, that’s what you were saying. That’s why I suggested you rephrase it, because what you’re saying is exactly what I presented and I didn’t think that was representative of your real opinions.

Anyways, that’s a great illustration of the problem:

Saying all black people are criminals? Not alright
Saying a black person is a criminal? Accurate (er… maybe)
Saying all [group] are [anything]? Not alright
Saying all furries are sex perverts walking around in a suit ‘made entirely of sextoys’? no, wait, that one is okay! (and again, something you made up)

Are you starting to see the issue here? You’re claiming that tarring all members of a group with the same brush is wrong, but then you go on to do exactly that because… I guess it’s okay when you do it? Presumably because you know damn well you’re not a bad person, and those creepy weirdos, well you just don’t like them. Sex perverts, the lot of them.

And I can see you’re not a bad person - we have six months of records that show you’re either a pretty damn decent person or one of the best actors I’ve found on here. So why are you so willing to barter away your values on this one issue, when I can fairly confidently conclude you’d never defend bullshit like this if it were being said about any other group of people?

Sure! Unfortunately I don’t get the luxury of running away from this, since your opinion is that you’re allowed to hate me for offenses you’ve completely made up.

“people can only form opinions is through experiences” is not the same thing as “anecdotal evidence”

(edit: formatting oopsie)

… You’re saying we have to protect women/blacks/queers/etc. from people because sometimes those sexists/racists/bigots/etc. dislike an entire group for totally valid reasons.

(Ooo, cute false dichotomy!)

Anyways yes, that’s why anecdotes really shouldn’t be used to justify hate.

I did, it’s that section I quoted - wherein you put forward the idea that we have protected groups (queers, blacks, women, etc) because it’s not considered wrong to dislike any [protected] group of people because of what they do. Implying that we have protected groups because it’s acceptable to be racist/sexist/homophobic, and by extension what you’re doing is also acceptable.

You don’t see the incredibly problematic comparison you’ve just made?

Lol no, don’t try and turn this around as though I’ve behaved poorly. I’ve maintained the entire time that the language you are using is the same as what’s used by bigots and racists, and made it quite clear that I don’t think you are a bigot or racist. But you’re free to storm off in a huff if you want, I’m for sure not gonna stop you.

Uh. Yeah dude, I do. There’s a fuckload of queer content on there, and you for SURE do not need to go to “a specific type of site or forum to find”. This entire argument is based on your anecdotal experience and wow, turns out that’s not exactly representative of reality, lmao.