TW: childpornography mention!!!! (I briefly describe an image I saw on newtumbl)
So Im active on newtumbl now and being able to post nudity is great and all but the amount of animal och child pornography on there is absolutely gut wrenching, even if most of it is drawings…it’s disgusting. I saw a painting/drawing of a grown man sticking his cock into a two year old’s mouth. it was tagged as “Loli” I…don’t want to be on a site like that. I don’t want to share a platform with people who post stuff like that. It’s disgusting. it makes me feel sick to my stomach. I reported every bit of it I saw but…idk man. People shouldn’t be able to post stuff like that??? Like sure this stuff used to be on here too but not as much?? Hmm, I hope newtumbl improves in this regard, I think I’m gonna have to write to the creators of the website and share my concern. newtumbl is supposed to be about free expression, but nobody is free if they allow CP and animal sexual abuse to be uploaded on that site. I’m sad and disgusted. and I honestly wouldn’t recommend that site to anyone just yet, it needs improvements.
How ‘normalization’ works: Trump’s campaign and government making it considerably more acceptable for white supremacists to stand by and spread their ideology
How ‘normalization’ doesn’t work: Indulging in niche interests, such as writing pseudo-problematic dark fanfiction/etc
I honestly believe the sharp rise of aggressiveness on tumblr in last two years is a result of normalization of accusing your opponents of worst things without any proof by trump and his administration.
Ops reblogging some fuckin nonce shit
Yiiiiiiikes
Oh no. I reblogged something pseudo-controversial that is representative of actual law but isn’t necessarily representative of my personal opinion on the matter. Whatever will I do now.
Can we speed this up and skip ahead to the point where both of you block me?
Honestly this is hilarious. Of all the images, they chose the one that is just stating an easily proveable fact. The least controversial thing I said in that post. That’s too much for them. Actual US law.
stating facts has always been grossly offensive to these people, are you really surprised?
Legal or not does not imply morality, nor condoning. It’s a morally neutral statement, simply saying “This is legal/illegal.”
Of course, people are free to debate about whether it should be or not, but the reaction people have to that statement is very similar to conservative reactions to “Fake news.”
In other words, a statement of fact that contradicts their beliefs is met with hostility rather than examination.
Spreading false information will always be dangerous, whatever stance on an issue you take.
Legal or not does not imply morality, nor condoning. It’s a morally neutral statement, simply saying “This is legal/illegal.”
That is exactly it. Also thank you for using the term ‘morally neutral’.
Of course, people are free to debate about whether it should be or not, but the reaction people have to that statement is very similar to conservative reactions to “Fake news.”
Yes! But - more often than not the debate isn’t whether it should be legally permissible, it’s debating whether it is. It is legal. We can still have conversations about whether it should be.
In other words, a statement of fact that contradicts their beliefs is met with hostility rather than examination.
Spreading false information will always be dangerous, whatever stance on an issue you take.
YES!Finally.
Thank you for making a statement in good faith, devoid of vitriol and based on logically sound reasoning.
Honestly, thinking that people are just idiots arguring because something is legal is so dangerous. It used to be legal to rape someone if you were married. Slavery was legal. It used to be illegal for people of color to vote, or women. I know those are extreme examples, but it shows the point Im trying to prove-just because the law allows something does not make it okay.
So,
your point is …
whether something is/isn’t illegalmight not have any bearing on whether it is/isn’t moral.
You made a point andrefuted it at the same time.
You’re not wrong, you’re just not following your own logic, and you’re misrepresenting historical causality.
There were times when people thought that disciplining your spouse was the moral thing to do. Today we’ve come to a tentative agreement in someparts of the world that it might not be moral after all, and should be made illegal.
There were times when people thought that two people of the same sex marrying would herald the end of all, and it would only be a matter of time until people would start marrying their goats or toolboxes or whatever. Same sex marriage was (and still is) considered immoral. And yet, we’re slowly coming to another tentative agreement that it is indeed moral, and should be legal.
No. Clearly, whether something is or isn’t illegal might not have any bearing on whether something is or isn’t moral. Along the same lines, whether we consider something moral or not might not (and should not) have any bearing on whether it should or shouldn’t be legal/illegal.
Maybe morality and legality are disparate concepts.Maybe morality is a volatile and unreliable indicator when it comes to determining whether something should or shouldn’t be allowed. Maybe legality should never depend on morality, but rather be inspired by it. Maybe logic and reason should be rated higher than morality when determining whether an action should or shouldn’t be permissible.
Too many people abuse the concept of morality to oppress and repress others. That’s what they’ve always done, that’s what they’ll always do - if you allow it. I urge you to reject morality as the vague qualifier it is, and decisively replace it with sound logic instead.
How ‘normalization’ works: Trump’s campaign and government making it considerably more acceptable for white supremacists to stand by and spread their ideology
How ‘normalization’ doesn’t work: Indulging in niche interests, such as writing pseudo-problematic dark fanfiction/etc
I honestly believe the sharp rise of aggressiveness on tumblr in last two years is a result of normalization of accusing your opponents of worst things without any proof by trump and his administration.
Ops reblogging some fuckin nonce shit
Yiiiiiiikes
Oh no. I reblogged something pseudo-controversial that is representative of actual law but isn’t necessarily representative of my personal opinion on the matter. Whatever will I do now.
Can we speed this up and skip ahead to the point where both of you block me?
Honestly this is hilarious. Of all the images, they chose the one that is just stating an easily proveable fact. The least controversial thing I said in that post. That’s too much for them. Actual US law.
stating facts has always been grossly offensive to these people, are you really surprised?
Legal or not does not imply morality, nor condoning. It’s a morally neutral statement, simply saying “This is legal/illegal.”
Of course, people are free to debate about whether it should be or not, but the reaction people have to that statement is very similar to conservative reactions to “Fake news.”
In other words, a statement of fact that contradicts their beliefs is met with hostility rather than examination.
Spreading false information will always be dangerous, whatever stance on an issue you take.
Legal or not does not imply morality, nor condoning. It’s a morally neutral statement, simply saying “This is legal/illegal.”
That is exactly it. Also thank you for using the term ‘morally neutral’.
Of course, people are free to debate about whether it should be or not, but the reaction people have to that statement is very similar to conservative reactions to “Fake news.”
Yes! But - more often than not the debate isn’t whether it should be legally permissible, it’s debating whether it is. It is legal. We can still have conversations about whether it should be.
In other words, a statement of fact that contradicts their beliefs is met with hostility rather than examination.
Spreading false information will always be dangerous, whatever stance on an issue you take.
YES!Finally.
Thank you for making a statement in good faith, devoid of vitriol and based on logically sound reasoning.
How ‘normalization’ works: Trump’s campaign and government making it considerably more acceptable for white supremacists to stand by and spread their ideology
How ‘normalization’ doesn’t work: Indulging in niche interests, such as writing pseudo-problematic dark fanfiction/etc
I honestly believe the sharp rise of aggressiveness on tumblr in last two years is a result of normalization of accusing your opponents of worst things without any proof by trump and his administration.
Ops reblogging some fuckin nonce shit
Yiiiiiiikes
Oh no. I reblogged something pseudo-controversial that is representative of actual law but isn’t necessarily representative of my personal opinion on the matter. Whatever will I do now.
Can we speed this up and skip ahead to the point where both of you block me?
just wanted to say real quick that i don’t answer asks from nsfw blogs and especially not blogs run by pedophiles, i didn’t notice the person’s ask i posted yesterday had a bunch of nsfw / drawn cp shit on their blog and i really strongly apologize for that i should’ve checked first
Due to some digging I did on Twitter, I’ve realized that the user @/damiqn has been secretly doing a double life where they use their alt to draw gross content.
