welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Feminism because why not make a thread for it?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 163, 164, 165 ... 300, 301, 302  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Feiticeira



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1774

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Option A is a consistent method for guaranteeing B and C as an outcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:46 pm    Post subject: And you probably won't even think you are in one by then Reply with quote

Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Feiticeira



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1774

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:03 pm    Post subject: Re: And you probably won't even think you are in one by then Reply with quote

Thy Brilliance wrote:
Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.


That's exactly why it's terrifying and to be resisted. Can you explain why you're so eager to embrace it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fritterdonut



Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 1183
Location: Hedonism

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thy Brilliance wrote:
Feiticeira wrote:
a novel argument for totalitarianism: there's just too many people not to!


Option B, let people starve to death from lack of resources.

Option C, Endless War.



I'm sure it's going to be a mix of all three anyway.


George Orwell called, he said he wants his plot back.

Thy Brilliance wrote:
Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.


Not really. A number of ancient totalitarian regimes lasted much longer than the paltry 12 years that the supposed "Thousand-year Reich" lasted and longer than the Soviet regime, as well.
_________________
To get things done, you must love the doing, not the secondary consequences. The work, not the people. Your own action, not any possible object of your charity.
-Howard Roark, The Fountainhead
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10717
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitflipper wrote:
Dogen wrote:
So, Thy, how would you protect children who were victims of incest, live in abusive homes, or would otherwise be put into danger if they told their parents they were pregnant?

Legislation already exists against incest, abuse, and neglect. And most courts will compound punishments if the victim is pregnant at the time of the infraction, often citing the fact that two lives were thus threatened as justification for the harsher sentence. Perhaps enforcement needs greater vigilance and perhaps victims need more education on what recourses are available to them, but isn't existing legislation sufficient means to accomplish your goal of protection?

All of those are great ideas, but until children are no longer likely to become pregnant while living in dangerous situations, they can't be the only solution. The question is what brings about the least harm? Is it better to force girls living in dangerous homes to put themselves at risk in order to ensure girls living in loving homes will do what they're probably already doing anyway? Research suggests requiring parental consent may influence girls to make bad decisions about seeking any treatment at all. Other research has shown HIV testing increases when parental consent is not required. We also know that kids who have been engaged on sexual risks by a parent take fewer risks (1). And we know that kids talk to their parents about sex.

So, the best outcomes of all these reports is this: Parents should talk to their kids about sex. They should tell them about the risks involved, and about the importance of condom use. This will foster communication and encourage them to come to their parents when they have a problem. However, children get more medical treatment for their sexuality without parental consent, including STI screening, HIV tests. This suggests that kids in loving homes will talk about pregnancy, but if they don't then they're likely to make uninformed choices and seek resolution on their own anyway - like getting a ride to a state that doesn't require parental consent. So freeing them to seek professional medical care is the safest choice.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Re: And you probably won't even think you are in one by then Reply with quote

Feiticeira wrote:
Thy Brilliance wrote:
Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.


That's exactly why it's terrifying and to be resisted. Can you explain why you're so eager to embrace it?




Not necessarily eager, just sufficiently prepared.


You say you would be terrified at such a development.

How will your life be any different from what it is right now?



It is not as if your freedom of expression will be taken away. It would in fact be encouraged.

There would be little need for excessive force when the populace is entirely dependent on all the fascinating new technologies keeping them entertained and occupied.

If those in power have learned anything from the past centuries of existence, they would at least understand where others have failed.

If you are so terrified, then what have you been doing with your life that reflects that terror in any way shape or form?

What lofty goals have you tried to achieve?

Do you truly seek freedom, or do you just spend your days stimulating your brain with an overabundance of information which may or may not be worthless?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fritterdonut wrote:
Thy Brilliance wrote:
Feiticeira wrote:
a novel argument for totalitarianism: there's just too many people not to!


Option B, let people starve to death from lack of resources.

Option C, Endless War.



I'm sure it's going to be a mix of all three anyway.


George Orwell called, he said he wants his plot back.

Thy Brilliance wrote:
Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.


Not really. A number of ancient totalitarian regimes lasted much longer than the paltry 12 years that the supposed "Thousand-year Reich" lasted and longer than the Soviet regime, as well.


You are aware that outside forces were necessary to end those regimes, right?

Had they won the war, they very well could have lasted forever.

No force on the inside would stop it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17175
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so what war did the soviet union lose to cause it to collapse?

....although i don't know why i ask, since thy is already winging off into his latest strange delusion.

by the way, i don't have to know bad parents to know they exist. the bad ones tend to show up on the news. right after they've been arrested for beating their pregnant daughter badly enough to put her in the hospital.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dogen wrote:
bitflipper wrote:
Dogen wrote:
So, Thy, how would you protect children who were victims of incest, live in abusive homes, or would otherwise be put into danger if they told their parents they were pregnant?

Legislation already exists against incest, abuse, and neglect. And most courts will compound punishments if the victim is pregnant at the time of the infraction, often citing the fact that two lives were thus threatened as justification for the harsher sentence. Perhaps enforcement needs greater vigilance and perhaps victims need more education on what recourses are available to them, but isn't existing legislation sufficient means to accomplish your goal of protection?

All of those are great ideas, but until children are no longer likely to become pregnant while living in dangerous situations, they can't be the only solution. The question is what brings about the least harm? Is it better to force girls living in dangerous homes to put themselves at risk in order to ensure girls living in loving homes will do what they're probably already doing anyway? Research suggests requiring parental consent may influence girls to make bad decisions about seeking any treatment at all. Other research has shown HIV testing increases when parental consent is not required. We also know that kids who have been engaged on sexual risks by a parent take fewer risks (1). And we know that kids talk to their parents about sex.

So, the best outcomes of all these reports is this: Parents should talk to their kids about sex. They should tell them about the risks involved, and about the importance of condom use. This will foster communication and encourage them to come to their parents when they have a problem. However, children get more medical treatment for their sexuality without parental consent, including STI screening, HIV tests. This suggests that kids in loving homes will talk about pregnancy, but if they don't then they're likely to make uninformed choices and seek resolution on their own anyway - like getting a ride to a state that doesn't require parental consent. So freeing them to seek professional medical care is the safest choice.



Out of curiosity, would you put a tracking device on your child?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17175
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

seriously, how does your brain make these connections?

talking to your kids about sex is ... what, equal to/worse than/in place of putting a tracking device on them?
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mouse wrote:
so what war did the soviet union lose to cause it to collapse?

....although i don't know why i ask, since thy is already winging off into his latest strange delusion.

by the way, i don't have to know bad parents to know they exist. the bad ones tend to show up on the news. right after they've been arrested for beating their pregnant daughter badly enough to put her in the hospital.


Competing with the United States during the cold war was a massive drain of resources, plus it was easier to bribe Russian officials to obey an American agenda (using spys and the like) than the other way around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mouse wrote:
seriously, how does your brain make these connections?

talking to your kids about sex is ... what, equal to/worse than/in place of putting a tracking device on them?


What dogen suggested is about as unrealistic as putting a tracking device on your child.

In what world does he live in where a parent will actually do the things he suggested, instead of saying: "No shirt, no service, no sex."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17175
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

uh....this one? in the parts that have normal parents?

i'm interested that you find it so improbably that a parent would talk to a child about sex (aka, "the birds and the bees"), that they would talk to them just in general, thus building a supportive home atmosphere.

not all kids are raised by wolves.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitflipper



Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Posts: 728
Location: Here and Now

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thy Brilliance wrote:
Out of curiosity, would you put a tracking device on your child?

Myself? No. I trust that her mother and I did a good enough job of raising her, and I trust her own judgment enough, that I've never felt a need to violate her privacy in such manner. As for protecting her from abductors and the like, she was enrolled in a dojo that coupled karate with street-style self-defense from age nine on, and she's progressed well in her belts.

Besides, at this point, she's over twenty-one, engaged to be married, holding a stable job, and doing well enough as an adult to pretty much prove that, despite our mistakes, her mother and I must have gotten enough of it right as we were raising her.
_________________
I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thy Brilliance



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3557
Location: Relative

PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:22 pm    Post subject: "out of touch" criticisms abound Reply with quote

Mouse, you're not exactly a blue collar worker.

Someone like that literally doesn't have the time to sit down with their kids and have a talk about sex, when they are barely financially surviving.

"Don't have sex" is short, simple, and to the point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 163, 164, 165 ... 300, 301, 302  Next
Page 164 of 302

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group