this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
1247 points (95.5% liked)

Comic Strips

12960 readers
1047 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 27 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (11 children)

You guys want to consider gender in vacuum but it is never a good idea.

Look at the sexualisation and brainwashing of the girls and patriarchy and men having this big power gap and sometimes using it in the most monstrous of the ways even today let alone 100 years ago. This is why the second image is big wtf while the first is small wtf.

That’s because in the first no one would immediately think that they sexualise the boy while in the second we arrive at this conclusion immediately and without hesitation thanks to all the hard work of men thorought history.

I know having this original sin of your fathers on your shoulders is not a cool feeling but this is the reality we are in.

The sooner this collective PTSD heals and that can only happen after some time of treating women as humans, the better for everyone. Problem is that point in history is far, far away considering the core issue is still prevalent.

It will take another 100 years of intense education and raising new generations to have the society that isn’t obviously fucked up and deeply hurt.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 67 points 5 months ago (2 children)

No one in the picture or the audience is sexualizing little girls (or boys). Instead, the outrage is caused by harmful expectations of purity that are imposed on girls and women, but not boys. As well as the current moral panic about pedophilia, which again is unhelpful in actuality protecting children.

Want to protect help children from predators? Help them remove the stigma around their bodies and sex, and empower them to speak and be heard when something they don’t like happens. Failing to do so reinforces the feelings of shame that all too often enable predators to get away with what they do.

And maybe also don’t share potentially embarrassing photos without consent but that’s small potatoes compared to the above issues.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 45 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Help them remove the stigma around their bodies and sex, and empower them to speak and be heard when something they don’t like happens.

This. So much this. If auntie wants to give them a kiss and they don't want to get slobbered then tough fucking luck auntie, I'll back the little shits up when they bite you. Predators are, by and large, able to do what they do because people don't teach kids that they do, in fact, have bodily autonomy.

And while I'm at it bodily autonomy of kids also implies that parents don't parade photos around like some fucking trophy or something. Have some basic fucking regard for your own kids and what they want. How would you feel when they're showing nude pictures of you to their classmates yeah I thought so.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 9 points 5 months ago

How would you feel when they're showing nude pictures of you to their classmates yeah I thought so.

Depends, does your mom have an onlyfans?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I like this take. If you get to show photos of your kids naked to your friends, they should have the same privilege.

[–] HowManyNimons@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How about nobody does it unless the subject is consenting?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

Explaining consent to certain members of the comments section is like explaining music to a rock, I think this approach might get the message across.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] uis@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

"Knowledge is the light in the darkness of ignorance".

[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago

I like this additional take with pure facts and discussion, It’s mostly uncharacteristically civil and starts to be interesting or at least has potential to be.

However I am mostly focused on why one picture is big wtf and why one is smaller wtf.

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Collective ptsd is not real and anyone who uses that term should be mocked mercilessly for the rest of their life.

[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

In fact, collective trauma can impact relationships, alter policies and governmental processes, alter the way the society functions, and even change its social norms (Chang, 2017; Hirschberger, 2018; Saul, 2014)

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

I never said collective trauma does not exist

[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

collective trauma refers to the impact of a traumatic experience that affects and involves entire groups of people, communities, or societies. Collective trauma is extraordinary in that not only can it bring distress and negative consequences to individuals but in that it can also change the entire fabric of a community (Erikson, 1976).

I appreciate your efforts but it is a real, scientifically proven phenomenon.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 5 months ago

"Collective trauma" ≠ "collective PTSD"

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Sure, but PTSD is a specific disorder that individuals are diagnosed with. If a group of people are unable to work towards a single goal, saying they have "collective ADHD" is imprecise and potentially offensive to people with the diagnosis.

That said, I knew what you meant 🤷

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I think there's a couple of people around with collective OCD that just can't stand metaphor.


Jokes aside, and not being a sociologist, I do think it's a good distinction because PTSD implies a maladaptive reaction to trauma, and communities, just like individuals, can process their trauma well or they can mess it up.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It seems to be the accepted term in the scholarly and clinical community.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

"Collective trauma" or "collective PTSD"? The latter is what we were discussing earlier in this thread. It has zero occurrences on Google Ngrams: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Collective+PTSD%2C+collective+trauma&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I was talking about collective trauma which OP was citing, though their initial term is collective PTSD.

Why would you use n-gram and not journal search engine like Google Scholar. There seems to be an engagement in the concept of collective PTSD since about 2007.

Is this an area of research or practice for you? It is not mine.

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

No, collective trauma is proven. Collective ptsd is not.

[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

Aydin, C. (2017). How to Forget the Unforgettable? On Collective Trauma, Cultural Identity, and Mnemotechnologies, Identity, 17:3, 125-137, DOI: 10.1080/15283488.2017.1340160

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 13 points 5 months ago

You're right, but I feel showing people photos of your child's genitals should never be OK, outside of medical professionals etc.

[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

It will take another 100 years of intense education and raising new generations to have the society that isn’t obviously fucked up and deeply hurt.

I don't share in your positivity.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The hot tl;dr of this that is going to get you a lot of angry boys sending you incoherent diatribes is that we haven't decided as a species that we will stop sexualizing youth.

Yes there are biological imperatives for the sexually aggressive sex to seek out mates that are young, healthy and capable of producing offspring before they become too old to reproduce. That's all a thing that's real, but it's as far distant in our past as most other ancient instincts that we've put to rest. We just keep this one alive because we want it to continue broadly. The whole notion of older men predating and sexualizing youthful appearances or "innocence" as standards of femininity is absolutely something that if we all decided together was no longer acceptable, it would end tomorrow. (Or realistically in one generation.) This is not a more natural part of us than anything else we choose to follow or not, because we are well above using any natural response system as an excuse to allow dangerous social norms to continue.

The reason I say this is because there are a lot of men who will secretly or overtly hold the position that since we have biological urges, then it must be natural and acceptable. Meanwhile, ya'll fuckers completely ignore the thousand other biological drives and standards that we've abolished because they're unproductive, hurt people or just have gone out of style.

For example: body odor. Do you really think we were using soap and perfume when we were packed together in huts and caves for the last thousand millennia? You are genetically identical to the people who used to bury their faces in each other's armpits to identify each other in the dark, but the thought makes you gag now because you were socialized to feel repulsion at this. (Fetishes aside.) We can socialize ourselves to believe and internalize almost anything, we are far, far beyond the forces of natural selection and are now choosing our evolutionary path. Wouldn't it be nice if we chose good paths that respected others and protected children.

(Fetishes aside.)

damn, you got me on that one.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

sexualisation and brainwashing of the girls and patriarchy and men having this big power gap

Women can do what men can't = sexualisation and brainwashing of the girls and patriarchy. Ok. "Men having this big power gap" indeed.

and sometimes using it in the most monstrous of the ways

Olga got r63ed

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

tl;dr "Misandry is perfectly fine because men are evil and nothing a woman has ever done is wrong."

The problem isn't that the bottom scenario isn't accepted, it's that the top scenario is. No one should be showing off nudes of children in public, or anywhere really, regardless of gender. It's weird, it's sick, and it has no place in this world.

[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

There’s nothing wrong about nude children or any other human old or young. Just go to a beach in Europe…

Yes Americans are weird about this thanks to years of well… catholic brain rot

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago

If you're taking photos on a nude beach in Europe you're getting decked. Kid, adult, doesn't matter.

There's a massive fucking difference between sitting naked in a sauna with other naked people and sitting on public transit, fully dressed, gossiping about non-consensual nudes of children. How is that even a question. How are you capable of equating those things.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 months ago (3 children)

It's weird, it's sick, and it has no place in this world.

Only if you think a naked body = sex, which is a weird assumption to make if you think about it.

[–] wavebeam@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

Except the comic doesn’t show them discussing or showing a naked body, it’s a weirdo pointing out the genitals to another person in a very public place. If it was toes, it’d be fine. If it was just a naked body it’d be whatever, mostly. But they’re specifically pointing out genitals, that implies sexual focus. It’s only “cute” and “funny” for the old women here because eventually it’ll be an organ used for sex…

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Nah, it should never be acceptable to show photos of people naked to your friends without their express permission. Outside of medical professionals of course.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee -2 points 5 months ago

Because the only time it's appropiate for two people to be naked together is when dey fucking?

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

You misinterpreted OP, otherwise I also do think the top scenario is weird.

we arrive at this conclusion immediately and without hesitation thanks to all the hard work of men thorought history.

you say this like women have ever had rights to the point that being ogled at "would be bad" the one argument here would be the "daughter is her fathers property" and that's not really a gender thing, that's a social custom about gender more than anything.

[–] Subverb@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for the lecture, professor.

[–] Nicoleism101@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

My god damn pleasure sub