59
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Babs@hexbear.net 44 points 4 months ago

Liberalsocialist was only doing what the unions wanted them to do.

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 23 points 4 months ago

LiberalSocialist wasn’t perfect but they are the harm reduction lesser evil

[-] Babs@hexbear.net 21 points 4 months ago

Do you disagree?

[-] BasementParty@hexbear.net 9 points 4 months ago

Do you disagree?

[-] dead@hexbear.net 38 points 4 months ago

The origin of this thread was that the D*stiny subreddit had suspected that Hasan Piker had gone on a date with Paris Jackson, Michael Jackson's daughter. LiberalSocialist often reposted threads from the D*stiny subreddit. LiberalSocialist was a very obvious wrecker from the start.

Paris Jackson was 19, almost 20 at the time. Hasan Piker was 26. Paris Jackson was also incredibly wealthy at the time. This was before Hasan had money or fame, it was before he even started his twitch channel. If there was any power dynamic in this situation, it was the multimillionaire heiress who had the power. I don't think a romance was ever even confirmed. Also I think they are still friends who keep in touch.

https://nitter.poast.org/ParisJacksonMX/status/949823837335531522

[-] Llituro@hexbear.net 37 points 4 months ago

Oh I remember that shit. I didn't post in that because I've learned to shut the fuck up when the going gets stupid. Probably why I've never caught a ban despite being stupid. Remember folks, you can always choose not to post.

[-] ElChapoDeChapo@hexbear.net 18 points 4 months ago

Yeah, I come to Hexbear to get away from the drama and bullshit of the rest of the internet

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 20 points 4 months ago

That's like going to a metro station to avoid public transport

[-] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 16 points 4 months ago

But you can’t make me not post.

[-] Llituro@hexbear.net 8 points 4 months ago

you're goddamn right comrade. except in the comms i moderate

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CDommunist@hexbear.net 31 points 4 months ago
[-] Egon@hexbear.net 21 points 4 months ago
[-] DirtyPair@hexbear.net 29 points 4 months ago

As I said, heterosexuality is unavoidable and even necessary to an extent. I’m not against it in principle.

based???

I'm a liberal socialist, not a fascist.

man this guy rocks why'd he get banned anyways?

Dating at any age is weird and creepy. Keep your vital essences to yourself at all times.

thank you, comrade alaskaball. rat-salute volcel-judge

You said you were against "vibe-based politics" or something but that's all I have, currently.

truly putting the "liberal" in "liberal socialist"

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 48 points 4 months ago

why did he get banned?

Power dynamics

[-] Thordros@hexbear.net 17 points 4 months ago

Power dynamics.

[-] Zuzak@hexbear.net 27 points 4 months ago

Liberalsocialist truly was one of the posters of all time.

[-] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 27 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I feel like a complete idiot for actually trying to give an honest answer about how you can disagree with something morally, but that doesn't mean that it must be illegal or punished by the state.

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

For example: cigarettes

I hate them, hate their smell, hate being around people who smoke, will never smoke myself and think they are killing people

I still don’t think they should be banned

Other examples would be interpersonal lying and cheating on your partner. Both are immoral, both should not be enforced by the state.

[-] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 16 points 4 months ago

I think they should be banned. They are quite literally cancer sticks.

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

So what do we do with the people who deal in black markets for them and continue to smoke? What do we do with the illegal sellers and distributors and dealers of tobacco?

Either you give them ineffectual slaps on the wrist and we have a thriving unregulated black market, or you crack down hard and throw them in jail and we have expanded our carceral prison state with more poor addicts and made more criminals and handed a massive market over to the cartels and gangs.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 15 points 4 months ago

I agree with this in a vacuum but I find this position odd in the specific context of the topic at hand. The way people talk about persons over 25 dating persons under 22, it seems people feel this is tantamount to actual pedophilia. So, you think this is almost as bad as molesting children, but also it should be legal? Why?

I don't really see any downsides to raising the age of consent if this is actually true. The only retort I've heard is that raising the AOC could be weaponized against queer youth, but couldn't that be said of the current AOC? Weaponizing the AOC against queers under 17, acceptable, weaponizing it against early 20s queers crosses a line! Also I think there's ways of preventing that which don't involve NOT having an AOC so we could just raise it and do those things.

Mind you I'm not advocating for raising the AOC here I'm just saying if you think 18-22/3/4 year olds aren't REAL adults and having sex with them is borderline pedophilia, then it's weird not to take the next logical step and make it legally pedophilia.

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The answer is that consent isn’t a binary, it’s actually a complex gradient. We all acknowledge this when we talk about power dynamics involved, we are talking about a sort of half-consent.

Marxists also acknowledge consent in things like work and economy is not binary. The Libertarians who are obsessed with contracts and voluntarism believe there is a clear binary of consent, where if you sign a contract you agree to everything. They ignore the complex gradient of coercion that comes into play from desperation for employment, desperation for housing, corporate domination of the legal system, etc.

Actually reviewing every single sexual relationship to determine all of the factors involved including age, relation, wealth, traumatic pasts, cognitive abilities, sobriety level, etc. is an insanely monumental task for any government. One that would involve massive invasions of privacy as well.

So to function, we have to sort of have a line we draw in the sand where we say consent in binary. Otherwise the state could not function and would be overwhelmed by this complexity and scale (hundreds of millions of relationships to review).

[-] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 6 points 4 months ago

Okay you make some good points here. I still think an argument could be made that the "line in the sand" should be moved upwards a bit could be made and I find it weird more aren't making it in this whole age gap discourse.

Actually reviewing every single sexual relationship to determine all of the factors involved including age, relation, wealth, traumatic pasts, cognitive abilities, sobriety level, etc. is an insanely monumental task for any government. One that would involve massive invasions of privacy as well.

Bit idea: SciFi future where and AI tells you who you can and can't bone based on a complex algorithm to assess power dynamics.

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 8 points 4 months ago

Yes, to be clear to my point so it’s understood where I am coming from, a Marxist feminist critique of the concept of consent, I believe in cases of doubt we should round down, not round up, so to speak. If consent in dubious, we should err on the safe side I believe and discourage such relationships. Whereas a Libertarian-minded person with a binary concept of consent would believe in assuming consent is present unless explicit non-consent was stated.

The most truly correct thing to do would be to have less severe punishments for more minor issues, and more severe punishments for more severe issues, taking into account all these factors. Unfortunately, that’s not really feasible for a legal system of a government to do.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The way people talk about persons over 25 dating persons under 22, it seems people feel this is tantamount to actual pedophilia. So, you think this is almost as bad as molesting children, but also it should be legal? Why?

Because I obviously don't think that, and I was trying to explain it to them from their perspective.

[-] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 9 points 4 months ago

Okay but I think liberal socialist did think that way.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 24 points 4 months ago

Wasn't that also the poster who said Picasso should have been a coal miner?

[-] HelltakerHomosexual@hexbear.net 21 points 4 months ago

he truly was the poster

[-] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 23 points 4 months ago

They were also the reason why the news com added a new rule.

The "-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--"

[-] ElChapoDeChapo@hexbear.net 20 points 4 months ago
[-] D61@hexbear.net 6 points 4 months ago

"Its what the union members wanted!"

Nope... wait... wrong thread.

[-] HelltakerHomosexual@hexbear.net 19 points 4 months ago

god i miss him, he nuked the platform like no one else

[-] ElChapoDeChapo@hexbear.net 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Honestly he at least behaved himself during movie nights from what I remember but maybe something happened when I wasn't around

He definitely made me laugh, still not sure if anything he said was intended to be funny

[-] CARCOSA@hexbear.net 17 points 4 months ago
[-] ZZZZedong@hexbear.net 16 points 4 months ago

That was like that persons least bad take why does everyone focus on it so much?

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 28 points 4 months ago

The comment pasting of "Power dynamics" probably

[-] ZZZZedong@hexbear.net 22 points 4 months ago

They always spam the same phrases on every thread though it was their thing

[-] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 19 points 4 months ago

Yeah it's really cringe behavior and I don't blame people for dunking on it

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 17 points 4 months ago

Yeah and I guess that was the thread that broke the posters back

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 11 points 4 months ago

Because they would get one hundred hexbears responding to their troll comments and they didn’t want to let them have the last word, but also didn’t want to take the time to write a response to each

[-] radiofreeval@hexbear.net 15 points 4 months ago

We need more of this, we have lost our roots when it comes to arguing about banal shit for hundreds of comments.

[-] booty@hexbear.net 15 points 4 months ago

I know how to solve the debate once and for all. Just go through the thread and tally up everyone who is banned vs everyone who is still here. Whichever side has more people remaining on the site must have been correct. blob-no-thoughts

Seriously though this is one of the few "struggle sessions" you can find my comments in because obviously this take is correct, if everyone involved is above like 25 and mature enough then fine date whoever you want, idc if the gap is 30 and 95. But if you're above the age of 25 and dating a teenager that is a child and you belong in the barbara-pit

[-] Thordros@hexbear.net 12 points 4 months ago

I have always maintained that the "am I definitely a fucking paedo if I am dating this person?" measurement is

ROUNDUP( [YOURAGE] / 2 + 7 )

At least until everybody is 25 or older—then age matters a lot less than other power dynamics (wealth, social connections, etc.).

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Leon_Frotsky@hexbear.net 13 points 4 months ago

best poster this site has had in a long time, even funnier bcs imo they weren't even doing a bit

[-] Parsani@hexbear.net 12 points 4 months ago

What was the actual final straw for their permaban? I dont remember

[-] WIIHAPPYFEW@hexbear.net 13 points 4 months ago

Pretty sure it was for defending AOC’s support of a strikebreaking bill or getting too sectarian (or both)

[-] Zuzak@hexbear.net 8 points 4 months ago

Neither, really. They were banned for "sustained hostility," a fair bit after that big thread where they got dogpiled. They got into the mindset of "me against the site" and got really combative over every little thing, always looking to pick fights and push contentious angles. I had a bit more sympathy for them than most, but at a certain point getting them off the site was probably better for them.

The final straw was that they started going around saying stuff like: "he/him, man detected, opinion discarded," but it was really more about the sustained hostility.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Lemmygradwontallowme@hexbear.net 7 points 4 months ago

Jaysus wept... a coupled piked heads from @LiberalSocialist@hexbear.net to @Pluto@hexbear.net...

Now, I'm gonna check their ban logs...

[-] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 4 months ago

Oh, Pluto finally got banned? What was the final straw?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
59 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13497 readers
936 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS