I find it really, deeply fascinating that she just assumes
everyone wants to outlaw at least one “nonharmful” fetish.
Like, as if that’s a normal thing, to want to legislate other people’s
sex lives.
No, there isn’t any case where I’d want to do that. And no, I’m not
alone. There are a lot of us out there who don’t want to outlaw
“nonharmful” sexual behaviour, ever, for any reason.
And yes, I know it’s all made-up bullshit and disingenuous and none
of it matters and there’s no point in doing or saying anything because
these people operate in a universe of anti-ethics and nonreality that
does not intersect with our own. But I can’t help but point out that
she’s really telling on herself here.
>Right, It's telling that she didn't give us one example.
It's an intentional 'Madlibs' tactic. It lets everyone fill in their own personal sexual gripe on the implied dotted line, while offering no real example that could spark disagreement.
See: free speech 'absolutists' who ______________________ (you fill in your own answer)
Edit: I'll go first: "free speech 'absolutists' who claim 'libel' is not free speech, but 'hate speech' is too vague to work anywhere.
I imagine the point of this kind of tweet is to think of a sex thing that _is_ harmful and banned, like bestiality/incest/pedophilia, and then be libertarian enough to argue the opposite.
Maybe? I don't know. The way I'm reading it is that she's asking for compassion for homophobes by inviting the reader to imagine a really gross fetish, conjure their disgust for it, imagine homophobes feeling the same way, and arriving at some sort of empathy for them.
It's a bad comparison since homosexuality isn't a fetish, but she obviously knows that and is trying to compare base, lizard brain feelings rather than anything substantive. Which is... stupid.
"Some straight people think gay stuff is gross" is very boring to me apart from the sympathy-for-homophobes conclusion, so I wondered if there might be another purpose. But there are only a few people arguing for bestiality in the replies so probably not.
One fatal flaw here is that being gay isnt a sexual fetish.
Second flaw, apparently having higher disgust sensitivities makes you
more likely to be conservative.
And of course this just leads to people comparing gay people to
necrophiles.
(She is doing the standard ‘trying to generalize rules’ rationalist
thing, which as a rule is pretty flawed).
E: paranoid shower thought, this seems more like a trap for people to
out themselves having bad opinions. So many people are going to go
‘incest is fine actually’ in the thread there. Double paranoid, it is a
trick to get people into more strict anti sjw ism. Trick people into
defending necrophilia, normal friends of these people see those posts
and go ‘wtf bob? what is wrong with you’, and the memeplex around people
reacting badly to what you are saying causes them to believe they have
been cancelled by the dirty sjws. (And not just shunned because they
started to defend pedophilia) (E2: this is just paranoia btw, there is
no evil plot, just silly badly thought out thought experiments)
I don't think she's bright enough to try, or even notice that that's what she's doing. We're talking about someone who ate acid regularly for years and thinks it made her spiritually enlightened. Not working with a lot of braincells
No one should be defending necrophilia. We have specific rules about how to handle dead bodies because they are a threat to public health. Obviously if you can’t go out to eat with a corpse, you can’t fuck it either.
Tell that to her followers. (No dont actuall, dont interact with people we sneer at).
I obv think here whole stance is silly and sloppy thinking masquerading as some sort of great insight.
Do homophobes consider the expression of same-sex attraction
“non-harmful”? It seems to me either they do think it’s harmful or
harmfulness isn’t something they think about at all
They consider it harmful, and they have data to back it up (from rightwing think tanks and research groups filled with people dispised by their peers (the rifht long ago figured out that if science doesnt say wat you want just create your own, serves 2 things, create data for your arguments, and makes people distrust science (the latter can be blamed on the postmodernists so 3 points). It is weird she doesnt know this and people aren't calling her out on this.
“I’m slow on the uptake; so many times I’ve been pulled in by a very
confident speaker confidently saying things I don’t really understand -
then when I check, turns out he’s actually wrong about quite a lot. This
is super disorienting and I don’t understand that at all.”
Sometimes I think tweets like that are produced this way:
“Hey you know the”paradox of tolerance”“?
“You mean that cheesy
graphic that simplifies Popper’s ideas on open society so much that
it actually betrays them. The one that survives only because it is
spammed by Enlightened Centrists(TM) who want to feel smarter than
anybody else, despite its evident lack of conceptual grounding or
practical applicability?”
“Yeah exactly that one! I bet I can make even reasonable people prone
to serious thinking appreciate it!”
“It’s impossible!”
“Watch me! I’m just gonna announce to the internet that the
real tolerance is being tolerant of people who hate you just
because of what you do in your bedroom!”
> You mean that cheesy graphic that simplifies Popper's ideas on open society so much that it actually betrays them
For those of us who aren't well-read or smart, what's the skinny on Karl Poppa's more nuanced actual ideas about a free society in which we could live?
It only applies to those who use the fist or the gun or who tell their followers not to listen to counter arguments
so, ironically, the people who regurgitate this are in fact the ones who need repressed as they support deplatforming and are the first to get violent
edit: i can’t get over this. what an absolutely amazing tweet. if she
were doing this simply to irritate people she would rank amongst the
greatest posters of all time
edit again: i always forget shes an onlyfans girl so this kind of
shit primarily serves to drive traffic there, tweeting awful takes is a
common marketing tactic on OF. tbh this is an argument for banning her
posts from this sub. otoh she is very funny.
I'm honestly surprised that more young women don't go the Rationalist Camgirl route. Creating a persona that's basically "Hey, nerdboy, I like all the things you do and won't challenge you at all" shouldn't be that hard? Or maybe there are, but Aella's just particularly good at it and has locked in to that particular brand.
"[As usual, be careful what devices you trust with your data or, in this case, with your genitals](https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7apnn/your-cock-is-mine-now-hacker-locks-internet-connected-chastity-cage-demands-ransom)."
I find it really, deeply fascinating that she just assumes everyone wants to outlaw at least one “nonharmful” fetish. Like, as if that’s a normal thing, to want to legislate other people’s sex lives.
No, there isn’t any case where I’d want to do that. And no, I’m not alone. There are a lot of us out there who don’t want to outlaw “nonharmful” sexual behaviour, ever, for any reason.
And yes, I know it’s all made-up bullshit and disingenuous and none of it matters and there’s no point in doing or saying anything because these people operate in a universe of anti-ethics and nonreality that does not intersect with our own. But I can’t help but point out that she’s really telling on herself here.
If something is nonharmful, it shouldn’t be illegal. Once again, they are confused by the concepts of leftists having this thing called “principles”
One fatal flaw here is that being gay isnt a sexual fetish.
Second flaw, apparently having higher disgust sensitivities makes you more likely to be conservative.
And of course this just leads to people comparing gay people to necrophiles.
(She is doing the standard ‘trying to generalize rules’ rationalist thing, which as a rule is pretty flawed).
E: paranoid shower thought, this seems more like a trap for people to out themselves having bad opinions. So many people are going to go ‘incest is fine actually’ in the thread there. Double paranoid, it is a trick to get people into more strict anti sjw ism. Trick people into defending necrophilia, normal friends of these people see those posts and go ‘wtf bob? what is wrong with you’, and the memeplex around people reacting badly to what you are saying causes them to believe they have been cancelled by the dirty sjws. (And not just shunned because they started to defend pedophilia) (E2: this is just paranoia btw, there is no evil plot, just silly badly thought out thought experiments)
Do homophobes consider the expression of same-sex attraction “non-harmful”? It seems to me either they do think it’s harmful or harmfulness isn’t something they think about at all
“I’m slow on the uptake; so many times I’ve been pulled in by a very confident speaker confidently saying things I don’t really understand - then when I check, turns out he’s actually wrong about quite a lot. This is super disorienting and I don’t understand that at all.”
https://twitter.com/Aella_Girl/status/1412464625094856705?s=20
Sometimes I think tweets like that are produced this way:
“Hey you know the”paradox of tolerance”“?
“You mean that cheesy graphic that simplifies Popper’s ideas on open society so much that it actually betrays them. The one that survives only because it is spammed by Enlightened Centrists(TM) who want to feel smarter than anybody else, despite its evident lack of conceptual grounding or practical applicability?”
“Yeah exactly that one! I bet I can make even reasonable people prone to serious thinking appreciate it!”
“It’s impossible!”
“Watch me! I’m just gonna announce to the internet that the real tolerance is being tolerant of people who hate you just because of what you do in your bedroom!”
“You total madman, you made it!”
we’re going to need a bigger brain
edit: i can’t get over this. what an absolutely amazing tweet. if she were doing this simply to irritate people she would rank amongst the greatest posters of all time
edit again: i always forget shes an onlyfans girl so this kind of shit primarily serves to drive traffic there, tweeting awful takes is a common marketing tactic on OF. tbh this is an argument for banning her posts from this sub. otoh she is very funny.
Nah Aella, I don’t think any fetish should be illegal, unless by ‘nonharmful fetish’ she means ‘but what if the child consents’
My personal sexual fetish is kinkshaming. You’d be surprised how many people are into that.
If I did I would want people to judge me for it.
I swear watching rats simp over this chick makes me want to join sneer club. It’s completely revolting.
EDIT: rofl just noticed this is actually sneer club, oh dear god. what have I done.