I mean, it’s Raddle. That place has always been pretty shit with toxic views, this doesn’t necessarily surprise me tbh.
I used it for about 3 days, until there was a post on the front page with a bunch of comments arguing incest is morally ok. Kinda put me off.
Thank goodness I left raddle
apparently when i signed up i thought lemmy was the toxic one, not raddle
slight miscalculation
I’m getting more secure in my instance choice all the time
a+ username would giggle quietly to myself again
If you like the name, make sure you check out the profile pic
Wow I had a whole crisis for creating the 196 on blahaj.zone because I thought it would move traffic away from the raddle. Now I am glad it moved traffic.
Imagine using radd(l)e
Appealing to majority is a bad way to make an argument. The age of consent in America shouldn’t be 16 because it is in other countries, like my own, the UK, but because in its own right a human of age 16 is mature enough to make their own decisions about this.
No, I think 18 is mature enough. 16 is too young.
Are you vegan?
Bro what
I am, what are you implying about me?
You’re not the original person I was replying to, but I’m glad you’re vegan. Do you think everyone else should be vegan too?
What does that have to do with anything
I mean, that’s kind of the wrong question. The moral question around being vegan is not “is it ok to eat animals”, it’s “is it okay the way we as a society treat the animals that people will eat.”
I would not be against you having a humane and i cruel way to consume animals. I myself think eating animals is gross the same way a lot of humans feel that eating other humans would be gross, especially living today where it’s not difficult (albeit not exactly cheap either, but that’s because we subsidize the hell out of animal production; if those same subsidies went towards organic and cruelty free consumption, that would be the cheap option).
However, especially if you live in the united states, but to some extent also globally, it is impossible (or, in some cases, prohibitively expensive) to consume animal products without contributing to mistreatment and cruelty towards animals. I don’t think there’s any justification for that. Most people wouldn’t. That’s why the meat/animal product industries fight hard against having to disclose the source and ethics of their animal products.
Do I think “everyone should be vegan?” No. But I do think that anyone should have other options than “contribute to the mistreatment of animals” and “be vegan”, and we don’t live in a world where that’s possible; given those options i have to be vegan.
I would remain vegan even if a third option was available; we live in the future where it’s not difficult to eat an animal-free diet (except due to your own wealth vs the capitalist large corporations that own most of agriculture in the modern world and/or profit off the parts they don’t own by pretending they “invented and therefore own” seeds).
The only reason meat is a cheap option for you is because the grains (which are unhealthy for the animals) are profitable on a “dollars invested” vs “sale value of the resulting meat” scale, which is the only scale that really matters. Meat is cheap because the government gives out farm welfare to farmers growing vegetables and grains that aren’t fit for human consumption to feed to animals. If we gave those same subsidies to people farming organic and cruelty-free products, they’d be the cheapest option instead.
In any case, I don’t see a moral justification to eating animals in todays world. I don’t think that “everyone should be vegan”, i think that people should have a choice other than “contribute to animal mistreatment” and “being vegan”, and that choice shouldn’t be based on the profitability of animal cruelty.
deleted by creator
How exactly are they mature enough? By what standard?
For the record, each US state sets the age of consent. 16 is the age in many states
I just checked the comments… shit’s wild down there holy shit
I just looked it up for my country and the law is pretty complex but here’s what I gathered
- 16 is the age of consent for sexual activity
- romeo-and-juliet laws for 14 and 15 year olds (up to 5 years their senior, imo this is too much)
- 16 and 17 year olds cannot consent if there is any power dynamic
- 18 is the age of consent for pornography
Imo it should probably be that the age of consent is 18, with 14-17 year olds under romeo-and-juliet laws (and maybe like 3 or 4 years their senior). High school is just such a different stage of life, and social acceptance into adulthood is at 18 anyway (though I personally didn’t feel like an adult till I was 21)
Seems like a whole bunch of pedos downvoting
It is really dumb to make it a hard cutoff in the first place. Colorado uses a system in which someone who is 15 can consent to sex with someone no older than 18. At 16 you can date consent with someone up to age at 19, and at 17 up to age 20. At age 18, people are considered adults and there is no longer an age limit to consent.
It is wholly necessary to protect children from sexual predators using age of consent laws. At the same time, it is a bit ridiculous to pretend that people in their teens don’t have sexual relationships with one another, and the law ought to reflect that. I certainly don’t feel that an 18-year-old should be considered a criminal for dating a 17-year-old, anyway.
ewwww I just wanted to see r/traa again 😭😭😭
