erin (she/her)

It would be on sight.

You decided I’m mad, not me. You also didn’t answer the question. Obvious rage bait, shouldn’t have fed the troll.

Can you elaborate? What is “honest and open” about being rude to someone for no reason?

Nothing irks me more than the “sharing your unasked for opinion at any time is just telling the truth” crowd. Come on. You must know the difference between honesty and integrity for the sake of good communication and being insensitive because it’s “the truth.” You’re not being honest, regardless of the truth of your beliefs, you’re being a dick if you tell someone they’re not attractive without being asked.

If someone asks, “Am I attractive,” not fishing for compliments but asking for an opinion, you wouldn’t be a dick for saying “I wouldn’t describe you as conventionally attractive,” or “you aren’t my type, so not to me.” You would still be a dick for saying either of those things to someone who didn’t ask, or delivering your answer in an inconsiderate manner. Truth doesn’t make your words right. You can be correct and still very wrong.

I would need to see multiple, peer reviewed sources. It’s a very sensitive topic, but regardless, I don’t believe that that material should be floating around. Access it through a psychiatrist, or therapist.

It’s the same argument, that the character only looks like a child, but isn’t. I chose a hyperbolic example for emphasis, but it’s the same argument. It looks like a child. That’s the point.

I have always felt the “actually she’s 1000 years old and just looks like a child” argument is both ridiculous and disingenuous. They’re interested because she looks like a child, not because of her character supposed age. Again, but rephrased, what’s the difference if someone makes a character that looks like a real child but is fictional and much older in their characterization? At what point is it morally acceptable? Do you need to use an ambiguous art style? Do you need to include inhuman character traits? I simply cannot take the argument seriously, because clearly the character looking like a child is important. What difference does the story you tell yourself about their age make? Why not just pretend real CSAM is just young looking aliens that are a million years old? If it looks like a child, I believe it’s unequivocally immoral, and there is no line you can draw that would convince me that a childlike drawing that falls on the “OK” side of the line isn’t immoral.

Legality and morality don’t necessarily align. I would find it very immoral, but as far as I know, not illegal, to get off to drawings of children. Additionally, what’s the difference between a photo of a child and a realistic drawing of a “fictional character” that looks like said child? I think getting off to children is wrong, regardless of criminality. If that’s something someone desires, they should seek help, not indulge in fantasy.

If you could look at a 6 year old and call them “born bad” for any level of mistake, it would make you an asshole. Why would you treat your child self like that?

No action a 6 year old takes is indicative of anything but their immediate environment. If you did something “terrible” when you were 6, maybe think about what that says about who was raising you, and why you’ve been made to think that it’s “terrible.” You desperately need to work through your childhood trauma with a professional.

Would you treat a random 6 year old how you’re treating yourself? Why or why not?

Try not to take it all personally. It’s a public forum, and no one here knows each other. They are just trying to be helpful. You will have more success if you assume people aren’t being mean. There is no need to delete your account. Learning the social rules for an internet space is difficult, especially when it isn’t your first language. Take your time and don’t be so hard on yourself. Your contributions will be appreciated, even if they aren’t perfect English. Have a good day.

There’s a big difference between the weed shop I can walk to down the corner and the nearest safe use site/casino. I think people should be free to engage in whatever recreational activity they choose to, and the existence of addiction doesn’t give the government the right to infringe on those freedoms. Safe use sites and social programs can exist without a semi-dystopian puritan system. I don’t understand why addiction is so huge a problem that it requires such insane overreach. Without capitalist exploitation, addiction wouldn’t be monetized. A different form of government and legalization do a far better job at managing addiction than creating a black market with draconian laws.

A drug casino doesn’t solve those problems though. Better social services for addicts can. Addiction is impossible to eradicate, all you can do is provide good social services for addicts and recovery programs (which aren’t judgemental and Christian). Requiring transportation to go get and use drugs is the same thing as criminalizing it for many people.

Neither does making a drug house that people need transportation to get to. That’s the same as criminalizing it for many people.

I feel like you have issues with the way capitalism takes advantage of people’s vices and you blamed half of it on the vices. If it wasn’t exploited, and drugs weren’t criminalized, with normal and healthy social standards taught instead of total abstinence creating an attractive taboo, none of that would be an issue.

Excellent question, but I have no idea. She tears the medicine labels off for some reason so I’ll ask her when she gets home and edit with more info. It’s a capsule and a tiny pill, taken morning and night respectively, if that means anything to you.

Edit: Phentermine and topiramate

My parents and my fiancee have gotten on an equivalent of Ozempic specifically for weight loss and covered by insurance. It seems to be easier now than it was, because if my fiancee wasn’t covered we absolutely couldn’t afford it.

That makes the assumption that trans athletes consistently outperform cis athletes, which there isn’t evidence of. A trans person winning something does not mean all trans people will always have an advantage, which is the assumption conservatives make. What place does a trans person need to place for it to be okay? Are trans people ever allowed to win? Any time a trans person places above any cis person, it’s used as evidence of unfairness, even though that makes no sense.

I wouldn’t say either. Sex is way more intimate than just hugging. I’d say it’s like “making out” but better. It’s lots of fun, and I don’t care about the societal norms restricting it between romantic partners. Pregnancy isn’t a risk for me, and I’m very careful to avoid STDs. I haven’t had sex with someone without a recent STD panel, and I use protection when necessary. My fiancee feels the same way, so I have sex with my friends all the time

For context I guess, here’s my views on the list you posted, as someone who is very much not religious and dated plenty before finding my fiancee:

• Marriage might be awesome for some, but it’s also not for everyone, and there are far too many bad marriages that could’ve been good casual relationships

• Standards are definitely good to have, but I guarantee mine are very different than the average Catholic

• No shame in being single. Better to be single than in a toxic relationship just for the sake of a relationship.

• I probably couldn’t see myself marrying a religious person, but if their beliefs don’t infringe on other’s rights then I guess they can do them.

• Sex is just sex, cohabitation is convenient, cheaper, and pleasant. I’ve never been married and I’ve lived more of my adult life with a roommate or partner than not. I also don’t believe sex needs to be confined within the boundaries of a relationship either, and I have sex with people that aren’t my fiancee, both with and without her, though that’s definitely uncommon and always done with the full consent of all parties.

• Dating could be for finding a future spouse. It could also just be for fun, or for a casual relationship, or a long term relationship with no intent to marry.

• Relatively wide variety in how long people date before marriage, if ever. I never planned on it for years, but I met my fiancee and changed my mind. We dated for a year before getting engaged.

• Normal to date in highschool.

Obviously this is only my perspective. No judgement, to each their own. Other than the views on polyamory (though more accurately, just sex. Open relationship? I don’t have a label for it), these opinions seem very common among the average dating population. My sample may be skewed since I’m bisexual and over half my relationships have been gay.

I don’t love the take “men dressing feminine is a fetish.” Are tomboys a fetish? Just because some people choose to engage in fetish and also are femboys doesn’t make it “in and of itself” a fetish. It isn’t.