-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
Pride discourse.
- Thread starter Baba Yaga
- Start date
Vernikova
Champion
I'm sorry to hear that you're not interested in discussion. I'm happy that you were able to get that off of your chest though.
I can understand that you're upset about this discussion and any possible pushback you receive from it. From your opening posts and subsequent posts, I can see that this topic is very near and dear to you. However. you will find it difficult to convince anyone or make any positive progress by sniping at people after you say that you will no longer discuss the issue with the person you're sniping.
If you believe that gay people on Twitter don't want to like "the gays," then there's nothing much I can say.
Last edited:
Gamzee Makara
Flirtin' With Disaster
You're not the gay person on Twitter. And please, name names so I can see if you're quoting someone like Nero or someone with a good reputation.
You're here.
Now.
Back up your points or stop relying on others and vague numbers, 'No impose morality" and other non-points.
Vernikova
Champion
Ask Baba Yaga since he's the one claiming that "leftists" on Twitter, supposed "allies," and "leftists commentators such as Vaush" are siding with "conservative reactionaries." I'm merely taking him at his word when he makes the claims those people have spoken out against his views.
Gamzee Makara
Flirtin' With Disaster
Vaush is inconsistent. He switches sides whenever it will get him clicks, and has played both sides during the kink and pride debate. He has 2 tweets, one for each side of the debate. @Baba Yaga may not know this. May people are parroting one tweet or the other in various forms.
This proves you're relying on heresay, rather than at least SOME research or having ANY proof of your claims.
Zora
perpetually tired
Kinks are just sexual interests that fall out of the mainstream. Leather is a big one, because it has a unique LGBTQIA+ history; I'll just link to the wikimedia commons page (CW: there's ass in some of the images). I dunno if Cyrus using a dildo in that way is a kink (I'm not an expert on straight sex, sorry ¯\_(ツ)_/¯) and it's honestly not relevant; kink is just a measure of how "mainstream" a sexual expression is, not how "lewd" it is.
Vernikova
Champion
The entire discussion was about why some leftists were against his position, so I had to accept his claim that some leftists are against his position. Also, you shouldn't ask me to prove Baba Yaga's experiences when you quoted his post where he makes the same claim. You're just reaching at this point.
Yeah, well, sometimes I don't listen to my better judgement and invest more energy into futile conversations than what's healthy, that's the nature of the internet.
But it doesn't appear you understand why you're being received so poorly. This paranoia you're defending about expressions of queer sexuality, and its proximity to tropes about queer people being sexual predators, perpetuate violence against us. These sentiments kill us. Imagine someone inserted themselves into a discussion about Jews, and blood libel, and said "No, I don't believe Jews ritually sacrifice children but allow me to play devil's advocate about why people who are afraid of this sort of thing are justified" It's madness. The devils advocate is meant to further expound upon thought excercises, or paradoxes, like the trolley problem, things like that. It's poor form and bad taste, and just offensive to do this in discussions involving the welfare of real people. Here, you're an ally or you aren't.
So, right off the bat, you announced you were going to argue in favor of our enemies for the sake of an intellectual exercise, and to make matters worse the arguments you presented didn't do anything to actually improve or sharpen the points your opposition was making, they were bad faith representations, shifting of the burden of proof, unironically arguing that what is just is what society says is just...ofcourse people are going to be mad.
The fact that Zora even had the patience to type that articulate and precise of a response to you was very courteous and afforded you more attention and credence than what you deserved.
Your posts give off major Tim Pool energy, where you masquerade as moderate left leaning liberal but constantly play devils advocate for or sympathize with conservative opposition in some way.
Last edited:
Vernikova
Champion
I see. I will end the conversation for you in that case.
Thank you for explaining your point of view.
Sadib
Time Lord Victorious
I appreciate that you responded to me and posted an article, but that's pretty long. I just wanted a simple answer. If the answer is complicated and dates back to the 1940s and then several more paragraphs, it's not really helpful.
From my understanding, leather just seems to be subversive.
Zora
perpetually tired
The article isn't that important; it's enough to understand that leather scenes emerged alongside/before Stonewall and stems from places, like motorcycle scenes, that tend to wear a lot of leather anyway.
"Why" people like leather in a sexual way is, to be frank, a pointless question. People like what they like, and often times there isn't much point in making sense of it. Sexuality be weird like that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sadib
Time Lord Victorious
I'm still not sure what's so gay about leather. I'm guessing it's because motorcycle gangs are hyper masculine. That article did point out that gay culture has lots of names for people, based on on animals. I guess straight culture doesn't do that because straight people tend to be repressed.
Gamzee Makara
Flirtin' With Disaster
And some of those articles are unscientific, trollish, made in bad faith and/or outdated. Did you source your sources, or just look at Google?
1) You claim these studies exist. Cite them. You can't just tell people to google stuff. The burden of proof lies with you, it's your job, not mine.
2) You cited pornography, specifically. There's a difference between healthy expressions of adult sexuality and unhealthy expressions of adult sexuality. A lot of pornography has unrealistic depictions of sex with unequal power dynamics, which isn't necessarily exclusively damaging to children.
3) Expressions of kink at pride aren't pornographic. Seeing someone in a dog costume isn't the same thing as watching problematic porn scenarios like broke straight boys or young perps for ****s sake.
Sadib
Time Lord Victorious
Oh, so kinks are tame like someone dressed up as a dog? That's good. I don't know why you made a distinction with problematic pornography. Children shouldn't watch any pornography.
The context of the discussion is kink, though, and comparable expressions of sexuality and nuditity. To cite such an extreme and out of bounds example is a pretty egregious nitpick. But porn is more an expression of sex than sexuality. They aren't the same things. For example, Ursula in the little mermaid is a character that exudes sexuality, if you don't believe me, rewatch the movie or look through some youtube clips. Sexuality certainly can involve pornagraphic things, but it has much more to do with expression and identity than the mere performance of sex acts.
And your last quip, as I mentioned to Vernikova, is a bad faith reading of what I said. I brought up examples from my own childhood because 1) the aforementioned examples are easily recognizable and relatable and 2) they were a stepping stone to the broader argument that expressions of adult sexuality is already pervasive in society and there is no corresponding youth crisis. Any reader could substitute their own examples, as other people like Zora have, with the example of Calvin Klein models.
And you still need to cite your sources.
While I agree pornography could be harmful to kids, I'm not convinced that the harm caused wouldn't be connected to the pornographic material in question and how its depicted. How many of us grew up seeing love making scenes in movies? Does watching Leonardo DiCaprio make love in the Titanic harm 10 year olds watching? I don't know, are there studies to that effect? My common sense says probably not. Is a child harmed watching some woman get pile driven, while being repeatedly called a slut against a cop car? ****ing probably, wouldn't really need a study to prove that to me.
Sadib
Time Lord Victorious
I don't know why you brought up Titanic, unless you're saying that Titanic is pornography.
