this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
112 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13521 readers
946 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

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

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Lmao are you Helen Lovejoy?
WONT SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?

What people do in their free time is their own choice. You judge teachers on what they do at school, because that's where they're teachers.

Some of your other examples are too petulant and silly to respond to.

Oh I thought we were supposed to assume good faith in order to have a productive discussion? My examples show that there is no cutoff for your moral panic, it's completely arbitrary. You of course won't engage with this because you're a shithead who thinks "debating" is something to be proud of debate-me-debate-me

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

What people do in their free time is their own choice.

Let me put this in the simplest way possible. The second you focus your energies on defending teachers' rights to do online porn, you have ceded the entirety of discourse surrounding the Education System to the conservative right at best, and the fascist right at worst. You will be exiled to the fringes of society by the parents themselves.

Sometimes it's not about Libertad, Carajo.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Let me put this even simpler: If your response to hearing a teacher has an OF is "they should get fired" then you suck. If your response is "well if you defend the teacher for having an OF then you lose the optics war!" then you suck and you're stupid. For one we're on a niche internet forum, nothing here matters. Behaving like this in any way constitutes as the public discourse with weight to change anything is silly. For the other it's not a good thing that teachers have OF platforms, but blaming them for it and going along with that puritanical moral panic is giving away territory in your so precious discourse.

Libertad? This isn't some libertarianism thing.

Also all the people that are arguing "well what if my kids find porn of their teacher?" Should probably implement some sort of parental control, if they're so worried of their children finding porn.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

If your response to hearing a teacher has an OF is "they should get fired" then you suck.

Was that what I wrote?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

If your response is "well if you defend the teacher for having an OF then you lose the optics war!

Boy I sure am glad I wrote more than that one sentence

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You will be exiled to the fringes of society by the parents themselves.

Picking your battles is important. A teacher doing OnlyFans is a great example of something that's defensible but very much not a hill to die on.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

This is a niche shitposting leftist forum. There are no hills here. Nothing matters. It's all valleys, which makes it all into mountains and molehills as well.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago

Well we should think of the children, its important socially.

You've said elsewhere that you'd be concerned if a teacher were a facist - would you not mind if they were teaching to the cirriculum at school, but in their time off work publically promoting fascist material? I don't mean to conflate the two subjects (fascism and pornography), but just point out that we don't (and shouldn't) judge teachers just on what they do at school. Of course, then it becomes a question of what is and isn't acceptable for a teacher to be doing in public outside of work, and I don't think its moral panic to say that pornography is not acceptable - sex education and teaching about relationships is very sensitive as a subject for people because as I've said there's a great potential for harm and exploitation.

We should assume good faith until demonstrated otherwise of course. You don't think your pepsi coke thing was silly?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What if the teacher drinks pepsi, but this is a coke town?

Oh I thought we were supposed to assume good faith

This is some real smuglord shit

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What goes around comes around shrug-outta-hecks

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We shouldn't interact with each other the way we interact with chuds.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I consider them a chud because of their behaviour and opinion

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

How do you expect to get anything done if you call other people on your small leftist forum chuds because you disagree on one thing despite agreeing on 99 others? You know there will be plenty of other leftists who disagree with you on this or that, right?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think they're a chud because they have a puritanical worldview and they use typical chud debatebro tactics.
I don't expect to get anything done thru a website and I sincerely hope you don't either. This isn't a place for organizing it's a safe space for leftist shitposting and it sincerely saddens me to see people be so blindly supportive of obvious puritanical moral panic BS.

You know there will be plenty of other leftists who disagree with you on this or that, right?

IRL I've had this conversation while I worked at a school and one of the temps that worked there turned out to have an onlyfans. The only person who got fired was the guy who made a big stink about it. This was because we worked with children and people found it weird how obsessed he was with porn.
I've done plenty of IRL organizing and you'd be surprised the kinda things you can talk out with regular normal people. I don't have to agree with them on everything, but being weird judgemental prudes using debate tricks learned by 3rd graders don't make them into someone where one can have a fruitful cooperative effort.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"I disagree with this person therefore they're a chud therefore I can be as big of an ass as I want to them" is a shitty way to interact with people here. "It's just a website" is a bad excuse because it makes interactions on that website shittier and how we act online bleeds through to the real world.

The only person I saw using "debate tricks" was you, and you can't say on one hand this is a website so you can be an ass to whoever you want, then on the other hand complain about stuff like that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

"I disagree with this person therefore they're a chud therefore I can be as big of an ass as I want to them"

No. The specific thing I disagree with the person on, and the way in which they behave, makes me consider them a chud and thus I don't feel like I have to be particularly kind to them.

The only person I saw using "debate tricks" was you.

Then you are either blind or willfully obtuse. By the way the thing you did before of reducing my disagreement was a "debate trick" in case you missed it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The specific thing I disagree with the person on, and the way in which they behave, makes me consider them a chud

A chud is a full-blown reactionary, not another leftist who agrees with you on 99 things and disagrees with you on one point you characterize as reactionary (and note that there is far from a consensus on that in this thread).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

if they think sex workers are a danger to children they are a reactionary

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

A chud is a full-blown reactionary

A chud is a right-wing asshole, and that's what the user is.

disagrees with you on one point you characterize as reactionary

"One point" being viewing sex workers as morally reprehensible humans that cannot be allowed space in polite society.

and note that there is far from a consensus on that in this thread

Okay and so what? I hold the opinion that the user is a chud, I hold the opinion that their puritanical views are reactionairy. What are you even trying to argue here? It's all subjective.
But go thru and see how they've behaved themselves since you stepped up to defend the smol bean. I'm done with your weird attempt at tone policing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: