Dark Arc is saying that it is generally considered a bad thing, contrary to the comic which is implying that it is generally considered good or neutral when it should be considered bad.
you guys missed the point. neither should be bad. it’s only bad because of how we sexualize eveything. it’s the sexualization that’s bad, and honestly, that wouldn’t even be that bad if it weren’t for the patriarchal exploitation of sex.
I haven’t been able to peg Lemmy down even after a year and this thread hasn’t helped. Lemmy is pro-freedom, acceptance, and FOSS, is literal to the point of absurdity, has a selectively activated superiority complex, and averages ~17 years old. Knowing all of that, I’m still endlessly befuddled. Any chance you’ve got the last puzzle piece?
Yeah, i mean in today’s world, i value privacy too, but don’t you wish you lived in a world where we were more in tune with the natural world and our natural selves?
I’m betting this same person you are arguing with is a vocal atheist who doesn’t realize religion is what imposed this shame upon our natural form, and probably that taboo contributes to the sexualization.
Stop sharing any photos of people who don’t give consent, whether they can or not.
In an alternate timeline where we never had the stigma around nudity, I’d be just as embarrassed of my nose in a photo than I would of my penis.
Or maybe 10 years after I cut ties with you because you became a massive douche sandwich, I don’t want my picture on the same Facebook wall as your white pride rally.
Hmm, that’s a good point, I was just clarifying what Dark Arc said as far as I can tell. You’re right neither should be sexualized, but in the world we live in neither should be shared IMO.
I think krippix’ point (as well as the comic’s point) is that the first is socially acceptable while the second is not. And that then suggests that the first scenario should also not be socially acceptable.
I don’t think it really takes a side … just kind of points out that it’s super weird that it’s more socially acceptable in one direction than the other.
I do hope the author intended for what I said to be the point though.
I thought that is the point
Dark Arc is saying that it is generally considered a bad thing, contrary to the comic which is implying that it is generally considered good or neutral when it should be considered bad.
you guys missed the point. neither should be bad. it’s only bad because of how we sexualize eveything. it’s the sexualization that’s bad, and honestly, that wouldn’t even be that bad if it weren’t for the patriarchal exploitation of sex.
Shouldn’t both be bad? Stop sharing naked photos of people who can’t give you consent to do so.
there is nothing inherently wrong with our naked bodies. society has conditioned us to have shame. once upon a time, being naked was normal.
STOP SHARING NAKED IMAGES OF PEOPLE WHO CANNOT CONSENT
IT IS THEIR BODY, NOT THEIR PARENTS AND NOT YOURS
WHY IS CONSENT SO HARD FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND
Lay off the caps lock bud.
wow. you are triggered. you must still be young enough that this hits home for you.
Yeah I’d still rather people not show off photos of me without them asking. Its okay to have privacy.
This has now gone to: sharing baby pictures is a privacy violation because the baby can’t give consent.
Lot of very special people in this thread on Lemmy today.
I haven’t been able to peg Lemmy down even after a year and this thread hasn’t helped. Lemmy is pro-freedom, acceptance, and FOSS, is literal to the point of absurdity, has a selectively activated superiority complex, and averages ~17 years old. Knowing all of that, I’m still endlessly befuddled. Any chance you’ve got the last puzzle piece?
It’s a majority (or close to) 40yr old tech autists. I’m not trying to be funny, I’m not trying to be offensive, that’s just a statement of fact.
Lemmy skews way older. Like 30+ average I’d say.
this particular thread seems to have brought out a real strange bunch today.
😧
Yes, yes there are.
Yeah, i mean in today’s world, i value privacy too, but don’t you wish you lived in a world where we were more in tune with the natural world and our natural selves?
I’m betting this same person you are arguing with is a vocal atheist who doesn’t realize religion is what imposed this shame upon our natural form, and probably that taboo contributes to the sexualization.
i’m an atheist and i realize that.
i agree with some other folks on here. i think there are a lot of children who haven’t thought this stuff all the way through yet.
Stop sharing any photos of people who don’t give consent, whether they can or not.
In an alternate timeline where we never had the stigma around nudity, I’d be just as embarrassed of my nose in a photo than I would of my penis.
Or maybe 10 years after I cut ties with you because you became a massive douche sandwich, I don’t want my picture on the same Facebook wall as your white pride rally.
Not you, personally, but any body really.
deleted by creator
Hmm, that’s a good point, I was just clarifying what Dark Arc said as far as I can tell. You’re right neither should be sexualized, but in the world we live in neither should be shared IMO.
Still shouldn’t be sharing naked pictures of people without consent and of people who cannot consent
Yes, they both should be bad. Don’t show people photos of naked children.
I think krippix’ point (as well as the comic’s point) is that the first is socially acceptable while the second is not. And that then suggests that the first scenario should also not be socially acceptable.
Last part depends on interpretation. But most likely yes.
I don’t think it really takes a side … just kind of points out that it’s super weird that it’s more socially acceptable in one direction than the other.
I do hope the author intended for what I said to be the point though.
You’d think so, but a disturbing number of people think the problem is there is a difference, not the nude photos.