eduardog3000

joined 4 years ago
[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 1 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago)

Latin equis? That sounds like something a stupid white anglo came up with without even thinking about how it would sound in Spanish.

Latinos is already gender neutral. But if you think that's too male oriented at least use something that sounds good, like latines.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 1 points 4 years ago (2 children)

Latinx is fucking stupid. It makes no sense in either English or Spanish.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 0 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago) (1 children)

None of the words he listed are "slurs", despite how much some people want them to be. They are just normal insults.

I'm autistic and if someone called me stupid I would probably be mad at them, but I wouldn't consider it ableist. Unless the conversation has enough context that they're using the word in reference to that.

Using "re[dacted]" or "autistic" as a stand in for words like stupid or dumb are ableist. Using stupid and dumb to attack someone for their mental disability is ableist. But stupid and dumb themselves aren't.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 1 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago)

It doesn't have to be random and independent. If neither sibling has power over the other (any more than any other couple), one proposes it, and the other accepts despite never having thought about it before and perhaps after thinking about it after, there's still no problem, that's literally how consent works.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 0 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago) (2 children)

You could argue that since it's illegal, victims who are already adults will be afraid to come forward since it was technically illegal for them too once they became adults.

But like I said, the compromise is making only same generation incest legal, or making a certain age difference illegal so stuff like siblings and cousins where it's a lot less likely to be grooming are fine.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 1 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago)

I can't remember the specifics, but it's something like women over 40 have just as much chance of producing a birth defect as incest. The real problem comes when incest is repeated for multiple generations, like royal families did. But that's extremely unlikely without the "royal blood" concept anymore.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 0 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago) (4 children)

Abuse is abuse. It's not consensual, and would still be treated as such. We have the same policy for workplaces, schools, and prisons like you said.

If most cases are abuse then those cases will still be illegal, but because they are abuse, not because they are incest.

A sort of compromise could be keeping inter-generational incest illegal, but not same generation. But still, setting the illegality criteria at actual abuse makes more sense to me.

[–] eduardog3000@hexbear.net 0 points 4 years ago (12 children)

(Hot?) take: consensual sex is consensual sex (minors can't consent ofc). It might be gross to most people, but so is gay sex.

view more: ‹ prev next ›