You must log in or register to comment.

Lettuce OP wrote

Also is there any legitimacy to the idea that masturbating is sexual assault if someone sees u who didn't consent? Like idk seems kinda bullshit since I've seen animals fuck all the time and its no offensive. Humans being sexual seems offensive due moralizing about it.

And like are porn pop up ads sexual assault? Cuz that's sexual content directly at u which is more offensive than the masturbation. It just seems like how all moralizing is camouflaged as defense. "u not being ur will and acting how I want is violating my concent". Concent is about what people do to u. And if someone is minding their own business ignorng u I don't think it's possible to violate concent.

Idk seems worth considering even tho it sound alike total nonsense to me.


ziq wrote

Lmao@ them telling u2 do [email protected] when the park is your home. Cancel them for being anti homeless


ziq wrote (edited )

Oops i used a slur. House-free?


tuesday wrote



ziq wrote

Un implies a lack of something but if it's a voluntary lifechoice like in lettuce's case, house-free seems more appropriate


__0 wrote (edited )

Not really directed at you but more the terminology around homelessness

Imo homeless isn’t really a slur, as much as people try to reframe and euphemise it, “person experiencing houselessnes” admittedly doesn’t have the same ring to it, but i feel like there isn’t a real push from people who actually are homeless to change the terminology…

I think a lot of the rhetoric on changing the terms used is at best misguided and in some cases actually harmful,

There to me is a pretty clear difference in connotation between house and home and shelter.

A house implies a specific type of shelter, it is a term that implies a default normative “housing”,

a home implies a sense of belonging and ownership that its occupant has, not necessarily a structure - potentially a space, but usually referring to a house … and a shelter implies a temporary or makeshift nature.

Homeless people often have to make due with shelter, such as a tent,

Homeless people often have their shelter removed in street sweeps where cops destroy or confiscate their shelter, often forcing them into state mandated shelters or prisons.

Homeless people often have couches to crash on, or find temporary accommodation in housing, they might find housing that is not entirely safe or adequate. They may have found housing but it may simply be shelter, they may not have any autonomy or control over how the space.

Is someone who is squatting a derelict house without access to utilities waiting for eviction or demolition no longer homeless because they are in a house? Is it simply about quality of housing?

Ive rented plenty of apartments that I wasn’t able to settle into, or with abusive roommate situations, in some cases i ended up settling enough that i could accept a place as a home, in others i was just waiting till i could leave. If I didn’t have a source of income and a few people who i could ask for favours, i would have become homeless and houseless.

Im a lot closer to considering my current residence a home, but i’m going to need to move again soon

Having an out group of an identity policing a terminology or name that that identity is “supposed to be addressed by” just kind of gets to me (not meaning to imply that you are doing that)

I know a lot of people who work in proximity to the so called “poverty industrial complex” the policing of identity comes from the top, from people who have a background in stuff like corporate management, often with a really liberal and generalized idea of identity politics.

Ofc visible poverty is incredibly stigmatized, I think instead of treating terms such as “homeless” as being problematic we should more address the depth of classism in our society, awareness of the things that make our society so unliveable.

Main criticisms i hear is The lack of support, lack of access to housing, the drug war, an economy built around real estate speculation, cities that aren’t built for people, the fact that suburbs often just dump their poor into cities because of centralized services that do the bare minimum, and etc etc etc.

Obviously as an anarchist my ideas of what “programs” and “services” would look like is very different on a structural level. A lot of the damage that these programs aim to fix are the result of government acting to facilitate the functions of capital, and markets also operating in conjunction with the mechanisms of capitalism (etc)

Also of course a lot of people who are homeless are also “working class” … the housing and job markets are so obviously fucked that people can both work pay taxes and be homeless at the same time. Maybe even try to pay off a car loan and accumulate credit card debt 💖

Heres a link i disagree with a lot of the things they say in it, i just think a lot of the rational is bogus…

And the criticism section of this wikipedia mirrors some of my thoughts


ziq wrote (edited )

homeless isn’t really a slur

i was being sarcastic but great effort post lol


__0 wrote

Figured haha, just wanted to put my thoughts out there on the subject matter, as I’ve heard a lot of people saying stuff like that without any sense of irony, had to stop myself from writing a book there 😂


Lettuce OP wrote

I'm chilling at my mom's house ATM. But regardless it kinda a waste of time. It's like the law politicans can break it it's only if other people break it that it's offensive.

Like I have first hand accounts from homeless anarchists that people will kick them out of free food events bc they made tweets they disagree with. Playing the identity card rarely works these days. If u follow the leftist mainstream opinion u are free to be anti whatever minority most anarchists don't like at the moment.


TwentyFiveCharsOrLess wrote

I think homeless is the perfect term because the cops won’t allow you to have a home they’ll take your tent from you


Lettuce OP wrote

Alright guess I can't be an anarchist cuz I want a society where I see people blowing themself while I eat dinner. Not a sexual thing but just for ambiance.


Fool wrote

Answer: Yes, however, you must get approval via consensus democracy, all members of society must vote and approve each time, and you are given a 7 minute window to implement the action immediately following the vote. Failure to complete the action within the timeframe could be detrimental to subsequent requests.

Counter question:

Would private masturbation be allowed in an Anarchist Society?


ziq wrote (edited )

you must get approval via consensus democracy, all members of society must vote and approve each time, and you are given a 7 minute window to implement the action immediately following the vote

so you need to attend a circlejerk before you can jerk? wouldn't you be spent a few minutes after the vigorous circlejerk tho?


ziq wrote



asterism wrote

lol, free therapy, I'm dead.


asterism wrote

Free being code for compulsory, you going to be reeducated.


Lettuce OP wrote

Yeah like I also got a mod mad at me bc I interpreted people saying "u wouldn't be allowed to masturbate as meaning they would do violence against me if I did". So apparently I wouldn't be allowed to nonviolently. I assume they will ask me to stop politely ig?


asterism wrote (edited )

The right way to peacfully end this is by showing you nudes of your grandma. (unless you're into that)

I mean the way I read their position was anarchy means no laws so I wouldnt personally violently stop you but someone else probably will. But you seemed to say it outright and then they denied it so idk.


Lettuce OP wrote

Oh yeah u have the archive. The actual reddit thread had a bunch of people being like I sure hope society would make it impossible r u to do that.

Considering someone even claimed masturbating in public is sexual assault to everyone who sees it. Definitely seemed like ppl were alluding to violence but couldn't feel like an anarchist if they said a vigilatee mob would stop u.


d4rk wrote

The flat answer is yes. Doesn't mean that that action has no consequences from other people tho.


Dopeblivion wrote

Excellent AgitProp. I am inspired to go posting on right wing websites asking questions of the same nature: Would discipline collars be allowed if Trump wins the next election?

"I am a small business owner and I have a hard time retaining workers, even when I pay illegal immigrants a whopping 5$/hour they manage to leave the workplace saying 'it's not enough to pay the bills'. At some point, I decided I had enough of this snowflake bullshit and followed the advice of a certain Walmart store manager who would lock up his illegals in a store after business hours so they have all night to clean up the place, but I tried that once and those little cucks broke out of my store by smashing a window. I can't handle this bs anymore. No one wants to work in this fucking country. I had to cancel my vacations at least 4 times this year because of staff shortages and being a business owner is becoming impossible by the day. If they launch that system they were talking about at the World Economic Forum, I wouldn't have this problem anymore. Just a little motivationnal zap! and they get back to work. Maybe even a perimeter fence like they do with dogs sometimes. I sure hope Trump wins and makes this happen."

Make them look evil. Show that community of Scrooges what the ghost of christmasses yet to come really looks like.