Comments

2

GrimWillow wrote

I just purged them, and when I see their posts, no matter they will be purged by me. We let it kind of sit for a bit because if we deleted their posts they would just make new accounts and post in the same regularity, but I don't care, I'll just stay on it. They have a simple pattern.

I left the account unbanned because I wanted to see if they abandon it once they get purged.

3

GrimWillow wrote

That's a pretty steep punishment because it's breaking a law that says that you can't insult the royal family or mess up their things. I think tourism is fucked up, and tourists should at least have respect for places they visit by not fucking with stuff there, but fuck the thai royalty and that punishment definitely doesn't fit the "crime".

Those people shouldn't have been tourists there, and thailand needs their monarchy to be overthrown by a horizontally organized system. Maybe you can even blame the royalty for inviting all that tourism for the "damages".

3

GrimWillow wrote

It comes after the government’s approach to tackling modern slavery came under fresh scrutiny following The Independent‘s report which found slavery victims who had escaped their abusers were being drawn back into exploitation following cuts to their financial support.

Sometimes collusion is spelled out in the outcome.

2

GrimWillow wrote

oh, that's good, and more people should take such an approach. I hope that you are using something other than android (or apple, obv).

2

GrimWillow wrote

Don't access them from your phone honestly. We can't trust a host that allows that garbage to thrive, let alone exist.

4

GrimWillow wrote

Yea, anytime I see their videos of "radical leftist gets owned" and "radical feminist gets schooled by [insert misogynist talking head here]" I get 5 seconds in before realizing that the person they're "debating" is just some neo-liberal capitalist...

When do they ever really debate the far left? They get so fucked in those conversations that they never show it.

3

GrimWillow wrote

What I did do was use examples opposite to yours: I presented an example situation where a child was comfortable with being a victim of paedophilia as less traumatic than one where a child was uncomfortable.

Don't dismiss what people are saying as just being a reaction to opposition. When you do this, it informs us that while you see that you're being opposed you are not understanding our reaction and choosing to obnoxiously ignore what we're telling you as clearly as we can spend the energy or emotional resilience explaining.

There is no reason to split hairs on trauma induced by different "shades" of pedophilia because we are saying that the whole act of splitting hairs draws us into the territory of negotiating the morality of "certain types" of pedophilia. It is black and white in terms of whether or not this is appropriate. Who cares if a shade of black is blackest and which black is just "demi-black"? If you really want to stick around in a place that is against pedophiles and pedo apologia, it is inappropriate to split hairs on such a topic because it is a pathway to excusing pedos and nothing else.

There is no "kinder" version of pedophilia, and there is no room for analysis on the variations of it when it really doesn't matter once you've crossed the line into abuse.

If you're just a contrarian, I would back off from defending subtleties in topics that only serve to negotiate the morality of pedos based on the interpretations of feedback from unwitting and tricked victims.

You keep saying that you never said "that pedophilia is ok or acceptable" but when you give examples you include descriptors like "kind approach". Having the perspective that there could be any amount of "kindness" in this situation is the part that is being called "apologia".

Honestly, the best thing that you can do right now is apologize for trying split hairs about "different shades of morality in pedophilia" and forcing everyone to have to spend time educating you on disturbing topics where your side would ultimately would ever serve pedos. Also, I don't know why you thought it was ok to rewrite the meaning of an article in f/trans that was meant to address casual transphobia, but that's a whole other case that is not helping your appeal for an unban, but for which I think another apology is needed.

2

GrimWillow wrote

ok seriously, you're so confused about why people are calling you a pedo apoligizer, I'll point out where you went wrong:

The second one may not be in distress and may even enjoy the act, possibly due to kind approach from the adult's side.

possibly due to kind approach from the adult's side.

due to kind approach from the adult's side

kind approach

The part you missed is that there is no kind approach.

4

GrimWillow wrote (edited )

I would be excited to work with you on that! I'm actually really wanting to work on a new zine, or contribute to one. Book covers of course. Also if you do some writing for comics, I would draw it. I like your politics and I think that you would write something radical af. :)