If any suggestion of "consider this other point of view" provokes such a reaction, I guess you aren't wrong, but isn't that simple closed-mindedness on your part?
Is there anything I can clarify about what I meant?
No you pretty much laid it out in you comment, I think it tracks.
Having a misleading UI and making not-unprobable assumptions about viewers feels less problematic though?
I don't think I particularly matters where the situation lands on the "scale of problematicness", but youre correct it does exist and it isn't at the far end of the spectrum. Nonetheless, it is a symptom of a greater social issue (patriarchy), and it warrants discussion and criticism.
The porn industry is made up of corporations, which will tend to reproduce the same heiarchies that exist in society, since that's what's most profitable. It isn't inherently problematic to objectify people in a sexual context, however it isn't applied equally, and is reproduced in the user controls on most porn sites.
They just assume everyone is a straight male or a gay male, so the choice that gets presented is "gay stuff" or "everything else". This is reflected in user stats, but it is also going to be self fulfilling. It would make more sense to be able to select one or more options of the broad "straight/gay/les/other" if pornhub existed in a relatively equal society. I don't expect them to do this, but I do expect my online community to be able to discuss it and how it both reflects and reproduces harmful social constructs.
Idk if that clarifies anything, but I think you and I are in the same ballpark?
It's tough out there, I hope you fine a way to get connected with people in your area. It may even be worth changing your area is that's a possibility for you.
Not true, the department ment was moved under the Department of Homeland Security. This reorganization has had a demonstrable effect in how it is led. There is nothing they do that can't be dealt with by other law enforcement. The DHS itself was a ridiculous ratcheting of the surveillance/police state "in response to 9-11" (that's the excuse that was dropped in their lap).
You can enforce immigration and border controls without ICE. It was functioning just fine until 2003. In your attempt to find a "middle ground" position I dont think your landing pint is reasonable.
I wasnt even taking a particular stance on the topic, just suggesting that we carefully consider "starting a civil war" as a potential option. I actually like the energy lol
I would consider a different point of view which is that ICE is a much closer representation of the "American ideal" than where you and your community stand. A study of key events of U.S. history backs this up, in my opinion. The founding ideals had much more to do with the supremacy of white, land owning, christian men than anything else.
As time has passed I think the definition of "white" has been reshaped, and women have been brought in a bit closer, but the United States government has never stood for the equality of all people. This illusion was able to be maintained in much of the late 20th century by exporting the oppression of the underclass to people in other countries.
I'd encourage people to reflect on whether or not their ideals of equality of people were ever "American" in nature, or if it might be necessary to oppose the United States government to achieve this vision.
We can leave it at the same volume. Its not "all men are bad" even, no need to make things up, its embedded misogyny, even perpetuated by women at times.
The question why is "lesbian" porn, in the "straight" section?
Why would a straight woman on a porn site expect to see lesbian porn when they select to see straight porn? It's a double standard.
If men (or anyone else) wanted to watch lesbian porn, there's nothing wrong with that, it just seems out of place in the straight section, cause that's not what it is.
Yeah I know, a civil war would be another escalation. I'm saying that the commentary should respect that fact, and respect the fact that if it pops off in 2026, the bad guys win 10/10 times because no preparation has been done whatsoever.
Europe needs to stop willingly subjugating itself to the US for its own good.
I guess if you don't have anything at stake it isn't up to you to navigate the consequences of a civil war. The US needs to decline for the good of the world, but unfortunately for it, it's unable to produce competent leadership, so the process is more rough than it needs to be
I think this has been proposed before, but i think that the instance with the most users (whatever it may be) should be deprioritized on join-lemmy, for the health of the federation. Its not like people won't come into contact with the largest instance like right away anyway (and could just kale a new account if they really want to)
Why so rude? What is even the "deep end"?
If any suggestion of "consider this other point of view" provokes such a reaction, I guess you aren't wrong, but isn't that simple closed-mindedness on your part?
Is there anything I can clarify about what I meant?