No one is saying you're affiliated with QAnon. It's just that you've been taken in by some of their theories.
I've had this talk with you before, about Kiwi Farms. So the thing about them is that they're not good people. They spend their time in judgement of other people -- and whether that's about lolcows or righteous crusades, you just end up with people who build themselves up by tearing other people down. I think you eventually learned that, but I knew it all along. But you can't judge a person by who they associate with. I have my own shames, which is why it was so easy to recognize this to me.
Except, well, you've had a very extreme reaction on this one issue, and you've found a lot of far-right sources to back you up. Who are your friends now? Who are you listening to? You're not associated with QAnon, but it sure seems like you're spending time around people who do, at least online.
I had a friend I met at community college. Really bright guy. When I knew him, he always used to talk about how stupid conservatives were, and he had pretty deep liberal values. It actually got him into trouble when he tried to say something anti-military, which didn't go over so well in my family. Well, he graduated from university with a geology degree, went up to Alaska for a while to work in a gold mine, and I got to meet up with him six months later. Turned out he was arguing the exact same way, but from the conservative side. Talked about how dumb liberals were on some issues, even reversed himself on things that seemed really deeply held. It turned out that his principles were in fact all shallowly held, and were easily replaced when he joined a new social group. The only constant was thinking himself on the smart, right side.
The point of that story is that it makes me doubt my own moral and political judgement. A lot. And in this case I saw something of the same in you -- you say that Lolita should clearly be permitted, but this movie clearly should be prohibited -- both for moral reasons. And it feel like one comes from the "no censorship" moral framework, and the other one comes from the "no perversion" moral framework. Why do these views seem so deeply held but incongruous? My best guess is that one or both views is held socially, rather than from some underlying moral framework. That you've let yourself be influenced by them -- and/or by us.
And while I was still trying to work through the moral conflict, you basically threw up your hands and left. Moral clarity isn't easy, and sometimes it's simply impossible to follow all of our morals. It's why we are in bondage to sin, and cannot free ourselves.
I've had this talk with you before, about Kiwi Farms. So the thing about them is that they're not good people. They spend their time in judgement of other people -- and whether that's about lolcows or righteous crusades, you just end up with people who build themselves up by tearing other people down. I think you eventually learned that, but I knew it all along. But you can't judge a person by who they associate with. I have my own shames, which is why it was so easy to recognize this to me.
Except, well, you've had a very extreme reaction on this one issue, and you've found a lot of far-right sources to back you up. Who are your friends now? Who are you listening to? You're not associated with QAnon, but it sure seems like you're spending time around people who do, at least online.
I had a friend I met at community college. Really bright guy. When I knew him, he always used to talk about how stupid conservatives were, and he had pretty deep liberal values. It actually got him into trouble when he tried to say something anti-military, which didn't go over so well in my family. Well, he graduated from university with a geology degree, went up to Alaska for a while to work in a gold mine, and I got to meet up with him six months later. Turned out he was arguing the exact same way, but from the conservative side. Talked about how dumb liberals were on some issues, even reversed himself on things that seemed really deeply held. It turned out that his principles were in fact all shallowly held, and were easily replaced when he joined a new social group. The only constant was thinking himself on the smart, right side.
The point of that story is that it makes me doubt my own moral and political judgement. A lot. And in this case I saw something of the same in you -- you say that Lolita should clearly be permitted, but this movie clearly should be prohibited -- both for moral reasons. And it feel like one comes from the "no censorship" moral framework, and the other one comes from the "no perversion" moral framework. Why do these views seem so deeply held but incongruous? My best guess is that one or both views is held socially, rather than from some underlying moral framework. That you've let yourself be influenced by them -- and/or by us.
And while I was still trying to work through the moral conflict, you basically threw up your hands and left. Moral clarity isn't easy, and sometimes it's simply impossible to follow all of our morals. It's why we are in bondage to sin, and cannot free ourselves.
"Kitto daijoubu da yo." - Sakura Kinomoto