Me, apologizing profusely to an underpaid, much abused intermediary on a call to the insurance company where I beg for the meds I need to live. God, those poor people are being used as human shields.

GIGO

I prefer PI, or pseudointelligence, as in The Diamond Age.

That’s because people mean very different things by “political.” I use the definition of “a subject related to the (usually human) division of power”, because it makes it rhetorically harder for people to depoliticize their pet causes, so we can actually look at what’s happening.

And yet we drank more during actual Prohibition than before. I wonder if other things happened in that time period… /s

You don’t need to be violent if the electoral apparatus is rigged to favor you (the right in American politics—I’m not making this up), but they are anyway. But if the electoral apparatus is rigged against you, if your party can get the most votes consistently and still lose, while your opponents make policy that literally kills people, if you’d still argue that extraelectoral measures are extremist, you’re not advocating democracy, you’re advocating acquiescence. The people of Germany would have been right to rise up against the Nazis (who only got 38% of the vote, btw), yeah? So where’s the line? Which standing up for yourself makes you righteous, and which an extremist?

“Addictive” means so many different things to different people at this point, it’s become useless. If you can compare the erotic materials I share with my spouse to heroin with a straight face, I’m not the one with a problem.

When do you feel they were gone?

That depends on material conditions. An economic boom doesn’t seem to be on the horizon, and boomers could have turned out very differently without the 80s. Plus, the boomers didn’t have to contend with climate change being obviously real. There are limits to our ecosystem, limits boomers didn’t have to work around, but we do. I don’t think younger people are better than boomers were, but I also don’t think that belief is the only possible source of hope.

Sweet summer child. A group can do more than one drug. Sometimes even at once.

ADHD? Some days, I think it might be…

Of course. Humor is never used to other out-groups so they can be treated as less. Gay jokes are just good clean fun. Like racist and misogynist jokes. /s

Sociopathy isn’t defined by what people will do in extreme contexts, but what they’ll do in “normal” ones. Yes, humans have survived so successfully in part because we have a strong survival instinct and will do whatever it takes to live. But there’s a meaningful difference between that and sociopathy. Context matters.

No. I won’t see the message, because I don’t live in a state that tries to shame adults for their sexuality. If you’re going to insist on having the last word, maybe try being right first, next time?

Nah, I’ll just keep living in a place where we don’t make regulations to try to shame adults for having a sexuality, thanks.

Yes. That’s why I mentioned it in response to a comment that said they were being reasonable.

Sounds like a great start. I’ve never heard anyone who’s anti-porn suggest that. My goal is that all adults have freedom of choice in these matters, and to that end, I support eliminating economic coercion. There will still be porn. I support that too.

Do you not think coal miners are more exploited? Let’s make that illegal too. How about meatpacking plants?

It’s remarkable how many people care deeply about workers, but only when those workers are primarily women they want to take choices from. You want to help people without choices? The way to do that is to give them more options. Taking away options doesn’t improve lives. That’s Puritan nonsense.

CAs warnings are designed to force producers to make a version of their products that’s less likely to kill people available (and required in CA). That’s helpful to everyone.

The intention of this sort of warning label isn’t to make porn better, it is to build toward banning porn entirely. California isn’t trying to ban industrial production, so of course people are going to respond differently.

“Self-perceived pornography addiction” Aka being an evangelical with an internet connection. I’m sure that doesn’t skew the study’s results at all…. One wouldn’t trust a study on cancer that used self-diagnosis (I would hope), why trust this?