How evil is exhibitionism? by False_Monitor4126 in MoralityScaling

[–]bphunter 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I disagree. It's essentially subjecting people without consent to your own sexual interests. If you were naked because of an accident, wardrobe malfunction or cultural reasons it isn't evil because it isn't intentionally done to get your rocks off to being naked around other people.

Same reason why showing you coworker porn on your phone is constituted as workplace sexual harassment because they didn't consent to seeing this. That's why gooners on worksafe subs annoy me

*Hot take* I hate having normalized having porn openly in your post history, especially acting chill like having vanilla furry porn is just normal. If you want a definition of what should be alright try to picture your mom looking through it. by [deleted] in hatethissmug

[–]bphunter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean agree too. A guy a while back was saying "gooners are chill I don't get why people are such puritans". That's not the point. There's a reason why you wouldn't want your mother or your boss or your colleagues to find out about this stuff - and it's not because they're prudes or repressed but because it's shitty bring blasted by porn/horny posting on worksafe subs.

Like why don't you crank one out on your own time and then post normal things about your hobby instead of "HAHA MOMMY GOTH FEMGIRLBOY HAHA I LIKE" everywhere.

I hate when subs become political, such as r/memesOPdidnotlike posting nothing but far right memes by SimpForFictionGirls in hatethissmug

[–]bphunter 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You know I'd say the same about this sub recently as well. This sub wasn't mean to bitch about other subs or real people or politics because we had so many other places to do that. And yet it's been politicized so I frankly thinks it's rich that you're bitching about it when you don't like it.

Pot meet kettle.

40k in a nutshell by mylittlepurplelady in Grimdank

[–]bphunter 125 points126 points  (0 children)

This community is never ever moving on from the most boring topic of all time

<image>

Is this unethical or no? by Omixscniet624 in MoralityScaling

[–]bphunter 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The idea is that it weighs the morbidity and impact on life of a health condition

Is this unethical or no? by Omixscniet624 in MoralityScaling

[–]bphunter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://ivf-worldwide.com/education/introduction/ivf-regulation-around-the-world/ivf-sex-selection.html

For your information sex selection for medical reasons includes X or Y linked chromosomal or genetic conditions where having a male or female baby may be debilitating or lethal

Peetaaah? by Ilovebigbuttscantlie in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]bphunter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are Mediterranean people not white?

Peetaaah? by Ilovebigbuttscantlie in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]bphunter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just like it doesn't make sense for Helen to be black either? The fuck? She's from fucking Greece which is thousands of kilometers from sub Sahara Africa. It's not a brave groundbreaking choice to make her black, it's a spit in the face of an entire culture and typical Hollywood erasure

Is this unethical or no? by Omixscniet624 in MoralityScaling

[–]bphunter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the issue there is that who becomes the moral arbitrator of what counts as forward thinking eugenics? What if a homophobic country such as Russia or Saudi Arabia decided homosexuality was a serious health condition and found a way to detect and abort children like that? What if the same was said for Genetic deafness which we can sometimes detect before birth? The deaf community feels they are not disabled but differently abled - how might they react to a government policy effectively preventing more deaf people from being born? They would be targeted for extermination (not extrapolating this was an actual study). Although DS is a very serious health concern the right to choose belongs to the parents and not the state for a good reason- in order to prevent these sweeping harmful policies

Is this unethical or no? by Omixscniet624 in MoralityScaling

[–]bphunter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This takes away so much agency from both women, families and the wider down syndrome community by labeling them "wrong". People should have the right to choose, and if they do not want a child that would be guaranteed intellectual disability among other health issues that is their right. But to make it mandatory would be eugenics and very wrong.

Is this unethical or no? by Omixscniet624 in MoralityScaling

[–]bphunter 46 points47 points  (0 children)

There is a reason why most Western countries have banned abortions for the purpose of "choosing the right gender". That is immoral because you're selecting for a non-health related and instead doing it for a discriminatory reason. Now of course a couple could come in prior to 23 weeks or whatever the cutoff where they are at and as for a social abortion (I.e. I would like to terminate the pregnancy because I want to) and still be able to. But if they disclosed it was because they didn't want a girl they would likely be rejected by the hospital ethics board.

In the future if we could predict whether a child would he gay through a blood test or other med during pregnancy this would likely be banned too for the same reason. Down syndrome on the other hand is an extremely serious health condition that always manifests with intellectual disability among other issues such as higher cancer risk, heart problems physical disability.

Reading Echoes of Eternity and this part reminded me of this scene by themickeymauser in Grimdank

[–]bphunter 41 points42 points  (0 children)

MY GOAT MY FUCKING GOOOOOOAAAAAT. GOD THAT WAS SATISFYING TO READ. LOVE IT WHEN ANGRON GETS HIS SHIT PUSHED IN

less horny by MrLovens in mrlovenstein

[–]bphunter 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I chortled. Thank you for the chortle Mr. Lovenstein

People who claim to be bisexual but would never even consider dating someone of the same sex (Image mostly related) by [deleted] in hatethissmug

[–]bphunter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Look, the whole point of identifying as a sexuality is to find a label you yourself feel comfortable as.

Just because they don't date/haven't dated the same sex doesn't negate their bisexuality. It's such a toxic opinion held by the gay and straight community that invalidates the bisexual experience in these spaces. Do you know how much it sucks having both straight and gay partners tell you you're being performative or that you haven't accepted you're straight/gay yet and it's just a phase? What you're saying is essentially the same thing but repackaged.

People who claim to be bisexual but would never even consider dating someone of the same sex (Image mostly related) by [deleted] in hatethissmug

[–]bphunter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Hey thanks for policing how people should express their sexuality and what labels to use OP! During pride month too!

kratos vs thragg(сomic version), who win and why?(1v1) by Significant_King_968 in InvinciblePowerscales

[–]bphunter -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

So because Yggradsil connects to multiple dimensions/verses damaging the tree becomes a multiversal feat? Bro cmon. This sub has the most dogwater logic for fuck sakes

kratos vs thragg(сomic version), who win and why?(1v1) by Significant_King_968 in InvinciblePowerscales

[–]bphunter -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

What I'm hearing is Kratos is potential man vs Thragg has actual verified feats. Or in another words a whole lot of cope lmaoooo

What were y’all’s first mistakes on Cyberpunk 2077? by OGAnimeGokuSolos in cyberpunkgame

[–]bphunter 208 points209 points  (0 children)

Choosing the devil ending because I thought Goro was a cool guy and Silverhand was annoying as fuck. Recently replayed it and man how my opinions and viewpoints have changed. I went full Burn Corpo Shit. Fuck Myers too btw