Sofia on Nostr: Fir :transspecies star: m o μ s e >I'm liberated in my telio sexual identity, but It ...
Fir :transspecies star: (npub1yyl…y9hl) m o μ s e (npub19kn…0fes)
>I'm liberated in my telio sexual identity, but It doesn't include me having sex with whatever adult I want just because that's what I want. It means I am not legally able to be discriminated against for those sexual desires.
preventing you from having consensual sex with someone you want *is* "legally discriminating against you for those sexual desires", that is how the term has always been used
>Irrelevant, I'm not arguing what the AOC could be. And, I'm not necessarily against its reduction with a reduction of the AOM.
i replied to what you said, so if it's irrelevant to the argument you shouldn't have brought it up to begin with
>It isn't an assumption, your argument for why youthlib is pro-c hinges on trying to prove why it isn't anti-c. That is an inherently MAP/AAM focused position, as it is possible to advocate youthlib apart from any MAP/AAM ideology.
age equality within a world where adults can have sex with each other is ontologically pro-c, stating that being pro-c is inherent to youthlib does not imply it is the *center* of it, so what you said *is* an assumption
>The abstraction you present requires a world where many more variables have come into play. It would require the elimination of the possibility of parent-child physical and mental abuse, parental sexual assault, disagreements in general between parents and children, etc, as opposed to one variable, the existence of aams.
the problem there is ignoring the transitive variables within "the existence of aams", the fact people with a specific attraction (regardless of what it is) will always exist is inherent to the very nature of human mind, how anything imaginable can be psychologically experienced by someone
in reality, it's not just one variable, the same way that the parenting example isn't one, both can be broken down uncountably many times
and also, the idea that how far from our world a thought experiment is ignores that this is primarily a *qualifying* argument, not a *quantifying* one
>the ability for adults to receive sexual consent benefits few youths.
the vast majority of youths are at least non-preferential teleios, which still benefit from that
>I'm saying youthlib isn't tied to aoc abolition per se, and rather its reduction or abolition is tied to youthlib.
covered above
>I'm liberated in my telio sexual identity, but It doesn't include me having sex with whatever adult I want just because that's what I want. It means I am not legally able to be discriminated against for those sexual desires.
preventing you from having consensual sex with someone you want *is* "legally discriminating against you for those sexual desires", that is how the term has always been used
>Irrelevant, I'm not arguing what the AOC could be. And, I'm not necessarily against its reduction with a reduction of the AOM.
i replied to what you said, so if it's irrelevant to the argument you shouldn't have brought it up to begin with
>It isn't an assumption, your argument for why youthlib is pro-c hinges on trying to prove why it isn't anti-c. That is an inherently MAP/AAM focused position, as it is possible to advocate youthlib apart from any MAP/AAM ideology.
age equality within a world where adults can have sex with each other is ontologically pro-c, stating that being pro-c is inherent to youthlib does not imply it is the *center* of it, so what you said *is* an assumption
>The abstraction you present requires a world where many more variables have come into play. It would require the elimination of the possibility of parent-child physical and mental abuse, parental sexual assault, disagreements in general between parents and children, etc, as opposed to one variable, the existence of aams.
the problem there is ignoring the transitive variables within "the existence of aams", the fact people with a specific attraction (regardless of what it is) will always exist is inherent to the very nature of human mind, how anything imaginable can be psychologically experienced by someone
in reality, it's not just one variable, the same way that the parenting example isn't one, both can be broken down uncountably many times
and also, the idea that how far from our world a thought experiment is ignores that this is primarily a *qualifying* argument, not a *quantifying* one
>the ability for adults to receive sexual consent benefits few youths.
the vast majority of youths are at least non-preferential teleios, which still benefit from that
>I'm saying youthlib isn't tied to aoc abolition per se, and rather its reduction or abolition is tied to youthlib.
covered above