Correct, thats what I thought as well.

beats

In what way 🤔

That is true, everyone should be entitled to a meal - especially within the place of work or education. Ideally, this sort of thing shouldn’t be limited by if the person is a child, teenager or adult.

Agreed, I never understood this mentality. Not only is this extremely sexist (for no reason what so ever) but ageist aswell. I’ve seen this scenario occur on Lemmy (mainly .global), and the conclusion is always the same: the woman has the mental capacity of a 5yo.

Also, like other things, this behaviour muddies the waters in what pedophilia is - further straying off from its definition just to allow others to use it as an baseless insult and a deregatory term for the inflicted.

Yep, an it was the capitalists under the excuse of protecting children/teenagers/minors.

Too late… You’re already flagged as an AI; there is no point in hiding.

Looks like it’s Luantis time to shine

So now you’re declaring a moral judgement on drinking?

Not what is said.

since it would mean both parties have committed crimes against each other

And that would be true. Let me rephrase it: intoxication inhibits your ability to consent - meaning all intoxicated participants are unable to consent.

This isn’t about drinking morality, its about involving sexual acts while being intoxicated. There is a clear difference.

But to say, it looks like youre declaring the rape culture an insignificant thing - as long as everyone is drunk equally it somehow becomes OK to have sex with everyone?

I dont know what happened here, but youre right on one point:

how shitty these sites can be when they come together to bully someone.

What youre describing is essentially a hivemind, which is true; however, in this case I do have to agree with the others - because you are talking like a dick, plus this community doesnt seem like a place for this kind of talk (unlike .world for example).

The point here is that any intoxication is bad - negative is its characteristic. Doubling that negativity doesnt make it any better than if it was just one person intoxicated.

If only one person is intoxicated is it always rape?

The answer is yes, because intoxication is involved.

Two people of similar intoxication levels can consent.

The whole point is that intoxicated people can’t consent - like at all.

Honestly, its a poor worded post. Pretty sure, no one would invite actual rapists to parties.

Personnel department sounds so much neater.

I do agree, but the thing is vendor lock-in is real. Indoctrination by the powerful capitalists does wonders for masses to never leave the app at all. It really takes a changed mindset to switch to alternatives or to quit it entirely.

That is true, but in the context of this community the stimuli should be focused on the mod not whatever moral ideas op has.

Agreed, a strong foundation to rules is necessary. A lack of rules thereof or just relying on the “vibe” of the rule is insufficient and could cause malevolent actors to abuse such “vibes”. Shitty people can cling to technicalities - such as people who cling onto the apparent vibes of the rule.

You can’t have one without the other, as without one, you have people excusing something that isn’t remotely within that rule.

…Which is extremely problematic - but not because OP did X or y, but because this community is about power tripping bastard mods not OPs morality.

That is the weird bit, and it proves that this community isn’t what’s promised.

While I do agree on being relatively loose with the rules especially on a social platform - it still seems a bit one sided. You’re taking the side of the mod (its pretty clear), but consider being the poster - the rules state nothing about the thing op is ranting about.

So tell me how is it fair for the other party? Of course the mod could’ve went about this somewhat differently - but they resolved it with the nuclear option. A warning is a thing you know - and it’s a tool mods should use before resolving to more rigorous methods.

Sure, but if you completely rely on the spirit without regard to technicality you get the same scenario. In addition, the “spirit” is highly subjective so the basis of technicalities is not only beneficial but necessary.

I do agree on the latter, however.