Yes. That’s why I compared the two. However when comparing caffeine to what Id argue most people think of as stimulants like cocaine or amphetamine, they have incredibly minor effects. Its like comparing <1% thc hemp and a 90% thc concentrate imo
- 1 Post
- 763 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: October 9th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
The ephedrine plants would be precursors to stims but still need quite a bit of preparation as far as I know. You might be able to get ephedrine extracted from a plant but that’s not a stimulant in the way we would think of adderall or cocaine or something today, having a more similar effect to caffeine.
12·4 months agoThat iteration, as I claimed literally exactly, was defunded in 1955. A quick Google search shows this.
Ok? Can you try rereading what we both wrote and explain how that is at all relevant? The BBC is funded by the UK, does that inherently make it an unreliable source/ MI6 propaganda outlet? 🤡
*from 1951-1955 when it was defunded. The modern iteration is far removed from this project and your line of argument is disingenuous at best.
It was a cia mouthpiece from 1951 to 1955. Its modern iteration is far removed from that. While we could really get into the weeds about RFA as a source, the fact that you’re citing random cia docs from 1953 without either realizing or indicating that the CIA program was defunded 2 years later leads me to believe you aren’t interested in legitimate debate about this.
11·4 months agoSo in rope manufacturing they have the “average breaking force” and the “safe working load” the ABF is the amount of force it takes to break a rope on average whereas the SWL is what it sounds like and is what the rope is rated to hold safely. The ABF is usually 2-10 times the weight of the SWL depending on the material but that’s because there’s a huge amount of variance in how much force different ropes that were manufactured in the same way take to break. If the ABF is 10 times the SWL, that means there were likely ropes that broke at twice the ABF. My hypothesis is that you got one of these ‘top tier ropes’ as your cable, so to speak.
Plantation/Slaveowner and sorta rapist that paved the path for manifest destiny and westward expansion of the US
pretty good
Pick one
15·4 months agoRemoved by mod
You’re correct that nobody has quite said the quiet part out loud yet except for myself and the initial comment I was replying to.
And again, nobody is interested in arguing about the points to do with sexualization of minors in video games and anime, despite that being the comment thread they replied to.
Yes I’ve made mistakes and committed fallacies in this argument. No, I am not arguing in bad faith. Nor do I intend to.
Nobody has replied to the salient points, nor the research I’ve raised, and that saddens me, as it means people are more interested in keeping their lolicon games than reducing issues affecting real people, and as a survivor of childhood sexual assault myself, I find that pretty fucked up. I would hope that even somebody who hasn’t gone through what I have would have the same proclivity to protect living, breathing children over having unfettered access to lolicon games that sexualize minors but this thread has shown me that this is not the case.
Goodbye
Oh that’s totally my b. I got confused. I think the article may have mentioned genshin impact somewhere.
Anyway, I took a look and you’re right only half the cast is child-coded! Great! Now let’s get the other half too!
Oh… I guess you don’t know the game.
Those are the characters.
Another commenter pointed out that a selling feature of this game is the jiggle physics.
This is getting old though.
Ahh yes I forgot to disregard all context of the argument. That’s my favorite tool in discourse, personally! Have anything to say to the rest of my comment? The actual important part?
Of course not…
Bye bye closet pedo!
Just so you know what the scientists studying this have to say:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010).
Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research.
While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…
Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn’t made. That was not a straw man.
The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn’t call that one out.
Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.
Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.
A direct excerpt from the paper:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010). Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research. While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
I am not religious…
You, on the other hand, are very good at making up arguments to put in my mouth.
Bye bye now
.world threads are far enough left that many of us would have been imprisoned under mccarthyism. Tankies do exist, which I know from interacting with them, and simping for authoritarian regimes is not leftism. Tankies don’t challenge my preconceived notions any more than nazis… they just don’t.