There's an argument to be made that this content satisfies a need for some mentally ill people, and I did believe in that argument when I was younger, but hopefully we've all learned from the Epstein files that demand for this kind of thing can be created from scratch in formerly normal people.
Yes, the name should be changed. The pictures on that community would be completely legal to look at if they were not described as fauxbait, but when they are posted with that framing, they become a crime to look at in Australia (And Finland, according to a Finn on Matrix)
Oh, you're a solipsist? You believe reality is an illusion and trees don't really exist? I'm somewhat similar, I'm an antirealist. I recognise that reality is an illusion, but I still choose to believe in it until it can be overthrown. If we teach enough people how to reshape their beliefs and perceptions, then we can decide for ourselves whether trees exist. But at present, I need to believe in trees in order to inhabit consensus reality and communicate efficiently with the people who live here. It's cool that you don't believe in trees, though!
Studies show playing video games raises short term aggression. But we have no hard data on the long term causative relationship between video games and violence, because it's very difficult to cause patients to play video games for many years. I sure hope people are learning some of their moral values around violence from video games. I hope Wolfenstein makes people more violent towards neo-Nazis. I hope Horizon makes people more violent towards tech CEOs. I hope Subnautica makes people want to protect nature.
Now I'm going to cite Humm et al., (2020)'s insights into the psychology of first-time CSAM offenders. Most first-time CSAM offenders are unaware that what they're doing is a crime, and they have doubts about the harmfulness of what they're doing. In other words, they're exactly the kind of people who tend to use the fauxbait community, and in fact they have a lot in common with people in this thread such as yourself.
Nonetheless, as a factor motivating onset, such exposure, or ‘opportunity’, is thought to have a ‘greater impact’ on an individual’s likelihood of viewing CEM than pathological motivations or drivers such as overpowering sexual urges
In other words, if you see this kind of porn by accident and you don't think it's that bad, you're more likely to go on to become an online-only child sex offender.
What you'll notice online is that a lot of these people who want to move the overton window understand this, so their goal is to remove the left from the voting population. There are a lot of ways to do this. You can require ID to vote, and then invalidate trans people's IDs. You can gerrymander so the votes don't count. You can just plain old kill people. You can make it very unpleasant to vote. You can suppress candidates who represent the left wing from winning primaries. And if you're really clever, you can make up a propaganda line that convinces leftists it's in their own interest not to vote.
The dems' corporate donors do want fascists in power, but the main way they achieve that is by giving the dems bad advice that makes them lose. Some Lemmy users are smart enough to see through that ruse and vote for the dems anyway so the fascists don't seize power. Some Lemmy users are not that smart.
John isn't the one who gave the bad apology, that was the event organisers. John doesn't owe the world a public apology, he owes the MCs a private apology, and he probably gave it. The BAFTA owe the world a public apology, and a better one than they have.
I dream of a future when cars are banned and the only fat people in the world are people who want to be fat.