• 3 Posts
  • 37 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 29th, 2024

help-circle
  • I cannot understand the reason y’all find the couple sneerable, as I look at that tweet and see something I very much would have done to one of my partners if they asked, and the language used by the bottom as the same language my partners might have used to describe the activity. If anything it’s very much on the tame side, for our standards. Promiscuity is me trying to understand what is it that’s so sneerable in the first place. Is it just ā€œlol sex thing weirdā€? Is it ā€œyou’ll regret your tattoo when you get olderā€? Me and my girls have done so much more intensely weirder sex things and more risquĆ© tattoos. I expect to be ridiculed for it by like, cishet right-wing men, but to find that type of attitude here was shocking.

    Like, ā€œvirtue signallingā€ as in the thing that rats accuse us of doing every time we have a motivation they cannot comprehend such as basic empathy, right? As in the rationalist’s stereotypically verbose euphemism for what previous generations of misogynistic male nerds used to call ā€œattention whoringā€? Is that the sneerable thing then, that people like showing off when they do an unusual sex thing? Because if so I have like, years of mastodon flirty banter y’all can go sneer at, if we’re branching out from ā€œnerdy fascism badā€ to ā€œkink on main badā€.


  • That’s very much the language my play partners use online, though? I totally post banter like ā€œthat submissive was so blanked out that I took advantage of them by doing Xā€, to which they’ll reply ā€œimplying I didn’t evily manipulated you into doing that in the first placeā€, and so on. This is so commonplace in my communities that I failed to even understand what could be the problem before you pointed it out. I mean, ā€œI forced my famous domme to mark me as a trophy as her #100 simpā€? How would you exactly force (non-kink sense) someone to tattoo you anyway, and if you did and were unwise enough to brag about it, presumably the microcelebrity in question wouldn’t like and retweet it? I took it to mean ā€œI was so into the idea of being marked, I’m glad she agreed to my pesteringā€, and I would bet money if any of my people talked in that exact wording, that’s what everyone would take it as. I mean, otherwise I would probably have been arrested for the frequency of times I say ā€œbye everyone gonna tie someone up and do unspeakably cruel things to themā€ and whatnot


  • Ok I have to say, I despise aella but as a promiscuous woman I completely fail to see what’s supposed to be the problem with this particular form of play. That people like having casual sex? That they have slut pride? What.

    I probably passed the 100 mark myself several years ago, I’ve hooked up with girls with much more obvious slut tattoos too, and we’re all antifascist anarchists. Is this community ok with sneering at public sexuality now?

    The only thing I found vaguely mid in that X is using a tattoo gun rather than scarification, branding, or at least stick-and-poke. But I don’t kink-shame people for being casuals.









  • The problem with FOSS for me is the other side of the FOSS surplus: namely corporate encircling of the commons. The free software movement never had a political analysis of the power imbalance between capital owners and workers. This results in the ā€œFreedom 0ā€ dogma, which makes everything workers produce with a genuine communitarian, laudably pro-social sentiment, to be easily coopted and appropriated into the interests of capital owners (for example with embrace-and-extend, network effects, product bundling, or creative backstabbing of the kind Google did to Linux with the Android app store). LLM scrapers are just the latest iteration of this.

    A few years back various groups tried to tackle this problem with a shift to ā€œethical licensingā€, such as the non-violent license, the anti-capitalist software license, or the do no harm license. While license-based approaches won’t stop capitalists from using the commons to target immigrants (NixOS), enable genocide (Meta) or bomb children (Google), this was in my view worthwhile as a rallying cry of sorts; drawing a line in the sand between capital owners and the public. So if you put your free time on a software project meant for everyone and some billionaire starts coopting it, you can at least make it clear it’s non-consensual, even if you can’t out-lawyer capital owners. But these ethical licenses initiatives didn’t seem to make any strides, due to the FOSS culture issue you describe; traditional software repositories didn’t acknowledge or make any infrastructure for them, and ethical licenses would still be generically ā€œnon-freeā€ in FOSS spaces.

    (Personally, I use FOSS operating systems for 26 years now; I’ve given up on contributing or participating in the ā€œcommunityā€ a long time ago, burned out by all the bigotry, hostility, and First World-centrism of its forums.)