Oh snap you’re right, thanks
Don’t you know this rock band: the father, the son and the holy spirit who made mother Theresa pendant
contraception
In the future, if you plan to add sync, consider reimplementing Joplin sync algorithm
That would give you tens of thousands of passionate users, dedicated FOSS server as well as webdav/s3/dropbox/onedrive client sync ability, webclipper and a lot of support to navigate future issues/roadmap
If you ever decide to do that, there’s even a plan to repackage the algorithm as a standalone library
deleted by creator
Yeah! now it’s turn of facebook to grow friendi.ca
Gulikit kk 2 pro and Vader 3 Pro
No hall sensor sticks at this point is just wasteful
Slowly spiraling into depression realizing that BPD is going to finish my marriage.
Meanwhile my spouse simply doesn’t care about it, so overall it’s lonely and sad experience
I mean automobile industry players? Anyone else just don’t have the capital to “invest heavily”
Chrome be like:
Syncthing - to synchronize your game saves with local devices Nextcloud sync - same but for cloud Browser based YouTube - have to use chrome because it supports touch scrolling
Missus doesn’t let me near it. Overall, it was a good purchase but next time I’d go for one with smaller breasts… and no gaming addiction 🤭
I mean I knew about the breast at the time of purchase, but gaming addiction…
thanks for chiming in, don’t forget to take your antidepressants ~~
Define flirtation? How do you separate it from just having a nice conversation with someone? I’m also not sure how the ambiguity of interest when talking to someone is related to the conversation about consent surrounding sexual activities. The law also doesn’t criminalize consensual sexual activity between similarly aged minors. Certainly not a couple 17yo’s. Sipping wine doesn’t mean you can’t drive a car so it doesn’t incapacitate you from making a consensual sexual decision. Besides the fact that the law is not really what we’re talking about here. The law will always be imperfect. We’re talking about being real here. Being a real human being who sees other people as human beings and wants to do the right thing. And to your last point, I can’t speak to different cultures. But I would be against sexual acts that don’t confirm enthusiastic consent no matter what culture someone is from. Ultimately your language comes across like that of someone who has studied dating academically without much practical experience.
With your permission, I’ll ignore this bc I feel I cannot address the actual core point of what you’re saying in there. I can write thousands of words and most likely you won’t be convinced.
I’m not really sure what your point is after all of this. That we shouldn’t worry about consent from our partners? It feels a little trollish to expect anyone to just be like yeah ok
I think the theory of consent is a bad tool for the job. Instead of contextual, implicit, natural, inherently risky decision making, it is trying to assign the blame for breaking “the rule of consent”. Rather than worrying of your partner’s consent, I suggest listening to your partner’s state. I invite people to acknowledge and embrace risks of communication; to carry the burden of potentially being wrong; to learn how to be more in-tune with your partner.
Specific words and general rules of thumb just don’t cut it for that purpose. Chances are your partner is complicated person with her/his own ways of expressing oneself; And as a good partners you both need to learn emotional languages of each other.
Indeed, behaviour might be inappropriate and potentially dangerous for both partners but it is present and quite prevalent.
Consider the act of flirtation: it’s conscious projection of ambiguity aimed to see oneself as desireable partner. In that regard, it’s self gratifying – people might not even want any relationship/friendship. They just like the act itself. Which makes it even messier – people flirt in any age, not matter how mature they could be in other areas of life.
If you take it at face value, you’d see what it is: a dating game. We implicitly project our enthusiasm (consent?) to a stranger and yet given plausable deniability if things go south. We play pretend and wear masks all the time. It’s been this way for thousands of years – and that alone throws consent theory out of wack.
On top of that no matter age, maturity, or any other characteristic, noone is rational 100% of the time, some people are unable legally to consent at all. Are we going to be that kind of society that jails (both of) 17 y.o. teenagers for few years just because they slept together? Or married couple who each sipped a glass of wine before sex? – they’re no longer able to consent therefore technically it’s a double rape
Lastly, many cultures (not talking about individuals here) even within one society are very different. For some asking about consent is a sign of weakness, for others expressing sexual consent (especially publicly) is associated with promiscuous behaviour. Simply enrolling this theory on such people may cause a lot of turbulence between\within generations and cultures.
When you sell or buy stuff, you can request a contract where the terms are going to be explicitly stated. Yet in ordinary life contract is used only in special circumstances when parties don’t know each other and stakes are relatively high.
Now imagine you’d have to make this contract every time you interact with your friends. They buy you food? Can’t accept it until the contract is signed. They give you a ride? can’t have before the contract. etc etc That’s very inconvenient, isn’t it?
Theoretically you can create all encompasing contract that will provision to do anything by anyone in accordance with law. So, what’s the value of such contract then? why do we have it in the first place if it doesn’t actually protects parties from abuse?
Have you been ever tricked into signing contract that’s not beneficial to you? I certainly have. More knowledgeable agents are always at the advantage in signing and creating contracts.
Example: Every day I agree to cookie agreement I didn’t read, so what’s the point of the contract that’s impractical to read and understand?
So, striving to protect the user, GDPR actually forced users to agree to random agreements they cannot be ever expected to read, let alone to understand.
And that’s just bits of data. Imagine you could become a sexual slave to someone just because you unknowingly consented?
For better or worse, in personal relationships people rely on vibes. There’s a reason for that: not everyone (in fact Idk who actually) has the capacity to solve moralistic riddles every time there’s communication ambiguity.
Theory of consent is assuming that morality can be objectified
Well, bad news, morality is not objective. So if you force your own moral vision as objective one, governing body actually not respecting consent of people.
Lastly, this theory is only an idea. There’s no real implementation structure as of now, there’s no clarity how it supposed to work and what will be the actual result. Once it progresses let’s talk about that particular implementation.
Now, fast and loose:
Is that risk acceptable to you? If so, why?
I am responsible for my own actions and ready to defend those actions according to state’s law
Would you be ok with that risk if you were the physically smaller/less strong person in the interaction? Assuming you’re a straight man, would you be ok with a gay man using your approach to consent with you?
This person is also responsible for his own actions and legally we’re on similar grounds regardless of weight. In fact, usually physically smaller person has legal upper hand: he’s risking by years in prison while I am (the victim) risking by half an hour of humiliating experience. Yes, it could be traumatizing experience but it’s nowhere near as traumatizing as post-con life
Smart conservatives don’t try to convince left leaning electorate to vote republican. They just want them not to vote at all
They tell leftists to refuse to vote if current administration doesn’t change their stance on problematic issues: such as position on israel, taiwan, carbon tax, housing, etc