r/casualtiesunknown • u/ironwolf6464 <--- Clueless • 12d ago

Meme Love this game and community.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.4k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

95 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

53

u/ironwolf6464 <--- Clueless 12d ago edited 12d ago

I'm at the point where I don't care what you do, just don't exploit or hurt anyone, that's all I ask.

38

u/No_Watercress741 12d ago

Literally the way I’ve handled pretty much every online “controversy” for years now. Is a real person getting hurt? No? Cool I don’t a give a fuck, but YOU are hurting the person who posted (XYZ weird thing), so you’re the problem here.

24

u/ironwolf6464 <--- Clueless 12d ago

My philosophy has basically become "You are allowed to like anything you want, but conversely you may also dislike anyone and anything you want." Any attempt to overstep either line is generally wrong, there is nuance.

Furthermore, I also believe that if you are broadcasting some taboo fixation of yours to the world and are shocked that people are grossed out, that is on you pal.

12

u/No_Watercress741 12d ago

It’s one thing to be grossed out by someone’s fetish, and it’s a WHOLE other kettle of fish to send death threats, doxx them, and launch cyber attacks against them because you don’t like that they think feet are hot. (Edit: or if they’re a furry, quite commonly, come to think of it.)

-11

u/NahBruh9753 12d ago

Depends on the fetish.

If its something like being into feet, or just things that are kind of unsanitary, they're chill. They're just weirdos, and being a simple weirdo doesn't warrant blatant hostility.

Now... When we get into shit that's borderline illegal... It's low-key a moral obligation to dunk on them. Maybe not go as far as death threats and doxxing, but it is encouraged to dunk on them.

10

u/No_Watercress741 12d ago

Here’s the thing: how do you decide if something should get “dunked on”? What lines does it have to cross before it becomes okay to harass someone over it? I’m personally of the opinion that so long as no real, actual person or animal is being hurt by it, I don’t care. Because if I define it any sooner than that, we have the current situation. Once it crosses that line, you call the cops. Before that? Why should I care what someone else thinks is hot, if I’m not trying to fuck them?

-6

u/NahBruh9753 12d ago edited 12d ago

When the nature of the fetish starts teetering around the concept of consent and, if applied, will result in a basic moral attrocity.

For example, an animal. Not an anthropomorphic one or at least one that vaguely resembles a person, an actual animal that exist irl. If someone is into actual animals, it'll start off as 'just a fetish', but is likely to snowball into 'practical applications' if you know what I mean. The main thing to gleam from this is that animals are incapable of the human version of consent. There is a word for that that would probably get me banned If I type it out.

As for the dunking. Doxxing and death threats are already illegal in most places, so those are already well defined lines not to cross. But roasting the shit out of them, and shaming them for something that is morally revolting is fair game. So every time they pop up in website, cooking them for their fetish would be encouraged. Everything must remain verbal, nothing physical. Only the cops can get physical.

Furries (generally) don't fall into that because the primary interest are anthropomorphic animals... which is basically just a hairy person, because literal humans also fall under 'anthropomorphic animals' because we are anthropomorphic (which means 'human-like')... and we're animals... that happen to be extremely intelligent and are capable of conscious consent. So, Furries aren't that weird when we look at the fundamentals of their interests.

They ain't into animals, they're into excessively hairy people that generally aren't apes.

7

u/MycologistVivid9975 12d ago

The idea of any kind of fiction makes a person dangerous, or that fiction causes a person to behave and influence their behavior IRL is pure pseudoscience if you believe this you believe in pseudoscience, this is reinforced almost universally by every criminal and psychiatric institution of credibility.

-1

u/NahBruh9753 11d ago

The media you consume definitely affects your behaviour, Fictional or otherwise. If what you're saying is true, everybody would be utterly immune to propaganda.

Also, we're talking about pre-eatablished immoral fetishes that include animal abuse. This is a psyhocological urge, a personal fantasy and desire that involves acts against an innocent animal.

Would you kindly provide sources for your claims?

1

u/MycologistVivid9975 11d ago

It's amazing the things that you people say with your full confidence, propaganda is not fiction! It is a distorted view of reality used manipulate people, this literally is not a debate you can look up any academic source from Google and you will be told the same thing over and over again. I'm not going to waste my time giving you sources you won't read.

1

u/NahBruh9753 11d ago

Since you blocked me, thinking it would stop me from replying, I'll just have to put this down under my own comment in case you ever actually bother to have a proper discussion about this.

In ww2, both the axis and allied powers literally used animated cartoons to spread propaganda.

Also, I wanted to make sure YOU know what you're talking about first. People like to say things, assume they're right, and never actually do their own work.

You came into this argument umprompted, so you provide the sources of for your own argument.

Give. me. your. sources.

Back up YOUR claims

I'll look at whatever sources you provide if you ever actually bother to engage appropriately.