So if you live in Uganda and I out you as a homosexual, it's the culture that's to blame for what will happen next. Not me.

It's both. Neither one is an excuse for the other.

Nor is comparing punishment times useful, because that assumes one side of the comparison is correct. That has to be demonstrated first, and no one has managed that (nor, under the current legal system, have I any confidence that it could even be managed.)

Harm was done. Society is not innocent in the matter. While the individual who took the act needs reform, so does society. Work towards and/or call for both. Don't ignore the one presuming the other is irrelevant.

I see. Never mind, then. My misreading. :)

Big tobacco and big coal are legally operated. Users of their products do so willingly.

I don't willingly breathe coal combustion products, and I don't willingly breathe cigarette smoke. The same is true for many other people.

It is long past time we went nuclear, solar, etc. for power. Burning stuff that continuously pollutes the atmosphere is not the best choice available. It's just what the politicians working on behalf of petroleum profiteers work to keep SOP (congress: 14% approval rate, 94% re-election rate -- sigh.)

As for cigarettes, they should be smoked only where those that consent to cigarette smoke in their air hang out. Unlike most other forms of personal consumption, smoking has well documented pernicious third-party effects.

I can't imagine being sentenced to nearly two decades in prison over $30,000 bucks. It's like committing an armed robbery for a couple of packs of cigarettes.

Yeah, it kinda was. It wasn't the cigarettes, it was the armed robbery.

Similarly, It wasn't the $30k, it was the extortion.

See what I mean?

The only rights one ever actually has are those rights that someone, somewhere is willing to enforce. Anything else is pernicious, deceptive myth based on hand-waving, not fact.

You can't take something someone doesn't actually have in the first place. That doesn't mean they'll be okay with whatever you do, because most people live within an illusory worldview that presumes immunity and safety on multiple fronts where those safeties and immunities do not actually exist.

The key to dealing with this reality in the most successful way is to understand what is actually going on. If one proceeds under the assumption that no one will screw them because "rights", one is very likely to suffer multiple screwings, some of which may be profound. Unfortunately, neither modern parenting or our public educational system does a proper (or often, any) job of informing people about this particular issue.

1) No one should make records of acts the participant(s) intended to be private, public
2) No one should inculcate others that sexuality and bodies are shameful
3) Responsibility extends both ways - 1 is only harmful due to 2, but it harmful
4) "victim" is not in any way an inaccurate characterization of individuals in such records
5) Victims of self-destructive thoughts and actions bear high levels of responsibility
6) As with all personal & interpersonal matters, informed consent is a critical underpinning
7) Participating in pearl-clutching and increases harm and risk of harm. Don't.

Also, you have a huge number of girls in this country who are trafficked.

The data does not support that contention. Here's a link with some well-researched facts, complete with useful references. I suggest some reading in a thoughtful vein.

There is overwhelming evidence that the "trafficking" narrative is agitprop specifically designed to trigger moral outrage. Those who spread the meme and those who believe it are the actual victims here.

It's cute that you think it works that way.

It's cute that you assume I think it works that way. It should work that way, and in order to effect any change it should be presented group-neutral. I am simply pointing out the defective assumptions and language that are complicit in making it the way it is as a matter of backlash against stupidity.

Opt-in is the right thing to do.

Opt-out is the wrong thing to do

If some action of yours is "optional," let the user CHOOSE if they want it done; don't inflict it on them and assume that's ok. EVER.

ts popularity has ballooned in recent years, and victims are disproportionately women.

It makes no difference if the victims are disproportionately any group; it would have to be UNIQUE to that group. Otherwise, if it's bad for people, it's bad for people, and no distinction need be made about age, gender or any other subgroup. It's not equality if we only consider some of the people, is it?

Doesn't bother me one bit if someone looks the facts up and presents that as part of their argument or statement. I'm just delighted to not be engaged by BS. I like to learn, too. Further, I suspect that the very act of looking something up, when that actually happens, is educational at least to some extent to the one doing the looking. In other words, I think it does make us smarter. It's certainly smarter behavior. Also, I outright question the need to know everything in specific, when you are both correct and informed on the generalities, and know how to look up, and how to comprehend, the specifics. That's not stupidity or ignorance. That's power.

"The Internet is such a powerful environment, where you can enter any question, and you basically have access to the world's knowledge at your fingertips,"

With the quoted remark in mind, it becomes even more difficult to accept the ignorance that anti-vaxxers, both of the rabid extreme positions taken on the warming question, the "Obamacare is destroying Murica" pushers, the anti-gays, those on both the far left and the far right extremes, the "constitution is a living document" bewildered, the superstitious, the homeopaths, the "quartz crystals boost your immune system" loonies, Fox news watchers, etc.

All that knowledge out there, so very easy to get to in easily digestible form thanks to powerful search engines and a huge variety of presentations, plenty of verifiable facts to counter the endless waves of ignorance, deceit, and agitprop... and yet...

With under 50 comments per spoof, you'd think those responsible would get the message that very few are interested.

But apparently not.

Oh well. See everyone tomorrow, when the site is over this.

Sorry, I thought I had been clear.

I wasn't talking about regional control of distribution by publishers, I was talking about arbitrary interference with materials intended for the end user, where the end user is interfered with by bad actors, most notably, government busybodies.

I own a literary agency and deal with copyright and regional issues a great deal more often, and in more ways, than most people. But that isn't what I was talking about, as it seems like a non-issue to me -- as long as we have nations and varying costs of distribution, we'll have some effective form of regional controls. So I had gone off on what I thought was an obvious tangent. Apparently not.

If you know of grammar errors or other writing problems / errors on my page(s), I will be delighted to fix them, and also to learn how to do better. Because doing the best one can is important. Better to strive to paint like an actual painter than to be satisfied with finger-painting like an addled child. So fire away. :)

Humans have learned to focus sound too. We've already gone the cetacean/bat route, and are now working merrily on the crustacian's methods.