“Try” is an issue. What if someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed and decided to burn off some steam by assaulting people?

Not thinking about ethics isn’t the same as not having an ethical framework you most closely adhere to

The Tories pissed it all into the channel as far as I can tell

How would telling him benefit either of you? As a random stranger in the internet, you don’t need to be the reason he lost his innocent view of the world.

If he starts asking direct questions, give age appropriate answers but I don’t see a reason to tell him unprompted

To call it useless is just untrue. There are many possibilities, Crypto is just a black hole eating the hype and funding that would otherwise go into valuable tech

I’ve already met you in the middle, I’m not providing any more information until you answer my question because I don’t believe you’re after a nuanced answer and you haven’t even tried to convince me or entertained anything else I said in my previous comments.

Give me a good reason why you’re so interested in Chicago over other, worse cities and I’ll bite

Yes, you people are asking that to derail from answering the question.

Who people? Do you think I’ve organised a group of friends to all get on your case about this one particular question, or is it more likely that random individuals have the same issues with your question?

It’s not an important piece of information unless you don’t want to admit chicago has a problem with violence.

I think everywhere that has violence has a violence problem. Violence is a problem. Why are you so interested in Chicago’s problem rather than the problem everywhere else?

Are you trying to argue that the crime rates of other cities mean chicago doesn’t have a problem? Just say so if that’s the case.

No, I’ve literally already told you that. I’m simply interested in why you’re interested in the 25th (random number) most violent place instead of the most violent place? What is it about Chicago that has got you so interested?

I’m not sure why you people think that the crime rates of other cities means chicago doesn’t have a problem

That isn’t the point people are making. They are wondering what it is about Chicago that made you focus on it rather than other cities that have a higher crime rate.

It’s an important piece of information you conveniently left out.

If you’re so concerned about skewed results look into per-capita numbers. But it sounds like you already have a reason in mind, you just don’t want to say it

It’s so crazy to talk about “innocent unless presumed guilty” as a policy that exists in western society, when we are drowning in cases to the contrary.

That is patently false. This really makes me think that you have absolutely no concept of what you’re talking about. The “court of public opinion” often assumes guilt based off of an accusation and that is exactly why “believe women” is so dangerous.

What sets rape apart from, say, immigration violations or illegal drug use or terrorism charges or subway fare evasion or CEO murdering isn’t this sacred commitment to “innocent until proven guilty”.

I agree, and this should stay exactly as it is. It’s is one part that is unquestionably beneficial to literally EVERYONE.

Treat allegations of sexual assault with even a fraction of the seriousness put forward to prosecute minor traffic violations. Maybe we can clear that mountainous backlog of uninvestigated rape claims within the victims’ lifetimes.

I absolutely agree. The lack of investigation is the issue, not the fact that women are implicitly believed when they make an accusation. No one should have that privilege.

Because as far as the law is concerned, they ARE NOT a victim until they are proven to be just as the accused IS NOT a perpetrator until they are proven to be. It has absolutely nothing to do with “trustworthyness”, and all to do with due process.

Destroying this legitimately good and absolutely fundamental part of the deeply flawed legal system will not fix this problem. It will only create more. Rage against the machine all you want, I’m absolutely with you. But do so with some critical thought behind it.

Can you tell me how this is relevant to the point I made? How any of that suggests something other than what I said?

If you want to have a conversation, let’s have a conversation but don’t throw data that is irrelevant to the point I made while dodging the point I made.

See, this is the problem. “Believe women” implies that women are telling the truth before an investigation has taken place. If you had read my original comment you’d see that I’m not suggesting women should be treated as they currently are, but that “believe women” specifically is a harmful rhetoric.

If we both want women’s accusations to be taken seriously and investigated as any other potential crime would be, then we’re on the same page and want the same thing. The statement “believe women” does not literally or figuratively mean that though, the problem is the wording. Say what you mean instead of this wishy washy language that is detrimental to the cause.

Do you want a medal for being a champion cat sexer?

I don’t think the current legal systems are perfect, but I do think “believe women” would make them fundamentally worse.

How do you handle the issue of future false accusations? And don’t give me the hand wavy “but there are so few false accusations” because that doesn’t matter to the person being accused.

THE core tenet of most legal systems is effectively “innocent until proven guilty”. “Believe women” utterly breaks that, they cannot exist within the same legal framework.

So, would you rather have the legal system change to better serve women by equally investigating their accusations, or by removing “innocent until proven guilty”?

This is exactly right. The “believe women” stance is so childish and naive. “Take women seriously” would be just as effective, less dangerous and fit into every just legal system on the planet

I disagree that it can only be romantic attraction.

For example, I can find a random person attractive if they’re displaying a skill they’re proficient in, talking passionately about a subject they’re knowledgeable in, or freely enjoying themselves. And all without feeling any kind of romantic inclination towards them.

It’s primarily sexual despite the fact it’s not necessarily physical

I’m definitely not old (~30), and my preference has generally been my age +/- 5 years.

As I’ve gotten older, I’ve noticed that my sexual attraction has migrated from being solely based on physical attributes to being partially based emotional connection, intelligence, passion, etc.

I think it’s also important to note that an individual’s “peak attractiveness” can occur at different stages of their life.

Oh I see where the disconnect is. I’m on the mobile app, not desktop

Completely agree. Although I have known a few people who went for accounting because of the reasons OP gave and absolutely HATED it. So it’s important to make sure you can actually handle it as a day job

I’m not sure how to actually get to the root instance in Voyager. I can find a communities sidebar though