Is it just me or do people who say things like "y-yeah...

Is it just me or do people who say things like "y-yeah, fuck Nazis! I'd f-fuck a Nazi up!" and "Pedophiles a-are disgusting, I can't believe someone would b-be so twisted!" and "If you want to have sex with anyone under 18, you're totally deranged. H-heh, that's so gross"

just saying things like that because they're terrified of being called a Nazi, or a pedophile, or a creep? It really seems like more of a social clout thing, like "look how good of a person I am, I would *never* do any of that bad stuff".

Are people really that afraid of what others think of them?

Well humans are social animals, that being said what others think is pretty important to people. Of course a neckbeard with few to none social contacts wouldn't understand.

But user, I have more friends than you

More than 0 isn't saying much

I stay away from most social media because people only post things to form a very careful image of how they want to be seen. Nothing is real.

...

I hope you don't mistake your autism for any kind of intellectual superiority, OP
/thread

...

>being logical about things makes you autistic

So people are cucks, is what you're saying?

White knights who know they're wrong are the funniest thing

Facebook friends don't count.
Just because someone doesn't disclose the full truth about himself doesn't mean he's lying though. Imagine someone ridden with insecurities but he manages to pull his shit together and to appear like a normal functioning human. He may do that in real life and on whatever social media, but objectively speaking: Isn't this "lie" really beneficial for social interaction? Nobody likes a whiney pussy.

>Facebook friends don't count.
fuck

heh

Maybe you can reason for yourself why humans evolved to look to each other for moral guidance. Your inability to do so is the autism. Part of your brain didn't develop properly.

>Maybe you can reason for yourself why humans evolved to look to each other for moral guidance.
>gay people were chemically castrated by governments as late as the 60s/70s
>the public wasn't just okay with this, they wanted it
>blacks were blocked from attending schools, entering certain businesses, forced to sit separately from whites as late as the 60s/70s
>the public wasn't just okay with this, they wanted it
>middle eastern civilians are killed by the US every single day, right now, because we have to protect US corporate interests and the wealthy
>the public isn't just okay with this, they want it

Yeah, if you get your moral guidance from society you are literally a fucking psycho.

You just described virtue signalling and yes that's all it is.

>because every act of humans is about murder and violence
You've got a very narrow view on humanity as a whole.
There is shit going on, but numerically speaking these cases of murders are such a small number. Hell - even the civil rights problems you've just mentioned are getting fixed or have been fixed already.

So THAT'S what virtue signaling is. I've been wondering about it since I first started seeing that phrase posted everywhere.

>Hell - even the civil rights problems you've just mentioned are getting fixed or have been fixed already.

The point isn't that they're being fixed. The point is that those problems existed at all, in the first place. If society were actually a good source for moral guidance, those things never would've happened.

And it wasn't just isolated communities doing fucked up things sometimes, it was entire nations or groups of nations committing horrific atrocities because they felt it was "morally right". They felt "justified".

Society and the average person are *terrible* sources for moral guidance. Most people would understand ethics if it hit them in the face. Coincidentally, when they get hit in the face by police, the average person still thinks "this is okay because they have authority".

user, I understand that in the times of living in caves and persistence hunting people necessarily had to obey the group's norms or they would simply be left to die. These days it not only isn't necessary, it's very easy to see that the groups norms are objectively wrong.

>Most people *wouldn't understand ethics

You know you're taught not to steal, or be mean to people, or be violent through social expectations and cues. Sometimes a pathological ideology grips a nation and it leads to pathological behaviour. But inhibitions put on people through socialisation is why most people don't punch that person who's really pissing them off or steal something even if they can get away with it. People who lack this ability to learn in this way tend to fill our prisons, have few friends and are generally disliked.

>If society were actually a good source for moral guidance, those things never would've happened.
That sounds pretty catholic - once a sinner always a sinner? Nah, i don't feel responsible for what happened even one generation ago. I live my life, and according to modern standards i'm a good human being. If people in 500 years think i'm a piece of shit then i'd say fuck em.
>And it wasn't just isolated communities doing fucked up things sometimes, it was entire nations or groups of nations committing horrific atrocities because they felt it was "morally right". They felt "justified".
Well because according to their respective moral compass they were right though. The perception of morals changes over time, but objectively speaking we're moving thowards becoming more ethical humans over the last centuries, maybe we'll even abolish war and racism and meat consumption at some point, but not just yet. Humans (including me) aren't ready for that yet.
>it's very easy to see that the groups norms are objectively wrong.
Well we came to the conclusion that certain group norms called the law are desirable for most people. Ask yourself: Do you want to live in a lawless state because human made group norms are objectivley wrong? Feel free to move to syria.

So the more social you are, the more restricted your freedom becomes?

If your personal desire for personal freedom includes rape and murder then yes.
I mean shit - even if you become trans you have to face social reprisals, even if many people pretend this is not the case, so yea - social interaction restricts your personal freedom because you're subjected to a set of social rules a group of people chose to live by.

Parts of your brain are set up for different functions. Some people rely almost solely on what society thinks to guide their behaviour. Some people rely almost solely on their own logical and emotional reasoning. Some people are able to weigh up the two and decide whether the societal expectation gels with their own moral compass on a case by case basis

A broken clock is right twice a day. The fact that society has sometimes been right about some moral decisions doesn't excuse the fact that they are wrong, a lot.

>That sounds pretty catholic - once a sinner always a sinner?
Not at all, this isn't even kind of like sin. The average person is literally incapable of making good objective moral decisions.

50 years ago, assuming you actually do abide by society's morals as you're arguing, you would say that gay people should be castrated or killed, for being gay. 20 years from now, maybe sooner, society will stop claiming that anyone attracted to anyone else under the age of 18 is a pedophile. You think it's a problem now, and you might think it's a problem in the future, but you are wrong and society will change.

>Humans (including me) aren't ready for that yet.
You, and most of society, maybe. Many of us are "ready" to stop being retarded and driven by "well that's how it's always been done" morality.

>Well we came to the conclusion that certain group norms called the law are desirable for most people. Ask yourself: Do you want to live in a lawless state because human made group norms are objectivley wrong?
False dichotomy. Some of our laws are good, ie murder and stealing are illegal (unless you're wealthy).

Some of our laws, however, are not good. Should marijuana really be a class 1 controlled substance? Should having 5 grams of weed on your person really result in years spent in prison?

Should peeing in public be a felony and put you on the sex offender's registry, putting you right along with literal child molesters and rapists?

Should a 16 year old taking a picture of his dick get him sent to prison for creation and distribution of child pornography? Should he be required to register as a sex offender? What about a 16 year old girl?

Not finding nazis and pedophiles absolutely disgusting to the point that it makes you violently angry just thinking about them is hardly comparable to raping and murdering. Some people can't stop themselves from developing an attraction to underage children, just like any other fetish or sexual preference might spontaneously manifest itself. Just because they have this attraction and even if it's the only way they can feel sexual fulfilment, that doesn't automatically make them monstrous people who deserve to be tortured to death. Voicing this opinion in some circles would equate to social suicide. You could lose your job and be branded a creep just for pointing out the distinction between a pedophile and a child rapist because it might be seen as sympathising with pedophiles and maybe being one yourself.

>these laws you don't like
Well truth be told i'd agree with you that these suck, but those are an american problem and not a problem of western nations.
/Eurofag™

>Voicing this opinion in some circles would equate to social suicide. You could lose your job and be branded a creep just for pointing out the distinction between a pedophile and a child rapist because it might be seen as sympathising with pedophiles and maybe being one yourself.

This applies to much, much more than just pedophiles.

>/Eurofag™
I am not jealous of you being enriched by the Islamic Truck Of Peace but, generally, European nations are better places to live than the US. Almost every single one has an objectively higher standard of living than America.

A broken clock is right twice a day. The fact that society has sometimes been wrong about some moral decisions doesn't excuse the fact that they are right, a lot.

There's a whole heap more of good things that we're taught than bad things. You can only make friends because you were taught to play nice. Sometimes society goes a bit mental and that's when your own reasoning is meant to take over. Standing up for what you believe in in the face of society's expectations is something that's ironically praised in today's society too. Although obviously the reality isn't as black and white as that.

I think we're on the same page here. This guy said it better than I could:
>Some people are able to weigh up the two and decide whether the societal expectation gels with their own moral compass on a case by case basis

The problem is far too few people operate like that. The vast majority think that morality is (and *should* be) what is legal; change the law, change the morals. Too many other people think that if they don't like something, despite it not harming anyone, that thing should be illegal.

Society is sometimes right, sometimes wrong, and you need to evaluate everything individually to determine whether those beliefs or laws are actually morally justified.

>Not finding nazis and pedophiles absolutely disgusting to the point that it makes you violently angry just thinking about them is hardly comparable to raping and murdering.
Well the discussion about pedophiles is much about protection of children which is a largely emotional issue. While they deserve special protection a serious debate about this is impossible at the moment.
And nazis... Well if you don't see why they're despisable as fuck then i don't know what to do with you. They want to replace the core of your country with a dictatorship, they want to take so many steps of ethical development backwards. If you for once assumed that humans are alike, and that no matter what race or religion you are you are essentially worth the same you can only come to the conclusion that nazis are scum.
>Some people can't stop themselves from developing an attraction to underage children, just like any other fetish or sexual preference might spontaneously manifest itself.
That doesn't mean it's not in the interest of the majority to stop them from following their urges. You can't pretend it doesn't lead to BIIIG fucking mental fuck ups if children are subjected to the sexuality of a pedo that often lead to mental illnesses and suicide.
>Just because they have this attraction and even if it's the only way they can feel sexual fulfilment, that doesn't automatically make them monstrous people who deserve to be tortured to death.
>Voicing this opinion in some circles would equate to social suicide. You could lose your job and be branded a creep just for pointing out the distinction between a pedophile and a child rapist because it might be seen as sympathising with pedophiles and maybe being one yourself.
As mentioned above, it's an emotional issue, that being said nobody who's not involved himself wants the discussion. Sucks to be you, but that's life.

[>being a nazi and a pedo at the same time, it's more likely than you think]

Couldn't of said it any better
>/thread

>While they deserve special protection a serious debate about this is impossible at the moment.
Agreed. Aristotle said it well: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

The average person is a nearly-retarded automaton, and can't begin to consider a thought they don't agree with.

>You can't pretend it doesn't lead to BIIIG fucking mental fuck ups if children are subjected to the sexuality of a pedo that often lead to mental illnesses and suicide.
I've seen little (actually no) evidence showing that an underage person engaging in consensual sex is more likely to develop mental illnesses. Molestation and rape, yes, but that's not what we're talking about, and that's not what age of consent laws "protect" against anyway.

Actual harmful behavior (rape, molestation, sexual assault) are already covered by other laws.

In fact, I have seen studies showing that people who engage in underage sex aren't any more or less likely to have negative outcomes as adults. Surely if having sex before you're 18 is so bad, there would be more evidence to show that?

>As mentioned above, it's an emotional issue, that being said nobody who's not involved himself wants the discussion. Sucks to be you, but that's life.
Not the guy you replied to, but you don't have to be personally involved to realize that it's wrong. I don't smoke weed, I never have, but I still want it legalized. That doesn't mean I want to smoke weed; I just realize that it being illegal is barbaric and, literally, only to protect profits of major corporations.