erin

You could try a Lemmy app that gives you a more reddit-like experience. There are several. I use Sync, but only because it's what I'm familiar with from the reddit days. There are plenty of alternative (and often better) options. I can find communities from instances my instance federates with in the search bar, and I even have several different accounts in different instances (world, beehaw, hexbear, etc) to see content my instance doesn't federate with which I can switch to with a dropdown menu easily.

Edit: I assume it's been explained, but not every server/instance talks to each other instance, called federation. This is often for political, spam, or harassment reasons. It may be worth using alternative accounts or using Lemmy from another instance logged out if viewing content from those communities you don't federate with is important to you. The big instances federate with mostly everyone, but there are always exceptions.

A few thoughts, as someone who is into BDSM and some dark romance:

1. Dark romance, like all kink (because it is exploring kink), needs to have proper boundaries and allow consent to be given. Proper trigger warnings are part of this. I may have consented to what I read on the back cover and/or mediocre trigger warnings, but if those boundaries that were set are crossed, then I believe my consent was violated. I do not want to read anything related to several topics, and if they come up without warning in a piece of media I am reading, I would find that extremely upsetting. It's the same in BDSM. Set very clear lines, do not cross them, or even push that boundary. If pushing the boundary is part of the play, then the boundary actually further.

2. Why is someone immoral for wanting to play something with a sex scene in it? That seems taken for granted in the post. I may not agree with said person's taste, but if it's not explicitly immoral (ie: desiring sex scenes in a game with exclusively underage characters), why is that a problem? Someone might want to play games that explore sex, for fantasy, pornographic, or other artistic reasons, and those categories can all overlap. I take issue with people expecting art to be changed to fit their desires, but none at all with someone choosing to engage with media that suits their tastes. The same applies to dark romance. Some lines, I agree, should not be crossed, especially anything related to children. Otherwise, consenting adults can explore their fantasies however they wish, as long as consent is respected and everything is done safely within the boundaries set.

3. All things have nuance. There is no issue whatsoever that doesn't have some degree of nuance. That doesn't mean hard lines don't exist, but it does mean that all issues have multiple facets and not just two explicit sides. Just because something is fiction and the topic isn't taboo doesn't mean it's okay, and just because a topic is taboo doesn't mean it can't be explored safely. A book could have every topic covered with a trigger warning but go about exploring the topics in a way that is unsafe or misinformed, and reasonable minds may differ on what that means for any given topic.

4. Smut can be addictive. I don't know who would believe otherwise. Any easily accessible source of gratification and dopamine can be, or even sources of frustration or anger. I don't think that is a relevant question to dark romance specifically, but one to ask about all romance, and all entertainment we engage with.

I (a Jewish person) draw a distinction between antisemitism and Nazism. Nazis aren't just racist, they're fascist, with a specific set of beliefs. All I can verify is that Disney associated with racists in Hollywood willingly. I find it hard to believe that if Disney was a Nazi sympathizer, he would've produced so many anti-Nazi propaganda films. To give a good analogy, someone might be racist towards Palestinians and Arab people without being Zionist. That's a more specific belief that includes racism.

I totally get that, but there's a big difference between "this guy did a Nazi salute" or "this guy idolized Hitler" and "this guy worked with anti-semites." I don't think we should be using the word Nazi to mean "racist person," as Nazi is pretty specific. I certainly hope I don't come across as making any of the above arguments. Ford was a Nazi. Elon is a Nazi. I haven't seen evidence suggesting Disney is the same, and I think it would be irresponsible to turn Nazi into a generic pejorative for "bigot."

Was Disney a Nazi? I know he wasn't a good person, but I hadn't heard that. Is there any further reading you could link me? A cursory search didn't find much other than the fact that he seems totally cool working with anti-semites, which isn't really the same thing. If he was, I'd like to know, and if not, we should be more precise with our language so when we call out people like Elon it means something.

Fig 53: Risk of Rain's "Huntress" has eyes perfectly positioned to gauge the velocity of arrows she fires.

Look it up. It's not my job to educate you. Facing danger in real life is a real problem, having every conservative politician focusing on banning your healthcare and reducing your rights is a real problem. I have to believe you're an empathy lacking troll or a bigot, and likely both. Discrimination is a "real problem,' and even if pedophilia was the number one political issue in our country, extrajudicial violence isn't going to solve it. And I block bigots, because I'm not going to debate someone who acts in bad faith and says something like

there are people with real problems at the moment

Insane thing to say.

Right. My lived experience doesn't matter, nor the statistics. I'm not seeking attention, I, like the majority of people reading this, am alarmed. I'm seeing people I care about and the community around me hurt every day, and you think "gender rules my life." Not a person worth listening to. When was the last time you got harassed in public for something intrinsic to yourself? For my trans wife, it was today. If you seriously think that trans people aren't currently at the front of the culture war, you're deaf, ignorant, or lying. Watch literally any pundit speak, any newscast, or any political debate around the country. Then tell me trans people shouldn't be concerned about violent rhetoric aimed at people they're increasingly being lumped in with. Bigot or stupid, I won't debate you on the reality plain around me daily.

Likely, or are likely to mistakenly target a trans person who happens to be around while they're hunting the person they cat fished. The people who are okay with extrajudicial violence are mostly conservatives. What's to say the people willing to go to such lengths to hurt someone wouldn't take the opportunity when they see someone they believe is a groomer and pedophile simply for being trans? It's easy to expand the definition, and we've seen it happen in the past. It's happening right now in rhetoric. Violence against trans people is already statistically high.

If someone shows up with the intent to fuck a minor, absolutely, but I guarantee those aren't the only targets vigilantism catches.

Except sometimes "pedophile" actually means "trans person just living." The right claims all trans people are groomers.

It does sound more racist, because it is. Why not Yasuke? Just because he's black? Why any of the other AC protagonists? Why choose a Spartan, a highly unethical culture filled with slavery and abuse? Why choose a Welsh pirate instead of a Caribbean native? These are all pointless questions, because the answer is all the same. That's the story they wanted to tell. Maybe they wanted to highlight the historical outlier at an important time in history. We could speculate on any number of different reasons, but "DEI" doesn't make any damn sense, considering they knew how gamers would react beforehand and even went out of their way to make a statement about it.

They wanted to tell this story. If you want a different one, play a different game. There is absolutely nothing wrong with choosing Yasuke as a protagonist. The series has consistently demonstrated that they don't really mind telling the stories of historical outliers, repeatedly. They shouldn't have to specifically avoid (because that is what your argument has shifted to) Yasuke for fears of "DEI." The "anti-woke" are ridiculous.