Are you attempting to imply that the "non-binary" or "porn" adjectives are relevant here? I may be going out on a limb here, but I am not sure that "non-binary" or "porn" people commit shootings at different rates than the rest of the population--do you have any evidence, rather than mere implication (if that is in fact what you are implying)?
The one you just cited, obviously.
The point is that you are either misinformed, speculating as it suits you, or lying to present that shooting as being motivated by moral panic type politics because it has since come out that the shooter did not subscribe to those beliefs.
And as much as it pains me to agree with you I concur that the shooter's gender and father's occupation are irrelevant.
The problem here is that in two separate comment subthreads you are acting as though the purveyors of moral panic are radicalizing people to shoot up gay bars when in reality they're 0-2 if that is indeed their goal.
Stop it. Stop lying.
Non-binary according to the shooter's attorney but referred to as "he" by his father. Neighbours also asserted that the shooter frequently used homophobic slurs and didn't identify as non binary at any point in the past.
This art is probably intended to be edgy, just like the faux-satanism fashion, it's meant to rub freedom of expression in the faces of certain people the in-crowd dislikes. All that is happening is mutual provocation and outrage. The same thing is happening on Twitter with performative trolling and then people claiming that Twitter is now a threat to democracy. Obviously, that means a lot of people who claim to want free speech only want it for themselves.
This particular speech that I don't like is a threat to society
Pedophilia is a sexual attraction to children. These photoshoots normalize and facilitate this attraction. If I was found with these photos in my possession, such evidence would get me in big trouble.
Yes, these blatant photoshoots are capitalized on by the hard right, and mostly ignored by the hard left. You would think that children are some of the most vulnerable people in society, and that these need protection from 1% sexualized capitalism, something the far left usually fights for, but these seem pre-occupied with battling global fascism right now.
Transsexuality is a big satanist topic. Male homosexuality has a big pedosexuality problem, but this is occulted and taboo to talk about.
You ask if it is tasteless, but then quote the Romans on debating taste, so assume it has a taste. This is the taste of pedophilia and Baal worship. This taste certainly provokes those with more common sensabilities.
It is pedophilic in nature. These people involved did their homework. Not like pop clips for children from about a decade ago, where they just slapped together some depictions of Isis to raps of Jeffrey Dahmer eating out hearts.
To you, these photos are not pedophilic. To me, an actual pedophile, these photos are. To each their own path. It is, afterall, a satanic truth that some things can have two opposing properties at the same time.
who says this? probably not "actual pedophile[s]"
>To you, these photos are not pedophilic. To me, an actual pedophile, these photos are. To each their own path. It is, afterall, a satanic truth that some things can have two opposing properties at the same time.
So you're saying that the photos tell us more about the viewers, based on their reactions, than about the photography itself? Interesting take, actual pedophile; interesting take.
Is it tasteless? De gustibus non est disputandum. So much high fashion is stupid and provocative, imo.
Is it pedophilia? No.