mainstreem

Isn't this just pointing out that farms follow a Pareto distribution, like a lot of creative domains? It's a really common emergent pattern. It doesn't diminish from the observation the article makes, but it does make it somewhat less surprising when you're used to seeing Pareto curves all over the place.

Why does the permission of their parents matter, even in the slightest? Do parents have the right to marry away their pre-pubescent daughters in our society?

In addition, a large portion of sexual abuse is from family, and the parents of child actors don't exactly have the best reputation when it comes to not abusing their children, and show business in general doesn't have the best track record on this either. Remember Corey Feldman?

> You really think the actresses are traumatised after this?

Yes.

> Why?!?

I think children being told to perform sexually explicit dances while in revealing dress for the enjoyment of adults (the nuances of such enjoyment will be lost on the child) will likely have a negative effect on their mental health later in life and yes, is a traumatizing experience, because they are being coerced into performing a sexual act, the likes of which they cannot understand or consent to due to their age. It doesn't matter if the coerced sexual act is stated to be in opposition to coerced sexual acts: the child has no choice! I shouldn't have to explain this!

If Taxi Driver could make a movie about sexual exploitation of young women without forcing Jodie Foster to literally dance in undress I think we can hold other filmmakers to the same standard.

>If you make a good movie denouncing dog mistreatment, that is good. The fact it may sexually excite some people mistreating dogs is not really relevant...

You've missed the point. If you kill puppies to make a movie denouncing dog mistreatment, the puppies are dead.

If you exploit children to make a movie denouncing exploiting children, the children are still exploited.

It has nothing to do with the subjective reception of the film at all.

Specifically to this point, the actresses that played the young girls in the film all auditioned in front of the director, doing the sexually explicit dances behind closed doors, along with many others that didn't get the part. The creator of the film was a victim of sexual exploitation like this at a younger age.

Additionally, it is very common for victims of various traumas to inflict those traumas on others, and it's also common for them to be in denial about their motives for victimizing new victims in the same way they were victimized themselves.

This is my experience in the cloud space as well. Sure, AWS has a GUI, but the API & CLI are what we care about.

The rich are better off in every way than the poor, every day. That's the nature of life. It isn't fair. Life being unfair doesn't mean something unethical is happening. Ostensibly, those that have the money to pay more either worked more for it, got luckier, or someone else who worked harder or got luckier loved them enough to gift them their wealth. Why should people be punished for luck or receiving a gift (inheritance) because it's 'unfair' to other people who weren't so lucky?

It isn't the rich peoples' fault, or the poor peoples', that there was a sudden surge in demand for these goods, or that the market did its job in adjusting the goods to their new real price in order to keep them on shelves. That's exactly what you want. Otherwise, no amount of luck or hard work will allow you to get that good even if you really, really, want it, and are willing to sacrifice other goods in order to pay the elevated -- but worth it, due to the circumstances -- price, because that elevated price was banned by people crying about "price gouging."

I need to get off of this website.

Increasing the cost of food is anti-poor. Increasing the cost of luxury fabric, not so much. Until poverty and hunger are eliminated worldwide, it's going to be hard to make me care more about how animals are farmed in order that the most possible people can afford enough to eat.

It's easy to not care about people not getting mink coats. Much harder to care about people having food taken out of their mouths by people who think they have a right to dictate that sort of thing. If you think eating pork should be forbidden, I've got a part of the world to introduce you to.

LOL only if you group together every organized religion as "Church" and compare it to other, individual organizations.

A price cap will cause a shortage. THAT is artificial scarcity. Allowing the market to select prices that keep masks in stock is the opposite!

Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris would like to end discrimination bans in California in order to enact the right kind of discriminatory guidelines: racial quotas!

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_16,_Repeal_Pr...

I was replying to someone saying gO MaKe yOuR oWn TwItTeR oR ReDdIt you absolute twit

your analogy doesn't even begin to apply. I can go to another mall if I'm banned. there isn't another dominant social network. Getting banned from Facebook and Twitter is like having your phone line cut off by Ma Bell in 1950, not like getting kicked out of a mall you incredible dunce

There's a little something called "network effects" you should read up on

Ever seen Smartsheets? I know someone I'd have described as "nontechnical" several years ago who is practically building business-specific applications complete with frontend interfaces and backed by spreadsheets and almost all of this person's code is formulas, which are very "functional programming." This person has asked to be coached in writing a "real" programming language and it's a challenge to think of how to approach the problem based upon the person's existing skillset and understanding, which is entirely backwards (FP instead of imperative) from the usual student's!

The BLM movement claims to speak for minorities but the burden of proof that this is actually the case remains on you.

Where's the evidence that the data on the hard drives and laptop were fabricated? There's a lot more physical evidence behind the Hunter Biden Laptop Story (and its censorship) than there was behind, oh I don't know, the impeachment of the President last January.

I must assume you have personal possession of exculpatory physical evidence. Please share your physical evidence that discredits the physical evidence you don't like unearthed by the New York Post

Please downvote me if you have no evidence it was faked or know there's no evidence or want to see the NY Post story discredited because Trump should be replaced at any cost.

Also note: other news publications, like the Washington Post, claiming that the hard drive data is "not verified" without any evidence beyond their own reputation, which itself is long since forfeit, is not evidence.

Sorry, in what way are the dominant social media websites (Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit in particular), NOT main stream media in 2020?

Certainly they aren't part of the legacy media, but they all seem to carry water for the same narratives and ideologies.

The non-mainstream media is publications that people in polite urban mostly-coastal American culture sneer at: Breitbart, The Post Millenial, Reason, Parler, Gab, specific independent journalists on some of the mainstream platforms, etc.

But certainly Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit are media and they are mainstream. And they have demonstrated their willingness to censor stories with more or less the same bias (in the same ideological direction) as the mainstream legacy media. They're just the mainstream new media.