This ad in honor of World Down Syndrome Day : Darnthatsinteresting
A lot of the comment threads are basically one person incredibly milquetoastly defending the idea that learning disabilities are an actual, real thing that exist, and then another person replying "Actually, if you look at the 99.9th percentile most intelligent people with Down's syndome and extrapolate to the whole population, you'll see that they're actually able to succesfully live on their own entirely off of social welfare with ownly twice daily visits from their carers! This also means you should allowed to have s*x with them, HITLER"
"Assume I can have s*x so I will" seems like a dangerous message to generalize
What danger do you perceive there, within or without the context of this ad?
[Words words words about how you can't frick people with a mental age of 8]
Idk what the frick this last dude's talking about, I think he's had one too many arguments defending 8000 year old dragons and his gut insticts kicked in lol
Bayes' theorem DEBUNKED by GENIUS Redditor. If you think about it, not giving driver's licenses to children is also judging people based on assumptions, so why not reduce the legal driving age to 0? Sure, a few twelve year olds might get wrapped trees, but that's a small price to pay to reduce the stigma we're currently putting on children. Because that's what matters: the stigma. The biggest problem people with Down's syndrome have isn't that they can't function independently in any capacity, it's the stigma they get from not being able to function independently.
Yeah, obviously the main reason not many people with Down's syndrome know how to drive is there's just no one to teach them lmao
So are we normalizing having s*x with people with Down syndrome now? Wild.
Yes because depending on their disability, they can consent. Not that wild.
All of this r-slur-molesting nonsense is underpinned by a sort of implicit Cartesian dualism and the belief that there's some ephemereal perfectly rational "self" that exists inside of everyone. This means that with the correct intervention--in this case, letting them do whatever they want all the time--people with severe learning disabilities could become just as smart and rational as Redditors. This is contradictory to all modern science, undermines the logic of offering any sort of accommodation to disabled people, and is only morally necessary in the first place if you make an a priori assumption that intelligence is necessary for a person to have individual worth, but is otherwise socially convenient, so it's mindlessly accepted even if the argument also explicitly promotes molesting people with learning disabilites
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Society should try to craft a framework to allow r-slurs to consent to having s*x while still having rules in place to prevent them from getting locked into someone's S&M s*x dungeon 24/7. I dunno how that would work but like, dogs and cats and insects and shit have s*x i don't see how forbidding them from having s*x for their entire lifespan is moral or realistic
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I noted that you speak almost exclusively in website emojis which is a sign of low intelligence. Not exactly "no u" but i would expect poor reading comprehension from an r-slur
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This must be the pinnacle of your day huh
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Hieroglyphics chads built the Pyramids.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The pyramids were a gigantic waste of time and money albeit
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
There already are rules on consensual s*x as well as having sound mind to make such decisions, so all you're really saying is you want to frick r-slurs.
!friendsofmimwee, would you look at this. There is a redditor in our midst.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Having a job is a requirement for dating me so r-slurs are out of the question personally. There should be like an r-slur love court to work this stuff out is all I'm saying
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Loving an r-slur like yourself would be a full-time job. Come now, @MeowMixed. Don't be coy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Simple. Allow r-slurs frick each other.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Yes but do you frick cats and dogs, or do you let them frick each other?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Letting r-slurs frick each other sounds like a recipe for sexual assault
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context