Dungeons and Daddies (not a bdsm podcast). Especially the specials, but I relisten to the seasons. I caught it early about 4 or 5 episodes in, my daughter was just born, and I spent a lot of evenings alone cleaning so my wife could rest. I'd basically listen to all of the episodes before the next came out, just listening while doing dishes or cleaning bottles or whatever.

Its been a favorite since.

Maybe this will be a good place to start.

Anti-porn legislation is a decidedly right wing thing. You can see this with the laws that effectively blocked pornhub. The one I linked to includes written erotica, and non-sexual representations of lgbtqia+.

Blocking porn (or erotica in general), is a very religious right action. Associating lgbtqia+ with porn is also very much right-wing.

I don't know where youre getting the idea that religious groups are pushing left wing ideals and are therefore secretly left wing groups. Collective Shout, for example, is pretending to be a left wing group (describing themselves as "a grassroots movement against the objectification of women and sexualisation of girls in media, advertising and popular culture."), when in reality, they are tied to hard right christian groups and conservative think tanks. The opposite of what you're suggesting.

You'll often see these sort of right wing groups cover their religious based anti-porn stance by wrapping it in "Protecting the children", which will then be used as an excuse to try and prevent everything from drag shows to erotic games like visual novels. This is not "woke".

Now that isnt to say there aren't leftists with an issue here as well. There are leftists who are anti-porn. Usually though, those will be against the porn industry, and will say all porn is exploitation in some form. They won't associate gender identity or sexual identity with erotic content though, which is (usually) a good indicator of where a group or person is landing on a political spectrum. These folks are also not that common, more often you'd see the criticism limited to the porn industries where women are often taken advantage of, and the consent given is a bit more dubious.

You may also see it with leftists and specific genres of gaming, where there may be depictions of rape, especially if its shown without a narrative reason for it to exist or where its not considered wrong to have done so.

I hope you take this comment as an opportunity to understand where others are coming from, to evaluate where youre getting your information from, and maybe, just maybe, reevaluate your reactions to what others are saying.

I was replying to a specific part of that persons comment.

That said, your comments about "the left" elsewhere are also actually about the religious right.

oppressed by woke cancel culture associated with the left

Pretty sure most of them are not racists at all, they simply want to hit the woke back as a vengeance.

Dude.

You have a definition of "the left" (and, tbc, "the right") thats so far abstracted from reality that I don't know where to begin. I wish I could be the person here who could help clarify things for you, but I'm not.

As I said, its my opinion that you deserved it in terms of the mod actions, and I gave my reasons. Many others shared the same opinion.

Maybe instead of lashing out at me you could consider why so many folks are disagreeing with your take, and start there.

Maybe your trigger is sensitive

With zero reason to do so, they brought up a hardline stance against "the left" in a thread about racists and a game about Africans.

Harassment, bigotry, and abusive language don't come into play.

I guess I don't go reading through user histories looking to evaluate users. I evaluate the comment in front of me.

I evaluate context. A well meaning user can often be misinterpreted. I generally don't act on any community I mod without evaluating context for the comment as well. It could be poor phrasing due to English being a second language or a variety of other issues.

Context is always important.

Even the left "hates the left": we're a disagreeable bunch. Seems your judgement is based on bias. Unless you can define troll, I could imagine anything you object to qualifying: I partly left reddit to get away from such moderation lacking integrity.

It seems youre trying to decide how I evaluate things for me, as well as then trying to paint me (not the mod in this case) as lacking integrity.

I'm not interested.

For the record, I would consider that sort of commentary in line with ragebait, as you have phrased things in a way to get a rise out of someone. Alone, not worthy of removal, but perhaps a comment to point out the antagonistic nature of your comment does not lend itself to constructive discussion.

Edit: Wrong part of paste cut out on the first section.

They can be highly responsive to their owners. You start showing any signs of tension, they will put themselves between you and whatever is bothering you.

When we watch my sisters dog, my wife has to use a vibrating collar for the dog. He reacts to everything as a potential threat to her, and that ramps up with my kids being there.

If its just me walking him, he tends to just be a roaming doofus. If I add in our (little and much older) dog, he's fine until the moment our dog reacts.

Its actually extremely wild to me just how responsive they are to those around them.

Edit: Forgot to mention, he's a mutt - consisting of like 7 different herding breeds common to the southern US. He's also well over a hundred lbs, and the goodest boy (of the lovable idiot variety).

He also has zero response to my kids, they can lay next to him, on him, whatever, his only interest is looking out for them. And treats.

It seemed civil enough.

It read like ragebait to me.

Further reading of OPs comments showcase a hatred of "the left", including assigning "the left" to right wing religious groups.

Heavily distract myself by listening to a podcast or audiobook and charging my phone.

I'm actually using this as a positive. There are some I relisten to because I enjoy them so much, its enough to keep a good amount of my brain on it, and let's me do other things since my hands are free.

When I miss parts because I start down some other train of thought, since ive already listened to it so many times I know exactly where I am and what happened.

Thats about the best I've got.

Edit: Apparently audiobook now autocorrects to audiobookshelf, which is very funny to me

Edit 2: This doesnt always work, as I should be folding laundry right now. Going back to folding laundry.

... Your example is someone pointing out its fucked up to want a community dedicated to getting off to a (canonically) 14yr old anime character?

What the absolute fuck

Edit: Read the damn comment people. The comment is about an OP who has licked his cousins underwear and is specifically looking for a comm dedicated to a 14yr old anime character.

No matter what you think about 2d, thats a problematic person who needs help. I don't know how any person could try and justify that as "woke left censorship" without being the kind of person who would have frequently visited epsteins island.

All of which marks no change in my opinion on your comment in context and its removal, regardless of my opinions on your personal take on things.

Edit: just to say, your other comments just confirm for me what I suspected was the case, so I'm just going to note that I stand by YDI and thats the last I have to say on this.

Because of slightly humorous wording?

None of that came across humorous in the slightest

And how context matters?

A bunch of racists were mad about a game featuring Africans, and you immediately compare it to being mad about "sexy women".

Or do you mean that posting anything critical of the left

Right wing talking points from the r/KIA days isn't really being critical of "the left"

even if it is also critical of the right for the same reasons

Entirely different reason, racism

Yeah, your comment absolutely reads like a troll.

Rule 2 also calls on civility, which I think is important here, because your comment (in context) comes off as a troll looking to start something.

I probably would have removed it too, but would have explained why it was inappropriate (in several ways).

YDI.

Andrea Baccarelli, the dean of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, received at least $150,000 as an expert witness during several lawsuits aimed at Kenvue, the maker of Tylenol, federal court filings reviewed by the newspaper show.

It’s a glaring conflict of interest, and a worrying example of how the Trump administration is using quack science to further a pseudoscientific agenda. Worse yet, it’s using baseless evidence linked to civil litigation to justify its claims.

A federal judge dismissed the suits aimed at the Tylenol maker, which were filed by families who claimed their children developed autism or ADHD after using Tylenol during pregnancy. The judge cited a lack of reliable scientific evidence and agreed with the defendants that Baccarelli had “cherry-picked and misrepresented study results,” according to the NYT.