!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Because the people who take advantage, already know that they shouldn't, and we aren't going to politely convince them otherwise.
Might as well make it harder for them by warning others that they are out there.
I totally agree with the sentiment though. It's a shame we have to, but until people can behave themselves, we need to be aware.
Yup. It is the same reason that I can't stand the people who think the world is an episode of Steven Universe and that if we just show compassion toward the hate mongers that they will change their hearts.
Be good to one another. But also understand that there ARE bad people out there and that they deserve nothing but weary scorn.
Freaky ass weirdos need to stay they ass inside
Roll they ass up like a fresh pack of 'za
City is back up, it's a must, we outside
This whole question rubs me the wrong way, like "Why do we teach women to protect themselves instead of teaching men not to rape?". There's not a big control panel somewhere that "society" can use to change everyone's behavior. People are individuals. Some of them will do bad things to others because it benefits them, no matter what they're taught. If you want to avoid being victimized, you have to be vigilant against that.
You'll notice only people who grow up in extremely safe societies complain about "teaching women to protect themselves instead of". People that didn't know why it's an idiotic argument to have already.
Bingo.
The only people you actually end up reaching are people with good intentions who don't need to hear it in the first place. "Stop taking advantage of people" is a message which can usually be dispensed only by force. The moral panic over "toxic masculinity" did very little to affect those who actually caused problems, but a great deal to disenfranchise those who would actually make bad actors stop taking advantage of others.
Although, now I'm thinking...
If we tell everyone that people are using X scam to get rich, then how many NEW assholes are convinced they could probably pull it off? Then Those guys come up with new schemes that we announce to everybody, which causes more people to think they should take up scamming.
Oh dear. I need to lie down.
The point is more why are we treating the symptom rather than the disease. People who take advantage of others are manipulators and by definition that's anti-social. Why is the system so broken that we can't imprison scammers?
The point is more why are we treating the symptom rather than the disease.
Hell yeah, great point
People who take advantage of others are manipulators and by definition that's anti-social. Why is the system so broken that we can't imprison scammers?
What the fuck, how is that your conclusion?
The "disease" is the lack of safety nets- a lack of education, resources, opportunities. "Anti-social" is a copout term to justify the status quo- to pathologize what are ultimately systemic failures manifested in the behavior of individuals. The disease is capitalism, and imprisoning people for "anti-social" behaviors is absolutely the wrong answer.
To put it very simply and probably too broadly, capitalism. Our whole system is built around taking advantage of people.
To create a culture of blaming the victim.
You cannot positively control the actions of others, and others cannot positively control your actions. You can influence the actions of others, but you can only control your own.
We can influence members of society to "stop taking advantage of people" all day long. But if you want to control whether people are taken advantage of, you have to address the victims rather than the perpetrators.
Society can try to placate perpetrators. There's little sense stealing something that everyone already has. We can appeal to the perpetrator's empathy, but that assumes they have some. We can threaten repercussions and hope that has a deterrent effect. But, the final decision as to whether to perpetrate is always in the head of the perpetrator, and outside the reach of anyone else.
If you want greater control over that decision, the only option you have is to take your own action.
Because you can't control other's behavior, so worry about yourself.
same reason we prosecute immigrants instead of the 'job creators' hiring them. money talks.
Probably based on the idea that people who knowingly do bad aren't going to respond to aphorisms.
I have some very bad news about what capitalism means
I know what it means, I'm asking why have we accepted that as a society when it harms 99% of us
Because you can’t change the behavior of other people, but you can change your behavior.
this
because the people that are taking advantage of people won't stop, so you need to make the people being taken advantage of less vulnerable.
What do we normally do with people who are harmful to society?
that depends entirely on what they're doing. if it's illegal then whatever the law says to. otherwise, there's nothing you really can do other than try to ensure people won't get caught up in whatever they're doing.
for example, flat earthers are harmful to society because they push an anti-science narrative that makes people reject reality in favor of whatever they want to believe. However, stopping them from saying things would be a violation of their right to free speech (which must be upheld even then because otherwise people could simply label any idea they don't like as harmful and suppress it, leading directly to a dictatorship), so instead we try to make sure people know that the earth is not flat and why.
in much the same way, someone taking advantage of someone else (say a guy leveraging a girl's trauma to make her not leave him, without actually violating the law) often can't be effectively governed without introducing something that could be used to take people's rights away in the name of protection. because of this, we have to try and make sure that people don't fall for it instead.
When you reframe the whole world as a jungle with 8 billion animals, your mantra translates to - don't get hunted, but it's okay to hunt, because that is survival instincts.
Because our society financially rewards people for taking advantage of other people, so it would be silly to expect it to stop until it's unprofitable.
I know this is supposed to be a profound question on the nature of our society, but I think its a lot more simple than that. First, this isn't a binary one way or the other. We have "stop taking advantage of people" things written into law already in many places. Things (so far) like the FDA that say food manufacturers can't put sawdust in food (yes this used to happen). We have the FTC that limits how much interest a company can charge you for lending you money. So we do have some of the "stop taking advantage of people" rules and powers in place.
However what you're talking about is generally: individual choice. For this the issue isn't where the attention is directed (the abuser vs the abused), its how this would be implemented. If we're instead switching the focus and enforcement on to the "stop taking advantage of people" for everyday purchases, who would be the arbitrator of what is being taken advantage of or not who would decide if a change is made, if it is enough of a change? Today it is the individual guided buy the mantra "don't let people take advantage of you". Here's an example if it were the other way:
A new 2025 Ford F-150 starts at $38,710, but if you go to a dealership lot you likely won't find one for that price. They will all be more expensive for various reasons (no low trim models in stock, arbitrary added dealer markup, or dealer added options like tinting). So if a buyer is at that lot wanted to pay $38,710, are they being taken advantage of because they are forced to pay more? I would argue, yes! (but even my opinion is subjective). So what is the remedy? Do we force dealers to stock X number of base models with no addons? What if those sell out? Do the dealers have to stop selling higher trim models until they can get more base models on the lot resulting in ZERO F150 trucks for sale at any price?
People want a choice to decide on their own if they are being taken advantage of, and whether they are is subjective to the person, and a remedy is also subjective.
Two reasons that I can think of.
Because individuals who believed "don't take advantage of others" were at evolutional disadvantage comparing to those who believed "do not get taken advantage of", and thus did not procreate and died out
Like first ones would just get taken advantage of all the time, burn out and die miserably.
Second ones would preserve their mental health and be able to achieve anything meaningful like raising kids.
That would be realistic in a lone wolf situation but humans are tribal by nature, humans are social by nature, humans are not inherently greedy nor malicious except for some outliers. The fact that sociopathy is a diagnosed personality disorder should tell you that our society is not supposed to accept that behaviour
our society is not supposed to accept that behaviour
Do not listen to what people tell you but watch what they do. If society did not tolerate sociopaths, sociopaths wouldn't govern nations and own multi-billion dollar corporations. This behaviour is not only accepted but encouraged.
By the way I am feeling depressed rn so that's why I am being so pessimistic, do not take too seriously
Just came here to say your username is awesome shit made me laugh LOL
No, you're awesome
I love it lol rock on man
Because victim blaming is easier
Because we as a society blame the victims more than the perpetrators.