That was Randy Pitchford, CEO of Gearbox. He has his fair share of controversial statements, but I don’t recall him ever defending CSAM.

Dear god! Who sent him .

It’s a reference to the “Always has been” meme.

When I said the law is selective in enforcement I meant the system of law. The courts, law enforcement, and political “tough on crime” attitudes. That is very much on me for the lack of clarity and I apologise for it.

The perpetuation and propagation of a fundamentally corrupt and unfair system does not require everyone that upholds it to be corrupt, it needs only for them to be willing to participate in it. Perhaps they don’t see the fundamental inequality, or maybe they believe they can reform it from the inside. I don’t think the system can be reformed enough to be truly just and fair. I think it needs to fundamentally rebuilt.

In the UK the system of law is the same one that oversaw the enforcement of serfdom and of slavery. It is a system where judges can enforce arbitrary rules of conduct and dress in ‘their’ courtroom. A system where judges are too often treated with deference instead of scrutiny, despite blatant bias towards upholding the status quo.

It’s distinctly possible that I’m being a naive idealist, and that this is as good and fair as the system can be. It’s entirely possible that my ideal system is entirely impossible. It’s just that I want to hope for a better world, and I have too much doubt in the capability of reforming things.

“The purpose of a system is what it does.”

You are right. Laws are universal and apply equally to everyone. The problem is the systems that exist to create and apply those laws. There are far too many cases of the law being selective in who it protects and who it punishes for me to believe that it upholds fairness. I also don’t believe it’s a fundamental human failing, I think it’s functioning exactly as its corrupt creators intended.

I want to violently disagree because I love onions… But I’ve never tried Shallots, so I can’t say you’re wrong.

But then the dad gives him another condom and a wink.

Well then I guess I’ll be playing with rocks and sticks. After all, sticks and stones may break the bastards bones.

Short answer yes with an if. The long answer is no with a but.

I’d say it’s racist if someone is complaining about illegal immigrants alongside a general contempt of ‘foreigners’ and not paying attention to the details of why it’s illegal for them to migrate the way they did and what options are available for legal migration.

It’s not racist to be opposed to those who are in violation of the law, as that is not a racial or ethnic classification. But it is important to be inquisitive as to why the law is the way that it is, and be willing to consider the possibility that just because something is against the law does not mean that it should be. Law has long been used as a tool of systemic oppression and racism, as well as many other horrific abuses inflicted on people.

Are you seriously drawing a parallel between putting hardcore bdsm content in a kids movie and a kids film that features a same sex couple!?

Having a same sex couple in a kids film is no more inappropriate than portraying an interracial couple. I find it ridiculous to say it’s inappropriate to portray something simply because it’s uncommon.

Incidentally, the equivocation of LGBTQ+ portrayals in media with that of explicit pornographic content is a position held by bigots who wish to erase the existence of non-heterosexual people.