World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I really have to know what you think being patted on the head means because you're speaking as if the child was punched in the face.
No, I'm speaking as if she was touched without her consent. Because she was. We shouldn't normalize that.
Children should know that they have autonomy. Children should be taught the importance of consent so they can protect themselves. Adults should know better than to touch others without consent.
No, much of the language and ideas you expressed are more in line with if some great violence or trauma was inflicted. It does not line up with an unwanted head pat.
I am still not convinced you know what a pat on the head is compared to a punch in the face.
Their differences are irrelevant to the question of "was it done intentionally to a stranger without their consent?" If the answer is yes then it wasn't okay, whether it was a pat on the head, a punch in the face, or a grab by the pussy.
That's not the question at hand. The question at hand is why they're flattening the two things in order to describe the act as "child abuse", and generally overreact to the exact nature of the action. The fact of the touch being non-consensual is not in question but the description of it as violence, traumatic, and abuse is.
Jumping to extremes is not rational behaviour.
That's not what's going on though. The two things share one very very crucial detail in common that y'all keep pretending isnt being mentioned repeatedly in this thread. Deal with that or do not expect to continue this conversation.
What detail is that? It can't be the non-consensual touch since I've mentioned that in most of my comments outright, including my last reply to you.
It's the fact that non-consensually touching a stranger's child is absolutely unacceptable behavior. Why do you have such a hard time understanding that? Are you looking to get away with something like this in the future and want to make sure it's downplayed sufficiently? Get outta here with this pretense of not understanding the issue.
So the thing that was regularly addressed is the thing you think nobody is talking about. And there's not a single comment saying non-consensual touching is okay or questioning if it can be, but somehow you imagined there was.
Meanwhile you're ignoring what I told you what I'm actually questioning. Don't pretend like you were ever trying to have a conversation when you were just looking to get angry about something nobody said.
It was, on me. And it happens because assholes like you normalize abuse and defend aggressors instead of victims.
It does, the child's consent was disregarded and her personal space was violated. This is unacceptable.
I'm still not convinced you realize you're literally trying to defend abuse.
Fuck off.
This is not about you, and that's weird as hell that you're saying you've been traumatized and violated by reading a story of an old man getting beat up for patting a child on the head without asking first. This is a next-level martyrdom complex.
If you think I'm "normalizing abuse" by taking issue with your idea of abuse as irrational, ridiculous, and downright stupid, then you can follow through with what that means for your assertion that I'm normalizing abuse.
A pat on the head is not a punch to the face, the same way that tripping and falling because someone accidentally bumped into you is not the same as having someone break your ankles with a golf club. Flattening two very different actions to a common denominator in order to treat them both as extremely as possible is irrational and, interestingly, a highly aggressive and hostile act in and of itself.
A pat on the head is not abuse. I question your notions of what abuse is if you're throwing around that term so liberally. I challenge you to go to a group of abuse victims and tell them that an old man patted you on the head so you're equally as aggrieved and traumatized as someone who experiences domestic violence that leaves bruises and black eyes.
Then we'll see who has to fuck off.
abuse verb
Why are you gatekeeping it?
Not only do you not understand how definitions work, you also don't know what gatekeeping means.
Here's a definition to look up: hysteria.
Fuck you for normalizing abuse.
Does the abuse I suffered inconvenience you?
A song for you: https://snoopsqueak.com/videos/31
DARVO
Without consent, yes, it is abuse.
Fuck you for normalizing abuse, shitbag.
I'd trust you to define abuse as much as I'd trust you to not stab someone in the for accidentally bumping into you on the street because you can't tell the difference between touch and violent assault.
The only thing I'm normalizing is not reacting like a psychopath.
Fuck you for normalizing abuse.