> Youth clubs are a thing, no? So I think your analogy makes exactly the opposite of your intended point
In my analogy, Roth is arguing that we allow children into adult nightclubs because they sneak in, not that we have separate clubs for them.
And it's I, not Roth, who already argued for "youth clubs". To quote myself “If there's a real need for this, someone can build it.” He makes no such pronouncement.
There's only 3 choices for where to put young people:
1. general apps
2. adult-only apps
3. youth-only apps
He made the case for 2, I'm anti-2 and suggest 1 or 3. Very simple, try to keep up.
> The thesis wasn’t about creating dating apps for queer teenagers, so that’s why he doesn’t say much on the subject.
I don't care. He writes just enough to be questionable and not enough to be defensible.
> You seem to suggest at several points that this thesis is entirely about young queer people (“no-one’s writing a thesis about it”), but you’ve been misled on that point.
As I wrote above, I have a copy of the thesis, I haven't been misled, you've just continued to display a wilful inability to read my comments.
> The rest of your post is frankly too much of a mess of mischaracterization to respond to.
And yet you do. This will be fun and ironic.
> You’re becoming so oddly insistent on Snapchat’s utility as as a location-aware queer hookup/dating app
That's weird because I've barely mentioned Snapchat. I've mentioned it once myself, and as a general app, not as "as a location-aware queer hookup/dating app". You have have mentioned it 10 times. Hence, every other time I've mentioned it has been quoting you.
Do you actually read the responses you get?
> you’re even undermining your own implied conspiracy theory
We're talking about Roth, a single person, there cannot be a conspiracy. I can see now why you reacted so strangely to the use of "pronouncement". Please, pick up a dictionary and use it.
> Why would Roth even care about luring young gay guys onto Grindr if he can find legions of them in his neighborhood on Snap?
I can think of several reasons why someone sexually interested in under 18s would want that:
- convenience
- self selection by the target demographic
- plausible deniability
- grooming
More difficult on a general app. In addition, when he was in charge of moderating a general app, he suppressed use of the word groomer. So many strange coincidences.
But that would be to miss the point as badly as you are wont to do. The point is, it seems perfectly reasonable to question his pronouncements and behaviour.
> I can think of several reasons why someone sexually interested in under 18s would want [to use Grindr]:
- convenience
- self selection by the target demographic
Great, so you can see its utility for queer teenagers then (who as a general rule are likely to be sexually interested in people around their own age).
As a general rule, all people are statistically more likely to be interested in people of their own age so that general rule is unsurprising.
I can also see the sexual utility for underage girls and boys if they let underage girls and boys into nightclubs but I wouldn't advocate that as nightclubs are adult spaces. Same goes for Grindr and Tinder et al.
Is what you're proposing a common position amongst gay men?
We do let teenagers into nightclubs for other people in the same age group. See e.g. this (admittedly old) article: https://www.cypnow.co.uk/other/article/youth-nightclubs-club... I don't think these sorts of events are particularly popular, but that's more because teenagers don't seem to be especially interested in them rather than because adults object.
>Is what you're proposing a common position amongst gay men?
What is it that you take me to be proposing? Also, whatever it is, how would I know if it's a common position among gay men?
Or is it that you're just dogwhistling "Are all gay men pedos?" – in which case, the answer is no.
In my analogy, Roth is arguing that we allow children into adult nightclubs because they sneak in, not that we have separate clubs for them.
And it's I, not Roth, who already argued for "youth clubs". To quote myself “If there's a real need for this, someone can build it.” He makes no such pronouncement.
There's only 3 choices for where to put young people:
1. general apps
2. adult-only apps
3. youth-only apps
He made the case for 2, I'm anti-2 and suggest 1 or 3. Very simple, try to keep up.
> The thesis wasn’t about creating dating apps for queer teenagers, so that’s why he doesn’t say much on the subject.
I don't care. He writes just enough to be questionable and not enough to be defensible.
> You seem to suggest at several points that this thesis is entirely about young queer people (“no-one’s writing a thesis about it”), but you’ve been misled on that point.
As I wrote above, I have a copy of the thesis, I haven't been misled, you've just continued to display a wilful inability to read my comments.
> The rest of your post is frankly too much of a mess of mischaracterization to respond to.
And yet you do. This will be fun and ironic.
> You’re becoming so oddly insistent on Snapchat’s utility as as a location-aware queer hookup/dating app
That's weird because I've barely mentioned Snapchat. I've mentioned it once myself, and as a general app, not as "as a location-aware queer hookup/dating app". You have have mentioned it 10 times. Hence, every other time I've mentioned it has been quoting you.
Do you actually read the responses you get?
> you’re even undermining your own implied conspiracy theory
We're talking about Roth, a single person, there cannot be a conspiracy. I can see now why you reacted so strangely to the use of "pronouncement". Please, pick up a dictionary and use it.
> Why would Roth even care about luring young gay guys onto Grindr if he can find legions of them in his neighborhood on Snap?
I can think of several reasons why someone sexually interested in under 18s would want that:
- convenience
- self selection by the target demographic
- plausible deniability
- grooming
More difficult on a general app. In addition, when he was in charge of moderating a general app, he suppressed use of the word groomer. So many strange coincidences.
But that would be to miss the point as badly as you are wont to do. The point is, it seems perfectly reasonable to question his pronouncements and behaviour.