It'll still be rape.
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
Yeah, almost put it in the question too, but felt that would be rude
Yeah that was probably a good call, even I hovered for a second before posting, but rape has always felt worse in my book, like killing someone is a horrible thing to do to someone, but they don't have to deal with it for life, the other one is a life long thing that could be argued is worse than death.
I might have some news for you about rape statistics - they're pretty high. That's telling a lot of people their experiences were worse than death, suggesting life isn't worth living after rape. That's a pretty brutal opinion to post on a public forum.
I didn't say life wasn't worth living after it, I just see a way where it could be seen worse than death, having to have that in your memory forever because some psychopath decided they can do what they want to you.
It's a life long issue these people have to unfortunately suffer, one that they never ever should have had to experienced.
A brutal opinion would be, I think we should publicly execute rapists the slow way, that's a brutal opinion to post on a public forum.
Assuming that immortality only applies to humans, environmental destruction would be a big one.
People care more about pollution and climate change when they know they'll be around to face the consequences.
Unauthorised pregnancy. If no one can die, every new birth is effectively stealing from the limited pool of resources. Too many births, everyone starves, no one can die to ease the burden on the limited resources. Endless suffering for all.
Wait, what resources would be most valuable if death was off the table?
Edit: I'll take a stab at it and say cats.
Seriously (or at least as serious as a hypothetical invinciblity/immortality scenario can be :D): food water and housing. You can live without most other things, but being cold, wet, starving and dehydrated will really make the eternity drag on :)
Abortion would probably be impossible too
I was gonna make a joke about ending the abortion debate, but then I went down a rabbit hole:
Abortions procedures would still be a thing, but the fetus wouldnt die. Its just an extremely premature birth. That means that intentional pregnancies could be "harvested" early, for the fetus to grow up outside the mothers body.
Lots to unpack.
Its no death. Not no aging or sickness.
People are still going to fall apart as they age. So I wonder if there would be a hard cap where you basically have a farewell party and go into a euthanasia booth/coffin.
Unauthorized pregnancies would be criminal. No idea what that world would do with the child in that situation.
Euthanasia is still death though, so unless live people are just going to crawl into a box and willingly never come out? And if they do get out, are they going to be okay with having being starved in complete isolation?
And where are their bodies stored? Outside of few exceptions, most human bodies decay away within a hundred years, so the grave sites can be reused, but you cant do that if someone's still in it?
If the world allows voluntary death, then it gets a bit easier to deal with though.
Well that's just immortality. Even immortals can be killed in most myths.
Separate comment, because I think it deserves its own discussion, but can there really be aging and illness? It might get a bit philosophical, but if all your cells stop regenerating and die off, eventually you'll end up a bit of ooze that can't interpret or perceive the world, so at that point you would be dead?
In my interpretation of the scenario, it would be like "in time", everyone grows up to 18 (or some arbitrary age), and then you are stuck like that forever after?
How are you envisaging it?
Yaknow there's a movie about everyone living forever and you basically pay with your lifespan.
Technology advances enough to cure all diseases and stop aging. I think age 23-28 is prime. Some people look way more grown up at 28 vs 18. Also you're body is done growing and starts breaking down in the mid 30s.
So yeah I'm thinking people are immortal via science. So it's sci-fi not fantasy.
In fantasy humans would ALWAYS have immortality. It's not like a switch is flipped in 1990 and suddenly people stop dying and aging.
Our society and culture would be completely different if death wasn't a thing. One of the reasons we have so many issues is religion. What religion would immortals have? What does war look like for immortals? How do you decide who wins a war when soldiers can't die? Violence loses its meaning with no death or injuries.
We'd all become non-violent. Maybe war would be decided by board games like chess. We'd be more open to talking things out instead of just killing and taking from each other.
Another issue with humans is overpopulation. Again resources being scarce and countries fighting over resources wouldn't be a thing in the way we have it today.
See how this goes down the rabbit hole?
Are you referring to "In Time", or some other film? The Man From Earth is another interesting film about a singular immortal man.
There is heaps to unpack, it really is a complete game changer.
The other issue, is what about other animals. If they end up immortal as well, we'd be litterally drowning in any animals that breed rapidly, like rats, rabbits etc.
Yeah In Time (2011) was there my brain went with the no death thing.
I only saw the trailer, but my mind went to a future state where we solved aging, illness, disease and the like with technology / medicines.
So we change our current culture to conform to that. Including late stage capitalism and the owning class.
Verses everyone STARTING immortal. Its an even playing field since the starting lines are closer together. You don't have generational wealth with people being born into wealth over and over at the same scale.
The head of the family that actually pulled themselves up from the bootstraps could still be alive and have the same core values of taking care of their workers. Instead of being dead and gone for 3 generations and enshittification takes root.
Well some might end up in the mines and others as the first proper space explorers who are just yeeted into space. Deep sea exploration without a submarine might also be on the table.
Its much harder to enslave immortal beings. How do you force someone to work in the mines?
Extortion? Torture? Just because they can't kill you, doesn't mean they can't hurt you or your loved ones.
Kidnapping, I say, in a world where killing a death is simply not a concept, being kidnapped for any reason could lead to millennia of torment
Any sex related crime.
Why?
Edit: why would it be worse than when death is a thing? And why would it the "most" unforgivable?
Becauae that shit stays with you... and if you can't die, you have to live with it for an eternity.
Unforgiveable implies that there can be no mistake about the negative side effects for even the dumbest among us before committing the act. Torture is about as intentionally cruel as it gets.
Some other suggestions here are frequently used under the umbrella of torture, for example, by the IDF.
Burying someone alive. Or trapping their feet in cement shoes and throwing them into the ocean.
This question implies death is the worst that could happen to you.
Personally, I don't see it that way. There's a lot more hurtful things than death.
Death is one occurrence, with no pain in the death itself, and "only" secondary pain in those left behind.
There's a lot more hurtful and lasting pain you can inflict, physically and psychologically, and without a definite endpoint.
Fundamentally, the basis for thinking death is the "worst" is that so long as you're alive you can still experience good things, regardless of your past, and you retain the capacity to heal in different ways.
Death is the one thing you're not coming back from to find a new way to live.
If death weren't a thing, I suppose that that pitching someone into lava or something like that would be pretty bad then.
Only if you're a pussy and can't take a few million years trapped in the earth's crust.
Torture. The main thing about torture is to make sure they don't die while suffering the pain.
I cant imagine what would be the most heinous torture in a world like this. Maybe casually, "accidentally", stepping on the same person's toe ever other day for like one or two million years.
Not putting your shopping carts back.
Stealing from musk.
This one gets more complicated the longer I think about it.
My first pass was to imagine humans just as we are aside from the ability to die. Many things about how humans are don't make sense without death though. Pain, for example likely evolved to cause organisms to avoid stimuli that could lead to their death. Fear largely derives from the anticipation of pain. Would true immortals have either? I imagine the psychology of such creatures would be vastly different from our own.
There's also the question of what form the immortality takes. If it's possible to destroy someone's physical body, but their soul can immediately manifest a new one, and pain doesn't exist, then doing so is just an inconvenience. If bodies are impervious to any damage or alteration, a large category of crimes vanishes.
It would probably come down to some sort of long-term imposition on the freedom of others, but it's really hard to guess what that would look like.
In my opinion killing is pretty bad but there are other crimes that can be worse, so not sure what point you are trying to make
Torture, kidnapping.
No death? As in you can't die from old age or you can't die no matter what happens to you e.g you're throw into the sun, you don't die? Or your physical body can die but that just means your game is over in one universe and you can move into the next, and so on?
If being thrown into the sun can't kill you, then you're invulnerable and torture can't be a thing. You could be tossed into deep space and not hit anything for a million years, but you could learn how to cope after a few years and make your brain a retreat of imagination.
If it's just games all the way up into eternity, being the game creator and making pain exist is an unforgiveable crime.
If being thrown into the sun can't kill you, then you're invulnerable and torture can't be a thing.
I disagree. there several forms of torture that don't involve killing you