> tl;dr i guess i can't tell how many levels of irony the OP is on
It is 100% unironically saying "you don't have to live in a society" to a "we live in a society", so I stand by what I say. Neither take is great (in the absolute), nor is the middle ground particularly satisfying.
Masturbation is good from a hedonist standpoint anyway.
>>773
> Bors has made a point about the greyness of Ethical Consumption under Capitalism
Negative, Dokyunkun. While you have correctly identified that it isn't about brand loyalty, Bors approaches issues with a conspiracy-thinking-addled, unsophisticated, Manichean bent, and that actually makes his point asinine: that some dude playing gotcha is worse than indirectly contributing to modern slavery.
I would, in fact, put the nuance of a consequentialist contortion (the exploitation is irreversible) or the Moral Saints argument (someone who lives with 100% commitment to consistent ethics isn't anyone you'd want to be around) past him and the fact that it perfectly matches the I AM SILLY format is why it doesn't matter that one can consider the work separately from the author.