31 votes

In 100 years' time, what do you think society will look back on and view with distaste?

Inspired by this comment, and thinking about how we today look back on (for example) segregation, or the treatment of homosexuals through the last 100 years.
In the year 2120 what do you think human society will look back on and be disgusted to think about?

The big one for me I think will be the treatment of animals, and not just battery farming, but straight up growing them for slaughter: food, clothes, lab-testing, etc. With the nascent industry of 3d-printed/lab-grown meats gaining traction, as well as vegan and vegetarianism on the rise through much of the West, it's not hard to imagine our great-grandchildren being horrified at the thought of their ancestors raising animals just to kill them.

64 comments

  1. [7]
    Silbern
    Link
    Our luxury. In 100 years, climate change will be in full swing, and I expect for the world then to be quite a bit more unstable than the world of today. I think in 100 years, people will look back...

    Our luxury. In 100 years, climate change will be in full swing, and I expect for the world then to be quite a bit more unstable than the world of today. I think in 100 years, people will look back at us and envy our lifestyles of disposable goods and fossil fuel powered conveniences, in much the same way people in medieval Europe envied the lavishness of the Romans hundreds of years earlier.

    39 votes
    1. jaylittle
      Link Parent
      This. A thousand times this. We are so wasteful in so many ways. Even are our PCs are stunningly wasteful despite the fact that we are living in a golden age of perf per watt right now. Climate...

      This. A thousand times this. We are so wasteful in so many ways. Even are our PCs are stunningly wasteful despite the fact that we are living in a golden age of perf per watt right now.

      Climate Change will force us to clean up our act in so many ways, we can probably only half ass guess at most of them right now. The majority of people aren't even aware that we are on the cusp of a massive change to both our lifestyles and how we view our relationship with the world around us.

      11 votes
    2. [4]
      0d_billie
      Link Parent
      You know, that's not a perspective I considered. I suppose I'm working within in an optimistic view that society is trending ever upwards in terms of advancement, but climate change may well be...

      You know, that's not a perspective I considered. I suppose I'm working within in an optimistic view that society is trending ever upwards in terms of advancement, but climate change may well be the trigger for another Dark Age.
      I would like to hope that as it becomes ever more problematic, humanity rises to meet the challenge and we are able to (as a global society) learn to live with less luxury, and act more out of the common good than self interest. Wishful thinking, I suspect.

      5 votes
      1. [3]
        vektor
        Link Parent
        Human ingenuity isn't going to go back. We'll find sustainable ways of replacing the luxury we have to rid ourselves of. Reduce/reuse/recycle. Plant-based meat substitutes will be better than...

        Human ingenuity isn't going to go back. We'll find sustainable ways of replacing the luxury we have to rid ourselves of. Reduce/reuse/recycle. Plant-based meat substitutes will be better than actual meat, reducing meat consumption without hurting living standards. Meat will look crude and barbaric. Machinery will help us reuse stuff we now can't. The repair shop around the corner might have some serious high-tech equipment to do general repairs, for example. I once sent a mainboard in to get fixed. I received the same item back. Granted, it went all the way to china, but they didn't just replace it. I can only imagine they have a machine that tests the board, finds faulty components and replaces them. Imagine that on every block.

        If everything goes to plan of course. If climate change causes an actual collapse, no dice.

        9 votes
        1. [2]
          UniquelyGeneric
          Link Parent
          I’m not so sure on this one. My fear is that with increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, humans are going to lose intelligence on the whole. We won’t even realize how limited our mental...

          Human ingenuity isn’t going to go back

          I’m not so sure on this one. My fear is that with increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, humans are going to lose intelligence on the whole. We won’t even realize how limited our mental faculties have become as it will happen slowly like boiling a frog. We are increasingly making future bets that some breakthrough technology will get us out of the hole we keep digging deeper every year, but that bet is contingent that we can make use of available resources in a clever way when the time comes. Both the resources and our ability to think are dwindling over time.

          Trump has reversed a decade or more of policies with such speed it seems the US will (assuming a majority Democrat government) spend even longer reinstating the policies well after the damage has been done.

          I hope I’m wrong, though, and that my doom and gloom is only a temporary reflection of the current state of affairs.

          9 votes
          1. vektor
            Link Parent
            I'm not sure that atmospheric CO2 is going to meaningfully impact brain functioning. There of course is an effect. But iirc, you have to go up to like 1000 ppm for it to be noticable. And even...

            I'm not sure that atmospheric CO2 is going to meaningfully impact brain functioning. There of course is an effect. But iirc, you have to go up to like 1000 ppm for it to be noticable. And even then, for a limited scope, scrubbing CO2 from breathing air is doable. Not in a scale to affect the entire ecosystem, of course. But scrubbing the CO2 from the air of an AC system seems doable to me.

            And I wouldn't be worried about us not noticing the cognitive decline. We already now know about the problem; that's what counts.

            On trump's impact, agreed. He's immensely harmful. I can not estimate how long the USA will take to return to a reasonable course. But keep in mind that they are only one country. And once the rest of the world pulls their fingers out of their bums, they might even sanction the US to get them to get on with it. Who knows.

            11 votes
  2. [13]
    Adys
    Link
    The same way I think we're starting to view smoking with disgust (including being near smokers), the same will happen to car exhaust. We'll probably think about "roads full of exhaust from...

    The same way I think we're starting to view smoking with disgust (including being near smokers), the same will happen to car exhaust.

    We'll probably think about "roads full of exhaust from gasoline-powered vehicles" with the same type of mental picture I might conjure if I tell you "houses commonly emptying chamberpots at the window onto the pavement" or "asbestos bath".

    29 votes
    1. [9]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. [8]
        vektor
        Link Parent
        Once electric cars are common place, it might be more feasible to move a lot of traffic underground in densely populated areas, mostly because exhaust isn't a problem in closed spaces anymore....

        Once electric cars are common place, it might be more feasible to move a lot of traffic underground in densely populated areas, mostly because exhaust isn't a problem in closed spaces anymore. Clears up more space for pedestrian-friendly spaces and green spaces.

        I imagine a future city as basically a single megastructure of a building: Heavy traffic on the bottom level. Mostly public transit and delivery vehicles. Above that, whatever spaces need no sunlight: Retail, most likely; as well as utilities. Up from that, we'll probably start to see "The Building" starting to differentiate. Once we introduce spaces that want to see the sun, we'll need to get more surface area in, so this will likely involve a lot of open air spaces stretching down here - either in the form of light shafts, but the further up you go, increasingly distinct tower/house-like structures. In these spaces, you'll probably see offices in the lower levels and living spaces further up. Most rooftops are likely covered in greenery, with foot/bike paths in between. Imagine the air quality. High population density makes most daily errands walking distance too.

        6 votes
        1. [5]
          helloworld
          Link Parent
          The smoke isn't the only things cars leave behind. The break pads and tire erosion, is extremely bad, will be probably worse in enclosed underground space.

          The smoke isn't the only things cars leave behind. The break pads and tire erosion, is extremely bad, will be probably worse in enclosed underground space.

          3 votes
          1. [4]
            spctrvl
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            Electric cars cut down on brake pad use as well, since they primarily brake regeneratively. That said, I still doubt moving traffic underground is going to be much of a thing, compared to...

            Electric cars cut down on brake pad use as well, since they primarily brake regeneratively. That said, I still doubt moving traffic underground is going to be much of a thing, compared to increased development of public transit. Or at least, I hope we go that route for reasons of safety, cost, and efficiency, rather than building increasingly expensive and ridiculous infrastructure to support the institution of private car ownership.

            2 votes
            1. [2]
              helloworld
              Link Parent
              As always, I doubt public transport will be a thing in most of US, but my poor ass city in third world is running a few electric buses and so far I have heard only positive feedback. But overall,...

              As always, I doubt public transport will be a thing in most of US, but my poor ass city in third world is running a few electric buses and so far I have heard only positive feedback. But overall, public transport is a people problem, rarely solvable by technical solution, so not holding my breath there.

              It will cut down drastically on noise though,and I'll be waiting for that day.

              2 votes
              1. spctrvl
                Link Parent
                Eh, the United States used to have the best public transport system in the world. If the will for it developed, and I think it is developing, we could certainly have a world class public transport...

                Eh, the United States used to have the best public transport system in the world. If the will for it developed, and I think it is developing, we could certainly have a world class public transport system again. Electric buses are pretty great though, just being able to brake regeneratively is a huge plus for the sort of stop and go traffic they're in.

                4 votes
            2. vektor
              Link Parent
              I would also expect a lot of public transit. As I said, I would expect mostly public transit and delivery vehicles to go there. That should limit the amount of traffic. Electric motors and brakes...

              I would also expect a lot of public transit. As I said, I would expect mostly public transit and delivery vehicles to go there. That should limit the amount of traffic. Electric motors and brakes cuts down on emissions. Tire wear, sure, but I doubt that's a significant enough problem to stop my vision of a megastructure city.

        2. [2]
          Tardigrade
          Link Parent
          You've got a much more positive view on all of this than I do. I don't have have a source right now but I'm pretty sure we don't have enough lithium for electric cars to become commonplace unless...

          You've got a much more positive view on all of this than I do. I don't have have a source right now but I'm pretty sure we don't have enough lithium for electric cars to become commonplace unless you're imagining the scifi situation where one area lives in the cities like you say and that's supported on the backs of millions outside the city living in desolate junkyard to support the opulence.

          1 vote
          1. vektor
            Link Parent
            Lithium batteries aren't the only batteries. Pretty sure we'll be seeing a lot of other high-density batteries out there in the next 100 years. Remember that WW2 submarines ran on lead acid...

            Lithium batteries aren't the only batteries. Pretty sure we'll be seeing a lot of other high-density batteries out there in the next 100 years. Remember that WW2 submarines ran on lead acid batteries. There's also fancy tech where all the active chemicals of a battery are liquid, so you can refuel it, basically.

            Beyond that, for high density areas and public transit you could easily go for batteryless cars with overhead wires or stuff like that.

            And I'm not so convinced about the actual rarity of lithium either. The ocean's supplies are basically inexhaustible(more than 20t/person, according to wikipedia), which means there is a price ceiling for lithium: Whatever the price per ton is of getting it out of the ocean, that's the highest it can realistically go. How low that price is, I don't know. But again, I doubt electric cars will rely solely on lithium.

            1 vote
    2. HrBingR
      Link Parent
      I fully agree with you. I can't wait for the day that electric vehicles become more the norm. Hell, where I live they're really hard to come by and extremely expensive to boot. Tesla won't come to...

      I fully agree with you. I can't wait for the day that electric vehicles become more the norm. Hell, where I live they're really hard to come by and extremely expensive to boot. Tesla won't come to my country as we don't offer tax breaks for electric vehicles, which is a real shame IMO.

      4 votes
    3. [3]
      0d_billie
      Link Parent
      Smoking is definitely on the way out, and I'm looking forward to that immensely (even as a former smoker who has the occasional backslide).

      Smoking is definitely on the way out, and I'm looking forward to that immensely (even as a former smoker who has the occasional backslide).

      3 votes
      1. wycy
        Link Parent
        Smoking is on the way out, but vaping is huge now. It'd be interesting to see a graph of "number of teens addicted to nicotine per capita" over the years. I'd imagine it's been falling for decades...

        Smoking is on the way out, but vaping is huge now. It'd be interesting to see a graph of "number of teens addicted to nicotine per capita" over the years. I'd imagine it's been falling for decades and suddenly shot up since 2010.

        8 votes
      2. Adys
        Link Parent
        Stay strong :) huge respect to all the smokers who quit.

        Stay strong :) huge respect to all the smokers who quit.

        3 votes
  3. [13]
    Wes
    (edited )
    Link
    I'm not even close to a vegetarian, but I can very easily see eating animal meat becoming a big faux pas. It seems quite clear to me that lab-grown meat is a more ethical alternative, and...

    I'm not even close to a vegetarian, but I can very easily see eating animal meat becoming a big faux pas. It seems quite clear to me that lab-grown meat is a more ethical alternative, and functionally there should be no difference. I also expect that insect farming will become more important in the coming years.

    Responses to both of these are often that it "seems gross". Well, give it time. Cultural norms adjust, and the need for alternate food sources is going to increase.

    It's not going to happen overnight though. We've already exhausted the majority of our arable land, and farm animals can use land that is less-than-desirable. We simply can't afford to reduce the amount of calories being produced right now, which means that factory farming will have to be a slow decline as alternative sources of calories ramp up.

    I hope it happens though. It will help us reduce CO2 emissions, and will result in more ethical treatment of living creatures.

    I'm more than willing to eat lab-grown or plant-based hamburgers to achieve that goal. I hope others agree.

    28 votes
    1. [5]
      nothis
      Link Parent
      I have weirdly strong feelings about this. It seems inevitable that lab meat will replace animal farming and thinking of that, I feel that slight sense of disgust that drives vegetarians: how on...

      I have weirdly strong feelings about this. It seems inevitable that lab meat will replace animal farming and thinking of that, I feel that slight sense of disgust that drives vegetarians: how on earth can we kill an animal just to eat it? That question will have even less of an answer the moment we get real alternatives like that. I'm looking forward to it.

      6 votes
      1. [4]
        nobody
        Link Parent
        Might be a bit cynical, but that's just part of how life works: animals killing other animals to eat. Humans are not special in this regard.

        how on earth can we kill an animal just to eat it?

        Might be a bit cynical, but that's just part of how life works: animals killing other animals to eat. Humans are not special in this regard.

        7 votes
        1. [3]
          nothis
          Link Parent
          Well, I agree with the "that's how life works" part and I eat meat. But humans are special in this regard. Lab meat is definitely not how life works, it kinda changes our concept of "meat" on...

          Well, I agree with the "that's how life works" part and I eat meat. But humans are special in this regard. Lab meat is definitely not how life works, it kinda changes our concept of "meat" on quite a fundamental level.

          2 votes
          1. [2]
            nobody
            Link Parent
            Of course we are special because we can artificially grow meat, but my point is more concerned with the fact that we are not fundamentally different from other animals from an evolutionary...

            Of course we are special because we can artificially grow meat, but my point is more concerned with the fact that we are not fundamentally different from other animals from an evolutionary standpoint. Our ancestors had been eating, among others, meat to survive.

            1 vote
            1. nothis
              Link Parent
              IMO that has always been a reasonable argument to make against eating meat being inherently cruel. But there are counter-arguments. Modern life has become so complicated, that it's no longer...

              IMO that has always been a reasonable argument to make against eating meat being inherently cruel. But there are counter-arguments.

              Modern life has become so complicated, that it's no longer necessary or even particularly efficient to eat meat. So the question of why we continue to do it is no longer one of nature (except, perhaps, animal instinct) but one of comfort or taste. I long felt that, as a meat-eater, I couldn't keep up a discussion with a vegetarian (to be fair: never initialized by them, in my experience vegetarians are never preachy!) about the ethics of eating meat. It's plain not necessary anymore and the arguments against it are compelling. I've concluded that my stubborn insistence to keep eating meat is irrational, I have no deeper reason to do so.

              Now artificial meat changes this argument completely. All the ethics of it are suddenly gone. It's technology potentially solving an ethical dilemma of mine in a really unusual, once-in-a-lifetime way. Things that were true about eating meat for eons are potentially turned upside down in a span of a few decades. I just find that fascinating and freeing. And convenient.

              5 votes
    2. [5]
      0d_billie
      Link Parent
      A lot of people I know who have turned vegetarian or vegan (or at least dramatically reduced their meat consumption) cite CO2 emissions as one of the main reasons for doing so. It certainly feels...

      A lot of people I know who have turned vegetarian or vegan (or at least dramatically reduced their meat consumption) cite CO2 emissions as one of the main reasons for doing so. It certainly feels like there is a lot more awareness over the damage that the meat industry does to the environment than there was even a couple of years ago.
      I'm actually quite keen to try different kinds of meat alternative steak, burgers, etc. Many that I've had so far have been extremely good!

      5 votes
      1. [4]
        teaearlgraycold
        Link Parent
        I’m not quite vegetarian, but I recently reduced my meat consumption to one meal per week (usually chicken). I didn’t make the change because of the ethics of how we treat animals. That makes it...

        I’m not quite vegetarian, but I recently reduced my meat consumption to one meal per week (usually chicken). I didn’t make the change because of the ethics of how we treat animals. That makes it an all or nothing decision. But 90% less meat means I am 90% of the way to a vegetarian carbon footprint.

        3 votes
        1. vektor
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          I know this is not your personal position, neither is it mine, but I disagree. You can believe that we treat animals badly and that we should stop it, and still weigh the suffering you cause and...

          I didn’t make the change because of the ethics of how we treat animals. That makes it an all or nothing decision.

          I know this is not your personal position, neither is it mine, but I disagree. You can believe that we treat animals badly and that we should stop it, and still weigh the suffering you cause and your inability to stop animal cruelty entirely against the inconvenience of completely switching to veganism; and then you can decide that a cut to 90% is what you can contribute.

          6 votes
        2. [2]
          bloup
          Link Parent
          I don’t really understand what you mean by this. Can you explain?

          I didn’t make the change because of the ethics of how we treat animals. That makes it an all or nothing decision.

          I don’t really understand what you mean by this. Can you explain?

          2 votes
          1. teaearlgraycold
            Link Parent
            I tend to see ethics as black and white. If something is wrong you must absolutely avoid it as much as possible.

            I tend to see ethics as black and white. If something is wrong you must absolutely avoid it as much as possible.

            1 vote
    3. autumn
      Link Parent
      I’ve been a vegetarian for a long time. I’m really looking forward to lab-grown meat! I have a feeling my stomach is going to hate me the first few times I eat it, since I haven’t had meat in over...

      I’ve been a vegetarian for a long time. I’m really looking forward to lab-grown meat! I have a feeling my stomach is going to hate me the first few times I eat it, since I haven’t had meat in over a decade, but boy howdy is meat a great source of so many things.

      4 votes
    4. KelMonstah
      Link Parent
      I've been enjoying things like the Beyond Meat burgers - though honestly they're no better for you than traditional meat, but definitely better for the environment. I think a lot of people jumped...

      I've been enjoying things like the Beyond Meat burgers - though honestly they're no better for you than traditional meat, but definitely better for the environment. I think a lot of people jumped on that bandwagon thinking it was also a healthier alternative to meat - it's not.

      I've been maintaining a largely pescatarian diet for some time now - trying to do something about my egregious cholesterol. It has helped a lot, though! As well as regular short walks. Generally though I do maintain a fins+feathers diet (poultry and fish) but lean toward the fish more often than not.

      It'll be good, I think, for everyone if we can curb our meat consumption.

      3 votes
  4. [2]
    vegai
    Link
    I think all the jobs that get automatized will quickly move into the category of "we forced people to do WHAT for sustenance?" That will probably include almost everything. I'm hoping that the...

    I think all the jobs that get automatized will quickly move into the category of "we forced people to do WHAT for sustenance?" That will probably include almost everything. I'm hoping that the idea of labor as a fountain of human dignity will be a distasteful idea in the future, but it doesn't look too good right now.

    19 votes
    1. Saigot
      Link Parent
      I think a lot of jobs will be seen in the same way we look at Victorian era poor houses and coal min[o/e]rs

      I think a lot of jobs will be seen in the same way we look at Victorian era poor houses and coal min[o/e]rs

      7 votes
  5. [11]
    EgoEimi
    Link
    I strongly believe that society becomes more moral as education and wealth increase. Society will eventually become post-scarcity or close enough to it. Animal exploitation I too think that future...

    I strongly believe that society becomes more moral as education and wealth increase. Society will eventually become post-scarcity or close enough to it.

    Animal exploitation

    I too think that future human society will look at animal exploitation with universal disgust. I don't think it will happen in 100 years, but I think it is inevitable for both ethical and environmental reasons.

    Criminality

    I think the same as the commenter you linked: future humans will disapprove of our current methods of dealing with criminals. They will find the labelling of criminals as "monsters" to be ridiculous. Such a label places the criminals outside human society when really criminals are produced by society: through neglect.

    Sex crimes

    Now, I anticipate this to be controversial: I think that future humans will disapprove of how severely we ostracise and punish sex criminals, like pedophiles. We already understand that people have no control over their sexuality. Chronophilia is one dimension of sexuality. I observe that many people, gay or straight, feel increasingly free to explore their sexualities and fetishes. I suspect that people will develop sympathy for those who have acquired sexual inclinations through no fault of their own, and they will want support (therapy and perhaps even simulations) to be given to people with sexual inclinations that happen to be socially incompatible. I think that this would happen if a few hundred years if not one hundred.

    Urbanism and land use

    As society approaches post-scarcity and people either work less or work in knowledge roles that allow them work remotely more often at home, people will want more out of their neighbourhoods. I think that future humans will find many current urban models — especially those with — to be ugly, inefficient, and frankly boring and unsociable. There is already a growing trend where younger people want to live in culturally vibrant, walkable-bikeable cities with proximity to nature. Mixed-use development will no longer be novel: it'll be the assumed default. Many local roads will be converted into lush green plaza-like spaces restricted to pedestrians, cyclists, and service vehicles. Ubiquitous mass transit and self-driving cars will connect people for longer distance travels. Future apartment buildings will be semi-modular and flexible, allowing residents to easily modify floor plans after construction to accommodate novel living arrangements: post-nuclear families, intergenerational households, co-housing, two families living together as one, households with 3 or more partners instead of the traditional 2, and so on.

    15 votes
    1. vektor
      Link Parent
      I'm not sure the developed world isn't already there. Most of the demand for material goods is to some degree artificially inflated to force us to work. How expensive is a rice-and-beans diet per...
      • Exemplary

      Society will eventually become post-scarcity or close enough to it.

      I'm not sure the developed world isn't already there. Most of the demand for material goods is to some degree artificially inflated to force us to work. How expensive is a rice-and-beans diet per day? We can easily afford to feed, clothe and house everyone. We just decide not to, because to keep enough people working to keep the growth machine going, we need to force the bulk of them.

      Imagine how many people could go home right now if the goal was to just maintain basic needs for everyone.
      Advertisers can all go home. Every person producing a product that only gets sold because of ads can go home too. People developing new products: Home. And the myriad of people tied up in that chain in more indirect ways.

      Post scarcity is here, we just didn't notice. I'm not sure things will change in that regard, unless political and societal awareness changes.

      The argument that post-scarcity will change people's lives fundamentally could have worked just as well during previous industrial revolutions. Yet here we are. 100 years ago, if you knew the tech we would have now, you'd think we'd all be kicking back by now.

      That said, I'm fully convinced that almost all humans will be unemployable in 100 years. Computers will outperform us in almost every way. There will be very little actual need for the things we still can do better than machines. The question is whether this will be an utopia or dystopia: Whether we the people are in control and are sipping drinks on the beach while the robots clean up the mess we made in the previous centuries; Or whether Bezos' brain in a jar will be the single stakeholder, amassing all the wealth in the world, and the rest barely scrapes by...

      Hard to tell. In any case I think the future 100 years from now will be significantly dominated by what happens in AI, politics, space exploration and climate change.

      14 votes
    2. [7]
      Wes
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      I feel similarly on the topic of sex crimes. There's such a hysteria around the topic, but it's clear that nobody would make the decision to be a pedophile. We're blaming people who had no choice...

      I feel similarly on the topic of sex crimes. There's such a hysteria around the topic, but it's clear that nobody would make the decision to be a pedophile. We're blaming people who had no choice in the matter. It's far more important that we offer counselling and support systems for these people rather than demonize them. This will lower instances of child abuse, by allowing people to get the help they need.

      This is something that seems so blindingly obvious to me, but is an opinion I wouldn't share in good company. I hope too that we can get past the hysteria and talk about this topic more plainly.

      I agree with all of your other points too, but wanted to reinforce this one specifically because it's a difficult topic.


      edit: There's been a few discussions sparked by this comment. I feel that perhaps I was not clear on one point, and that's my fault because the original context was of sex crimes. However to clarify: there is a distinction between pedophiles and child molesters.

      A pedophile has an attraction to children. A child molester acts on that attraction, and abuses a relationship of power. It's important that we understand this distinction because only one of these groups has actually committed a crime.

      So when I say that it's unfair to blame someone who has no choice in the matter, I want to be clear that I'm referring specifically to a pedophile that has not committed a crime. It should of course remain criminal to abuse children, and I don't think anyone would argue against that.

      Whether somebody has acted on that attraction or not though, it's still essential that we offer the appropriate counselling and resources to ensure they have ways of coping. That is the only way we can improve things.

      10 votes
      1. [2]
        Grendel
        Link Parent
        I've got to speak up on this one. You are right that people don't choose to have pedophilia desires, but they do choose what they do with those desires. I have strong desires to view pornography,...

        We're blaming people who had no choice in the matter

        I've got to speak up on this one.

        You are right that people don't choose to have pedophilia desires, but they do choose what they do with those desires. I have strong desires to view pornography, however I choose not to give into those desires because I feel that pornography is wrong, and also my wife would be very hurt by it. I can recognize that giving into my desires would hurt someone else, and act accordingly.

        I'm not trying to say that pedophilia is easy to overcome, rather I'm saying that I believe there are people who struggle with those desires but never give into them. It is possible to get help.

        I feel strongly about this because I'm a foster dad of two children that were sexually tortured for several years before they were finally rescued from that house. Living with that trauma, seeing it's effects first hand makes it hard not to get angry. I do believe that the social stigma prevents some people from getting help, and that needs to change. However, it's important to remember that these crimes are still heinous.

        10 votes
        1. Wes
          Link Parent
          Yes, and I think I wasn't clear on this point. I've updated my comment to make a distinction between pedophiles who don't act on their attraction, and child molesters who do. For the most part I...

          You are right that people don't choose to have pedophilia desires, but they do choose what they do with those desires.

          Yes, and I think I wasn't clear on this point. I've updated my comment to make a distinction between pedophiles who don't act on their attraction, and child molesters who do. For the most part I was referring to the former group.

          Thank you for allowing me to clarify that.

          6 votes
      2. [4]
        0d_billie
        Link Parent
        Oh mate, I had a huge argument with an ex about paedophiles and how I think that in the future they won't be as vilified as they are today, and that we will find ways to help and support them...

        Oh mate, I had a huge argument with an ex about paedophiles and how I think that in the future they won't be as vilified as they are today, and that we will find ways to help and support them without demonising them. Her argument was basically "it's disgusting and think of the children." I thought that considering her sexuality, it was quite ironic that she was quoting the same argument that people used to (and sadly still do in some places) peddle about homosexuality and gay marriage. She didn't agree about the irony.
        It should have been an interesting discussion, but too often when the P-word gets brought up, all sense of decorum is thrown out. Which is a shame, because I agree that there is valuable debate to be had, which would save an awful lot of children an awful lot of trauma, and would not punish people for aspects of their personality and brain chemistry that they cannot help.

        7 votes
        1. [3]
          Omnicrola
          Link Parent
          I understand the comparison, but I think it's one that probably will never be received well. In the context of homosexuality, society has moved from "that's disgusting and immoral" toward "it's...

          I thought that considering her sexuality, it was quite ironic that she was quoting the same argument that people used to (and sadly still do in some places) peddle about homosexuality and gay marriage. She didn't agree about the irony

          I understand the comparison, but I think it's one that probably will never be received well. In the context of homosexuality, society has moved from "that's disgusting and immoral" toward "it's not doing anyone harm, so it's ok". However in the context of pedophilia, it very clearly causes harm to a child, and always will, and people rightly have a visceral and strong reaction to the very concept of it. The problem is allowing that reaction to influence our response. As @Wes pointed out, given how the vast majority of society responds to crimes involving children, nobody sane would choose to become a pedophile. The solution (as with so many crimes) is not to punish people harder, but to try and give them the tools and resources to help themselves and heal their own damage.

          10 votes
          1. Silbern
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            I dunno. You're right, in that pedophilia will likely always provoke a stronger counterreaction to being LGBT, but I think most people in the 1950's would've very similiarly struggled to see how...

            I dunno. You're right, in that pedophilia will likely always provoke a stronger counterreaction to being LGBT, but I think most people in the 1950's would've very similiarly struggled to see how we would ever change position from condeming alternative sexual orientations and gender identities. At least in the US, being gay was often seen as an offense against god, and as a willful choice - people choose to be gay, so it's alright to punish them. Research on pedophiles is extremely limited, because very few will willfully identify themselves as one and nobody wants to say they research pedophilia for a living, but from the limited work that has been done, pedophilia seems to be somewhat of a combination between a fetish and a sexual orientation. There seems to be a link to people being abused and having a significantly greater chance of being a pedophile, which to me suggests that there are environmental stimuly at play (like a fetish), but at the same time, it doesn't seem like you can recondition someone away from it, and there are many that claim to have always been that way.

            From that, I wouldn't be surprised if in the future, we see pedophilia more akin to a mental disorder, of sorts. People with touretts' syndrome often suffer from a specific tick, and sometimes that tick is uncontrollable and highly offensive swearing. I think most people, if they knew that someone had tourettes, wouldn't feel like they should be personally blamed for having the condition, because they didn't willfully gain it. Likewise, while society will likely never accept pedophilic acts, I wouldn't be surprised if our understanding changes from "pedophiles are disgusting individuals who choose to prey on vulnerable children" to "pedophiles are people who were unfortunate enough to suffer from a syndrome that encourages them to do illegal acts, and most of them likely don't act on their feelings".

            6 votes
          2. patience_limited
            Link Parent
            Tangentially related, I'd like to believe that in 100 years, we'll have a more nuanced approach to age-appropriate sex education and affirmative consent.

            Tangentially related, I'd like to believe that in 100 years, we'll have a more nuanced approach to age-appropriate sex education and affirmative consent.

            4 votes
    3. [2]
      0d_billie
      Link Parent
      I would love to see more movement towards this within my lifetime. I love the idea of smaller, more communal towns, rather than sprawling, impersonal cities. Hopefully one of the benefits to the...

      Urbanism and land use

      I would love to see more movement towards this within my lifetime. I love the idea of smaller, more communal towns, rather than sprawling, impersonal cities. Hopefully one of the benefits to the pandemic will be that it becomes less necessary to move to the largest city you can in order to facilitate getting the best job you can, as working from home becomes more of a thing.

      2 votes
      1. moonbathers
        Link Parent
        Unfortunately, smaller towns are less efficient and have an outsize impact on the environment, so if we want to minimize and weather the impacts of climate change over the next century we need to...

        Unfortunately, smaller towns are less efficient and have an outsize impact on the environment, so if we want to minimize and weather the impacts of climate change over the next century we need to continue to urbanize, just in a way that's more efficient than we are now.

        7 votes
  6. [6]
    Kremor
    (edited )
    Link
    Mental health treatments, in 100 years will see the stuff that we do today similar to how we see things like lobotomies now. Rigidity of gender expression/expectations, not really sure about this...
    • Mental health treatments, in 100 years will see the stuff that we do today similar to how we see things like lobotomies now.

    • Rigidity of gender expression/expectations, not really sure about this one but one can dream.

    10 votes
    1. [2]
      EscReality
      Link Parent
      Not really the direction you were going, but I think future humanity will look at the current generations view on Gender as something very extreme and naive. A lot of what is currently being...

      Rigidity of gender expression/expectations, not really sure about this one but one can dream.

      Not really the direction you were going, but I think future humanity will look at the current generations view on Gender as something very extreme and naive. A lot of what is currently being socially accepted is not based in science and that will not be looked back on favorably.

      6 votes
      1. Kremor
        Link Parent
        I was hinting at that, but I don't think we'll get at that point in 100 years.

        I was hinting at that, but I don't think we'll get at that point in 100 years.

        3 votes
    2. [3]
      milkbones_4_bigelow
      Link Parent
      Very interesting. Care to elaborate? Do you mean in terms of pharma, therapeutic techniques, both? Are there any treatments in particular you think will be first out the door? If so... a) What...

      Mental health treatments, in 100 years will see the stuff that we do today similar to how we see thinks like lobotomies now.

      Very interesting. Care to elaborate? Do you mean in terms of pharma, therapeutic techniques, both? Are there any treatments in particular you think will be first out the door? If so...

      a) What currently leads you to believe that?
      b) What would you expect to be the alternative?

      1 vote
      1. Kremor
        Link Parent
        This few things: In psychiatry there's an excessive focus on symptoms rather than causes. Using medication without a clear understanding why they work and why sometimes they don't is pretty awful,...

        a) What currently leads you to believe that?

        This few things:

        • In psychiatry there's an excessive focus on symptoms rather than causes.
        • Using medication without a clear understanding why they work and why sometimes they don't is pretty awful, specially when the side effects can be quite horrific.
        • Therapy is closer to dating than visiting any other medical practitioner. If a patient feels unsatisfied with their current therapist they need to ask themselves if it would be better to look for another therapist.
        • There needs to be better acknowledgement that psychiatry treatment and therapy can only do so much, specially when an individual has an impoverished life. In cases like a bigger societal change needs to happen.
        • Socially, mental health is still seem as a minor issue, this can affect the availability and quality of such services.

        b) What would you expect to be the alternative?

        I think in the future we'll have a more holistic understanding on how different factors: genetics, brain chemistry, socio-economic status, and individual issues affect the psyche of an person, this will led to better treatments.

        5 votes
      2. Avocado
        Link Parent
        Not Op but: Actual procedures and practices that could change is how patients are treated in mental health hospitals (shocker, currently not great), as well as medication types, combinations and...

        Not Op but:

        Actual procedures and practices that could change is how patients are treated in mental health hospitals (shocker, currently not great), as well as medication types, combinations and prescriptions of said drugs have changed greatly in my lifetime alone.

        Secondly, cultural stigma around mental illness will change. Look into the history of "hysteria" to see how those were used to systematically dehumane groups of people.

        1 vote
  7. nacho
    Link
    Modern day slavery and its prevalence in a host of global industries. Modern day state indoctrination camps. Monoculture and the eradication of so many habitats and the dire consequence to...

    Modern day slavery and its prevalence in a host of global industries.

    Modern day state indoctrination camps.

    Monoculture and the eradication of so many habitats and the dire consequence to biodiversity.

    How large and opulent western housing/gardens are.

    All the space spent on private cars and parking (and other aspects of car-culture).

    Wasting clean water and food.

    Post-fact politics.

    The view that schooling and knowledge is something to be negative towards.

    Hopefully the horrendous inefficiency of international politics and the failure that is the UN. If countries were held to account to their agreed international obligations, or the international society could hold countries to account, things would be so much better for so many hundreds of millions of people every day.

    10 votes
  8. [2]
    CALICO
    Link
    Hopefully, the way we treat our dying. I could write up a long post—as is my custom—but I've had a long day. Suffice to say that here and now, in the year 2020, I'm confused & disgusted at how we...

    Hopefully, the way we treat our dying.

    I could write up a long post—as is my custom—but I've had a long day. Suffice to say that here and now, in the year 2020, I'm confused & disgusted at how we tend to treat our pets with more respect, and grant them more dignity than we do to our own elderly and terminally ill.
    When our animals are suffering, we give them peace. When grandma is suffering, we put her in the hospital so we can keep her alive long enough to feel her organs slowly fail. We take away her agency, her autonomy, her right to self-determination, and force her to endure her death, on our terms.

    I hope the folks of the future have more empathy than we do, in the present.

    8 votes
    1. vektor
      Link Parent
      Yeah, I can see that. We're pretty authoritarian about the whole human rights thing. The german constitution prescribes Human dignity, Human rights, Liberty("free development of one's...

      Yeah, I can see that. We're pretty authoritarian about the whole human rights thing. The german constitution prescribes Human dignity, Human rights, Liberty("free development of one's personality") and Life in that order as foundational values of our society. The usual interpretation of that is that you can't even dismiss your own rights: You can't choose to die, because it violates your dignity. (Currently changing for cases in which a death would actually be more dignified.) In copyright law, which is an extension of the "free development of one's personality" aspect, we do not allow you to rid yourself of your rights. Copyleft or Creative commons area legal gray area, because we treat your work as part of your personality; and you can't just rid yourself of your personality.

      No thought whatsoever regarding whether you might share those values and want the same interpretation for yourself. Which, granted, is usually kind of inconceivable. Who wouldn't want dignity, human rights, liberty and life.... But sometimes you just disagree on what is and isn't freedom or dignity.

      3 votes
  9. patience_limited
    Link
    A few not-previously-mentioned selections from my 2120 society's rear-view mirror: Future citizens will be utterly baffled by our blindness to systemic fragility, and lack of planning for...

    A few not-previously-mentioned selections from my 2120 society's rear-view mirror:

    Future citizens will be utterly baffled by our blindness to systemic fragility, and lack of planning for resilience. E.g. "They knew the Earth's magnetic field could collapse or the sun could flare, and they didn't harden electronics? Old nuclear reactors could melt down, and they located them near cities? The stock markets could crash on a mere glitch? There were no medical and food reserves for plagues? Every possible resource was used to the capitalist maximum, with no slack or planning for surges and declines in demand? There was no meteorite defense system? One person could launch a nuclear weapon strike? Only a single genetic library of plant seeds?" You get the idea, and I'm assuming our descendants (presuming survivors) will have had to clean up the results of one or more catastrophes along these lines.

    2120 may have a science of cognitive toxicology, and they'll wonder at how we came to consume an informational diet of junk food memes, radioactive ideologies that harm multitudes and are impossible to clean up, plus synthesized viral propaganda. It will be mandatory to discard any data that lacks a verifiable quantum-unbreakable hash and blockchain of source history. Personalized (and personally verifiable) AI curation will filter and ration your feeds to ensure your long-term mental health remains sound and connected to objective reality. There will be legally specified limits on work exposures to traumatic content, and paid time to recuperate in natural settings without connectivity.

    7 votes
  10. HrBingR
    Link
    I think a big one will be how we've treated the earth, alongside climate change deniers. While there is a lot of awareness surrounding climate change, and some countries are doing something about...

    I think a big one will be how we've treated the earth, alongside climate change deniers. While there is a lot of awareness surrounding climate change, and some countries are doing something about it, not nearly are doing nearly enough to turn around the direction we're heading in.

    I think 100 years from now the world will look back on this period in time ashamed of how previous generations treated the planet.

    6 votes
  11. WendigoTulpa
    Link
    I wonder what people's relationship to technology will be. Will we look back to 2020 and think "Gosh I can't believe we were so blindly accepting any and all new tech", or "I can't believe people...

    I wonder what people's relationship to technology will be. Will we look back to 2020 and think "Gosh I can't believe we were so blindly accepting any and all new tech", or "I can't believe people were so precious about their privacy".

    So much of science and technology is based on somehow "improving" our lives, whether that means health, convenience, entertainment, efficiency, etc... Is it possible that dealing with the ravages of climate change would make people more skeptical of being all "Ooh wireless and voice controlled
    yes please!".

    Generally nowadays when you think of someone living a primitive lifestyle off-grid you imagine some guy in a cabin in the woods, chopping wood, hunting, fishing, etc... Maybe they have a solar panel? I wonder what people's concept of primitive subsistence living will be in the future. A lot of opinions seem to say that climate change will make people more conscious of their consumption, but people also say that overwhelming technological novelties will be needed to deal with climate change as well. Will this make people more conscious (and hopefully skeptical) of technology? I'm not sure how a society based on needing MORE money, MORE space, MORE fun, MORE everything can possibly be conscientious of their consumption. I'm afraid people will sacrifice their primitive, animal survival intuitions in favor of more efficient sMaRt technology that guarantees a lower carbon footprint, not realizing the lowest carbon footprint is just not having it at all.

    6 votes
  12. grungegun
    Link
    Child stars. A lot of the child star that appear in film/performances/etc seem to have real mental health issues later on. Justin Bieber is a good example, but there are more. There are people who...

    Child stars. A lot of the child star that appear in film/performances/etc seem to have real mental health issues later on. Justin Bieber is a good example, but there are more. There are people who deal with it pretty well, but there are also a lot of cases of people being damaged mentally for a long time after.

    6 votes
  13. WMWMWMWMWMWMWMWMWMWM
    Link
    I think "specieism" will be very sad to look back on, trying to eliminate certain species entirely, wrecking entire ecosystems without a second thought for construction, flooding other "lower"...

    I think "specieism" will be very sad to look back on, trying to eliminate certain species entirely, wrecking entire ecosystems without a second thought for construction, flooding other "lower" animals' enviroments with poison with no concern, so on.

    4 votes
  14. Tygrak
    Link
    Optimistic: -Us not doing more about global warming earlier, for example viewing coal power plants as insanity -The world being mostly ok with incredible wealth inequality -People taking...

    Optimistic:
    -Us not doing more about global warming earlier, for example viewing coal power plants as insanity
    -The world being mostly ok with incredible wealth inequality
    -People taking unnecessary risks, for example not using self driving cars

    Pessimistic:
    -People not living in mega cities, causing inefficiency
    -People taking lots of unnecessary risks, taken to the extreme, for example - using basically every drug (alcohol, smoking and everything else)
    -People being individualistic and unique, thus selfish, everyone should be the same to not cause any conflicts and to maximize efficiency
    -Not pursuing genetic engineering to make everyone "perfect", because of ethics
    -People "wasting" most of their days not working, not being productive - spending their time playing videogames, watching movies, taking walks, basically most hobbies, slacking off in their work not actually working

    4 votes
  15. mrbig
    (edited )
    Link
    How physical movie production still is.

    How physical movie production still is.

    2 votes
  16. Pascia
    Link
    its a letter to the guy, who read this in 2120. We are uncivilized peoples and lives in shit cities. Yes, we arent "genetically engineered". Our genes are totally chaos and full of diseases and...

    its a letter to the guy, who read this in 2120.

    We are uncivilized peoples and lives in shit cities. Yes, we arent "genetically engineered". Our genes are totally chaos and full of diseases and weaknesses. We couldnt feed all peoples, many people are starved. Cancer, influenza, kidney failure cant be healed yet. Its funny but real.

    I mentioned this, we live in shitty cities. For this reason we use micro mobile cabins named "cars" for transportation. They are powered with refined ancient dinosaurs and plant remains -thats fossil fuels- that is very important for our strange community. World is run by this fuel. It can give really big money to desserts. Peoples declared war for this fuel. Every year, thousands of lives die for that.

    Did you know you can buy a real gun in 2020. A real gun can kill someone, as a normal people, for no reason.

    And global warming not my fault. Dont blame me ! We have to pollute to thrive. Haha sorry.

    2 votes
  17. moocow1452
    Link
    We will likely be looked upon as children with our inability to work together to solve our own problems, constant need for affirmations and indulgences, and our loyalties being the unspoken...

    We will likely be looked upon as children with our inability to work together to solve our own problems, constant need for affirmations and indulgences, and our loyalties being the unspoken anchorpoint for our moralities. Whether this is through the eyes of a society that hasn't gotten over any of that or far removed from our folley, I can't say.

    Or we extinct the planet, and nobody can judge us again. That's something right there.

    1 vote
  18. Comment removed by site admin
    Link