this post was submitted on 16 May 2026
205 points (95.6% liked)
Greentext
8230 readers
258 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Huh. I can't come up with a reason for why molesting baby Hitler feels so much more wrong than killing baby Hitler. You could even make the argument that it's less wrong.
Is it just because of how killing and death is so normalized in all of modern media?
Society disensitises us to the idea of killing bad people, all the movies and TV you watch and games you play will have you kill someone because they're an enemy or a bad person. No media justifies the idea of molesting someone because they're a bad guy.
I mean, not anymore. Prison rape jokes used to be all the rage
I think a lot of people tend to externalize the consequences of murder as simply a matter of course. Like, a lot of people don't think of themselves as murderers, but do think that if push comes to shove, or if shit hits the fan, or if worse comes to worst, they'd be able to dig deep and find the strength within themselves to "do what needs to be done" and "protect their family" or whatever.
In this sense, murder is just "work." It's a means to an end, if an extreme one.
But, basically no one feels this way about molestation. I mean, how could you? There's no obvious connection between action and effect; the prompt says there is, but you just have to take that on faith. It's probably easier to just commit the murder, anyway, which means there's a degree of "indulgence" inherent to this that makes it feel much more gross. Plus, most people know this intuitively: we fix problems either by stopping them (murder, prison) or repairing them (therapy, support, love), and molestation is neither of those. Intuitively, it seems like the molestation would make things worse, actually.
So, in a rule-utilitarianism sense, I think people feel that murder is horrible, but permissible. Molestation is just horrible.
Also, regarding all of the above points, there's a virtue ethics angle to what each of those options might say about what kind of person you are, even if they both yielded the same outcome.
To be fair, he was innocent as a baby obviously.
But much easier to imagine woodchipping him than well, the fucked up shit anon spouted.
Maybe we are all different kinds of sick?
Frankly, I don't see how killing baby Hitler is not... extremely obviously morally superior to molesting baby Hitler.
You can kill anybody nearly instantly.
'Molestation' implies... over a signifcant amount of time.
It also implies that this is done in lieu of directly killing baby Hitler.
So you've now generated an even more fucked up Hitler.
Who will... regardless of how their time travel affrcted lifepath plays out... well they'll have been molested. As a core memory.
That... seems to me to be less moral, causes more Hitler-suffering, unnecessarily.
You've minimized total suffering, via killing baby Hitler.
... this is all assuming that just... doing either of these things somehow results in Hitler not coming to power, WW2 doesn't happen, holocaust doesn't happen.
Frankly I also do not see anything near a guaranteed causality to 'molesting baby Hitler' -> 'somehow WW2 does not happen'.
Whereas it is at least semi-plausible that killing baby Hitler at least could result in ww2/holocaust not happening... I guess the ... Strasserists just stay in control of the Nazis? And do not have a strangely charismatic firebrand to massively expand the movement?
So it also just seems very impractical, unlikely that molesting baby Hitler would achieve the presumably desired aim.
And it also assumes that these are your only two possible actions.
Of course the entire thing is ludicrous is the sense of hinging on perfect foreknowledge, and time travel, which is fundamentally paradoxical, and/or results quantum suicide/immortality type nonsense, and/or in the Red Alert timeline.
Oh god, and we essentially have to assume that this will be the only possible instance of time travel that ever happens, otherwise we potentially get into a kind of battling time travellers scenario ala whatever the fuck the Terminator series is doing now, and/or just a reality where many people can do time travel.
Why not just do... teleportation, and either kill or molest Trump or Netanyahu, right now?
I think I'd again conclude that telefragging them would be morally superior.
See this one 4chan creep there is why all those time travelers are shooting everyone who goes to see baby Hitler. We could have just killed baby Hitler in peace with Marx but someone had to and ruin things. Was this SCHOPENHAUER? IT WAS YOU WASN'T YOU SCHOPENHAUER ADMIT IT
I may not properly understand quantum immortality but I suppose it is technically 'possible' that I might be schopenhauer, in some sense, so... uh ... yes, maybe?
Typical people deal with rape, murder is far rarer so there’s less “reality” to it. Go to a war torn country and you’d get a different response. Possivly “who is hitler?”
But, more specifically, the kill baby Hitler question already exists in the social ether to be finished through call and respond. Branching into molestation requires recontextualization which pulls us into reality. It’s no longer call and respond, and you’ve just asked someone if they’d molest a baby.
See for me I don't think killing babies is any more or less appropriate. They are both horrifying questions that I can't understand anyone not being able to say "no" to either question.
If youre back in time you could just work to not create a genocidal piece of shit. Also, this presumes that he was the only problem - there were many other horrible people involved, so there would likely just be another to take his place anyway.
Both questions are just off the charts level wrong to me and worth reporting. Though I bet there were plenty of other things said in the chat which would have also fit this ban message.
Misplace him into an Orphanage, problem solved!
Big fucking oof. And I say that as someone who routinely ruins peoples’ days with my comments.
You’re not wrong to feel the way that you do. But I would recommend that you try to understand where others tend to draw the incredibly arbitrary violence line