this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2026
147 points (98.0% liked)

Not The Onion

22511 readers
782 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] medicsofanarchy@lemmy.world 33 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The FBI said the change was meant to account for the fact that some otherwise suitable candidates, including service members, may have engaged in the practice in places where it is legal and to accommodate applicants who may done so as a young child or have themselves been victims of sexual abuse.

So, "as a young child" if I used my allowance for sex instead of ice cream I would have been disqualified? Or if "as a young child" I was a victim of sexual abuse I would be disqualified? Because... reasons?

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 11 points 3 weeks ago

It's possible the question was "have you ever been involved in an exchange of sexual acts for money?"

If you did survival sex work as a child (<18) or had a very awful life experience very young, you might still have to truthfully answer that question yes and that sucks. Of course I'm sure they care more about accepting people that did the purchasing than the providing, since the government is now filled with a people who pay for sex, but either way I'm glad there is a decrease in stigma for those affected.

[–] Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What's more fucked up is that beastiality is not longer an automatic bar either...

[–] hemmes@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

Well, listen - we need to know the context a little better /s

[–] schwim@piefed.zip 13 points 3 weeks ago

That was my final barrier to employment.

[–] Wakmrow@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

My gfs response lives in my head "prostitution or soliciting?"

[–] Zirconium@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

This feels like less of a, "we want to hire people who had no other reason but to sell themselves," and more of a "lets hire sex traffickers"

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago

Epstein class wants to make sure the people doing the investigation are understanding....

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

While, morally, I don't GAF if someone exchanges money with another adult for sex, this seems like a very problematic development for an FBI agent specifically, given that legal or no it is heavily stigmatized in our culture. (And therefore, stupidly easy to use as a means of gaining leverage over an FBI agent.)

[–] Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago

It's only fair that they hold the rest of the bureau to the same standards as Kash Patel

[–] northernlights@lemmy.today 4 points 3 weeks ago

Now please do that with weed it's ridiculous. I started smoking here when it became legal here.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

Yet more evidence that stupid fascists can’t get laid without coercion.