Greenguy & Jim's Official Rage Cash Statement

[swedguy]

Swedguy's 2 cents!

Only thing that turns me on related to this thread is furrygirl's posts

[Lemmy]

Originally Posted by susanna

No one has ever said that people who promote the sleeping woman assault site were rapists. I do believe they are misguided, possibly have not read the text on the tour and instead they have read the justifications for the site. Then there is those that think making an "entertainment" site about hurting women is a good thing?

I personally am concerned with line crossing becoming the adult nets downfall (visa could care one day) and 2. what effect this has on the young people growing up.

Someone who slips a cock into their sleeping wife and does so because they know she doesnt mind has not raped her, he KNOWS she doesnt mind, she has somehow given consent.

This tour does not speak to consent in any way...and that is not what the owners are trying to tell you.

That's posibly one of the most condescending posts so far in this discussion. How 'bout this: I've seen the site, I've read everything on it and I think it's just fine the way it is. I've come to this conclusion entirely unassisted, because after all I do have a mind of my own and am capable of producing an independent thought. And I still disagree with you. I also believe that rape and any kind of coersion is wrong, sexually or otherwise. I also consider myself a reasonably descent and moral person. Is that so hard to understand?

[2ndChance]

Hi Furrygirl

Yes it was more of a ""society has a weird attitude about sex" using a polysyllabic. ( My communication social skills are not very good I work hard at being a good communicator somtimes my choice of words arenot the best. But when I use basic I didn't mean to offend)

I agree with you about the comparison of content and copy with the little april site. copy is what makes the fantasy artifically real.

[Stever]

I have only glanced at the site in question and have not thouroughly read all the promo text for it. And I don't need to. The one word in the title is all that's needed to make it EXTREMELY questionable. Will the site owners consider changing to title? who knows? I'm sure they are at least rethinking things a bit considering the flack the site is receiving (even as the cash flows in). They may very well get themselves in some trouble with that site (i dont have a clue where the law lies on this or if Visa will have a problem with it)

Susanna, I and many others are on your side on this but I find many of your posts very poorly worded. You are getting your point accross but you could be a little more tactfull. Otherwise people will just start skipping over your posts (some may already be doing so)


Oh yeah, and pass the

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by swedguy

Swedguy's 2 cents!

Only thing that turns me on related to this thread is furrygirl's posts

Uh, thank you?

[susanna]

Originally Posted by Stever

I have only glanced at the site in question and have not thouroughly read all the promo text for it. And I don't need to. The one word in the title is all that's needed to make it EXTREMELY questionable. Will the site owners consider changing to title? who knows? I'm sure they are at least rethinking things a bit considering the flack the site is receiving (even as the cash flows in). They may very well get themselves in some trouble with that site (i dont have a clue where the law lies on this or if Visa will have a problem with it)

Susanna, I and many others are on your side on this but I find many of your posts very poorly worded. You are getting your point accross but you could be a little more tactfull. Otherwise people will just start skipping over your posts (some may already be doing so)


Oh yeah, and pass the

ahhhh NOPE!!! I am purposely being abusive to ahhhh MEN??? to get my point across about respecting others.

Why the fuck should I respect anyone that doesn't respect women enough to consider that they might just like to have some consent.

I know that people are complaining about condescending posts and the like, they are assuming I am talking to them. I am not making blanket statements, many people already agree with me and some chose to post about it. Others don't post but speak privately about it. To each their own.

Still others come up with poorly thought out or worded explanations as to why they think that site is legal, not offensive to them (did they wonder if it is offensive to women? or do they care?)

I don't give a shit what people do in a consentual context but I will express my distaste and concern for non-consentual porn which people believe more and more to be "real"ity porn.

Heh people really do this shit.....I for one have a conscience...enough to speak out and say when I think something is going too far.

Got lots of attention so far right? The site owners are also sitting back saying "bad attention is just as great at getting the word out as good attention" everyone knows this marketing fact...just look at any post on GFY


You do what you gotta do and I make just as many apologies for hurting some feelings ha ha ha as rage does for making a violence against women site.

[Surfn]

[furrygirl]

Susanna, really, sometimes less is more, you know?

I find ethical and political discussions to be the most interesting things that come up on boards, and like other people here, I'm "on your side" in many ways, but it's hard to get people to listen to your side when you're saying that everyone who's not avidly agreeing with you supports rape. And I'm a *chick* saying that this time around, so maybe it might sounds more palatable coming from me.

I don't agree at all with the idea of "assaulting" sleeping women, but I also personally like fantasy, roleplay, and kink with my sex and porn, so long as it is clearly defined as fantasy. My problem with the site is about context and content-framing, which make all the difference in my mind. (Context is a great topic for banter, and I think anyone profiting from content that is not of themselves naked has sometime to say about how they frame their porn.)

I do think this is an open-ended discussion, and I'd love to see it keep going, so it's a shame that in your passion for women's rights, I think you're killing the thread.

Trixie (also female) and I both proposed that non-consensual fantasy sites provide some sort of disclaimer and make it abundantly clear to surfers that it's just roleplay. I see it as a good chance for webmasters to provide a smidge of education to their surfers about kinky lifestyles and about the important elements of trust, consent, and communication.

I think that roleplay is really fucking hot, and as an adult, I can see roleplay porn and say, "this is not real, these are actors", and it can still be fun. I think a move away from text that seemingly glorifies "real" non-consensual sex and a move towards "fantasy roleplay" is a good idea, and as I said before, attracts the real "fantasy" folk, and repels the scum you don't want to do business with anyhow. It seems like a win-win to me.

Do you have a sort of, well, positive solutions? Or, are you saying that any portrayal on non-consensual sex shouldn't exist at all? Content, or copy?

[Linkster]

After much thought and looking over my stories category on my link list (that was an eye-opener) and seeing that Rage has put a disclaimer on the mother-daughter tour - I believe I will be starting a little promoting of them

Being very old, it probably just takes me longer to get things to sink in

[docholly]

I've been following this post from the beginning reading all the pros and cons.. and i have the same internal feeling that i have when i hear GWB speak.. either your are "for" everything I say or you are not a patriot.. etc..

What, for me, it boils down to is that I have a choice. I, as a wm, can choose to promote or not promote sites that I personally find violates my ethics or just that I don't think I'd be able to do a good job at writing copy for. There are 1000's of sites out that that I can do a GOOD job promoting.

For example: I promote Trixie and all the sites that fall under WebWhoreBucks. I love her stuff, i love the sites, i love the writing and i love promoting her. (see my siggy if you want to promote her too)

BUT i do not promote her "bloody trixie" site myself. i do post her FHG on my TGP but I don't actively promote that site. I don't feel I could do justice to the copy I'd be writing. I don't feel I'd be able to portray that in such a manner that would respect what she is trying to do and sell the surfer at the same time. It's my option.

Likewise with RAGE.. there are some sites I instantly took to and some that I'll leave alone. This doesn't make me anti-fem, or promoting rape because i'm selling their Fucked Tits or Creamed feet sites.. just my preference as a wm.

Before the board crash a few years ago..i'd written a post on ethics among adult webmasters over a site i found while surfing that showed big "african' men in tribal dress with pictures stolen from the movie Shaka Zulu, fucking little white women they'd 'carried' off to their village.. I found it disgusting and was pretty angry about their stealing the pictures from Shaka. But what i realized after my anger settled down was the best way for me personally to 'rage' against this was to NOT promote that sponsor AND to portray interracial love in a good and positive way.. choices..

|blinky|

hmm for some reason i'm very wordy today..

[susanna]

Originally Posted by furrygirl

Susanna, really, sometimes less is more, you know?

I don't agree at all with the idea of "assaulting" sleeping women, but I also personally like fantasy, roleplay, and kink with my sex and porn, so long as it is clearly defined as fantasy. My problem with the site is about context and content-framing, which make all the difference in my mind.

Do you have a sort of, well, positive solutions? Or, are you saying that any portrayal on non-consensual sex shouldn't exist at all? Content, or copy?

If you have read all my posts then you know I dont have a problem with fantasy, I do however have a problem with the fantasy being about non-consentual sex. Its not thread killing to "say it like it is". You have chosen to keep this thread going too ha ha ha

I have also said that I would love to see a disclaimer (linkster, the mother daughter site is not an issue to me, consenting adults, related or not, can do as they please ADULTS...incest to me is about children...again my opinion but I am not varying from what my opinion is on consent and non-consent).

This is not about womens rights...I have never said it was about womens rights. At the moment it is womens rights being trampled on. I am not a feminist. I do not want women placed above men ya da ya da. I would like to see a smidge of consentualism.

I have also said in a post that a domain change would be half the battle. Of course this is not terribly hard but it means admitting something which I am not sure that the site owners will admit. Time will tell I guess.

I agree with some others that it could just get them in trouble one day which everyone else will pipe in and say "so its their business what do you care". I care that my business will be damaged by people pushing the limit.

I had a conversation with someone recently about how fuckin hot the site would be if they removed the non-consent. If they talked about sleeping-sex vs. sexual assault. Most everyone has had someone wake them up during sleep by slowly caressing, sucking or whatever. It is hot, it is pleasure. Heck I would buy em a new domain ha ha ha

The text still talks of non-consentualism which is not even the somnophilia kink. It is the sadist kink, the rapist kink what ever, its about harming women and taking what they want whether the gal wants it or not.

I have offered to re-write some text for them, no strings attached, if they didnt think it was hot they didnt have to use it.

I say portrayal of non-consent is never appropriate. Its not even a fantasy to have non-consentual sex. Sorry. It is true deviant behaviour.

I might even like a front of tour solo disclaimer that says "this is fantasy role play, we intend no harm, we dont want you to hurt women" etc.

What are your positive solutions?

[Coolegg]

The URL says it all... sleepASSAULT.com. And the text on the tour makes it a cut-and-dry case, IMO. It's not a sex-while-she's-sleeping fantasy site; it's a sexaul-ASSAULT-while-she's-not-conscious fantasy site.

There's no getting away from the word ASSAULT in the url and title, legally or ethically.

Not cool RageCash, IMO.

[swedguy]

as·sault

1.
A violent physical or verbal attack.

2.
a. A military attack, such as one launched against a fortified area or place.
b. The concluding stage of an attack in which close combat occurs with the enemy.

3. Law.
a. An unlawful threat or attempt to do bodily injury to another.
b. The act or an instance of unlawfully threatening or attempting to injure another.

4.
a. Law. Sexual assault.
b. The crime of rape.

[Jel]

Still others come up with poorly thought out or worded explanations as to why they think that site is legal, not offensive to them (did they wonder if it is offensive to women? or do they care?)

How about fem-dom sites that are offensive to guys? CBT type stuff, etc.? How about anal sites that are offensive to me? How about *any* site that is offensive to *me*? I think its pretty plain here, some are comfy, some are not. Not comfy? Don't promote it. Comfy? Promote it.

Without getting into the whole 'yes but no but' argument, is this site the worst thing any of us have seen? Really? I highly doubt it. I'm by no means as articulate and clever as some of the posters here, but fuck, as was said earlier, I do have *some* semblance of a brain, and sure as hell can make my own choice(s). This thread is on page 4 - wtf? We all sell fantasies, we all sell bullshit.

What another chooses to promote I may not agree with, and what I promote (be it watersports or such) someone else may not agree with. Last I heard, if it's legal, then free speech had a play in there somewhere, much as those of us who disagree with whatever particular aspect of that may not like it.

'2 cents smiley here'

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by susanna

What are your positive solutions?

I've made two wordy posts with positive solutions, if you haven't taken the time to read them, I'm not spelling it out again. (Or maybe you have, since you're essentially just re-hashing what I wrote.)

I think you're just getting defensive with that last comment, like you don't want to be upstaged or something. I'm not trying to upstage you, I'd just rather shift this useful thread away from a battle of the sexes.

[Chop Smith]

Meow...

[spazlabz]

Let's not miss the fact that RageCash.com has gotten absolutely golden press here. Whichever side your on... or even if you dont have a side... you won't soon forget RageCash and its not because of the skin......
controversy = gold
IMHO

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by SexyCityJim

controversy = gold
IMHO

For the most part, yes. But I don't think any sponsor wants to be the next E--- C---, lots of press or not.

[Surfn]

furrygirl

Take a break and submit another gallery to me

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by docholly

BUT i do not promote her "bloody trixie" site myself. i do post her FHG on my TGP but I don't actively promote that site. I don't feel I could do justice to the copy I'd be writing. I don't feel I'd be able to portray that in such a manner that would respect what she is trying to do and sell the surfer at the same time.

I think this deserves highlighting.

I think most people promote things they have no idea how to sell, and it applies extra for amateur or small niche sites. So many of my affiliates sell me as a "horny teen who sucks cock", but when a surfer arrives at my site, it's not at all "teen", and I have little hardcore content. People really should stick to what they know, which is going to benefit everyone's bottom line in the long run.

[susanna]

Originally Posted by furrygirl

I've made two wordy posts with positive solutions, if you haven't taken the time to read them, I'm not spelling it out again. (Or maybe you have, since you're essentially just re-hashing what I wrote.)

I think you're just getting defensive with that last comment, like you don't want to be upstaged or something. I'm not trying to upstage you, I'd just rather shift this useful thread away from a battle of the sexes.

I have read your posts yes, infact I commented on them being well worded. I have said all those things before you did, there are other threads. You asked me what my positive solutions are...I rehashed what I have already said ha ha ha

You sound like your getting defensive now. We might as well quit this questioning each other since I think its taking this thread in a direction away from the point of it... and oh my is it thread killing?

Back to the regular scheduled discussion of the inappropriateness of having "fantasy sites" on the net about non-consentual sex.

[furrygirl]

Susanna

It's hard to have a rational, productive debate with someone who can't even decide what they're trying to convince me of. You're really all over the place with your posts, and I don't think I'm the only one who's a bit bewildered.

On the one hand, you're accusing anyone who doesn't hate Sleep Assault of being rapist-sympathizers and trying to profit from hurting women, and on the other, you find fantasy sleep-fucking is extremely sexy.

In the same paragraph, you avail yourself of being labeled a "feminist" and say that this debate has nothing to do with "women's rights", but follow it with, "At the moment it is womens rights being trampled on."

You say that you think a disclaimer and a domain name change would be a good solution, but then you say that all non-consensual fantasies are "never appropriate" and "true deviant behaviour."

Which is it? What are you talking about? Can you, in 200 words or less, define the problem with Sleep Assault, provide a solution, and a plan for how a fix could be implemented? Think of it like a debate class assignment or something. Or should the company just go outside and smash all their hard drives and start making romantic erotica to suit your site?

It's also hard to take someone seriously who ends or segments their sentences with "ha ha ha" or ellipses and doesn't know the correct spelling of what it is that they're arguing about. (Yes, I'm a grammar asshole, because I believe that if one is trying to convey their ideas in a medium of works, they should know how to write. If one is trying to communicate ideas using photos, for example, I expect better than 320x240 web cam stills.) You've repeatedly bragged about your "high IQ" and how you're the smart, conscientious one here, so act like it. Know what it is that you're trying to convey to us, keep on topic, and stick to your guns.

[RawAlex]

furrygirl, a simple question: Is the picture of a nude 12 year old with a disclaimer that "this isn't porn, it's art" make you feel any better about the content?

Sex is an act between two consenting adults. There is no visible way to determine the consent on this site. In fact, they play up the specific terms that it isn't consentual, that is what makes it so exciting.

It is very hard to justify a site that encourages and panders to would be or wannabe rapists.

Alex

[Chop Smith]

Anyone making book?

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

Anyone making book?

LOL