Quote:
|
Originally Posted by furrygirl
If you guys are going to grudgingly accept and/or welcome the idea of women working on an "in defense of porn" project, you better get used to hearing our opinions on why we defend porn, otherwise this thread might as well be re-titled "Speaking out on behalf of the entire adult industry- for male webmasters only!" Males and webmasters are just one part of the industry, but I realize that any board/group would be eager to select leaders from its own pool. (Maybe if you asked 100 people who do camerawork and lighting on sets, they'd agree that a handful of them were the best ones to represent the entire industry, too.)
This is the third time I've said this: ONE OF THE MAIN ARGUMENTS AGAINST PORN IS THAT IT HURTS WOMEN. Frankly, you're not going to be able to counter that as a group of male TGP webmasters who have no experience in front of the camera saying, "Uh, no it doesn't. We don't think so. Uh, it's their choice."
|
Has anyone disagreed with you other then Surfin? Did anyone dismiss the idea of having a female spokes person? I posted that it was worthless to discuss "feminists" in this thread and I still don't see why it's fruitful.
This thread should be a list of constructive bullet points instead it's just another bash the FSC and argue about side issues while bypassing the actual issue at hand. The board has been chosen and Conner Young appears to be the only one with any on-line experience.
If we can't post consice recommendations without getting caught up in pissing matches then we're not going to be successful in working together. I think somewhere in your pages of posts filled with passion and angst that you might have a few good bullet points.
Care to post some bullet points so that we can clearly see your ideas? Is there really any need to get into more pissing matches?