"Political Influence of Adult Sites" and "Free Speech Coalition" pressure.

[RawAlex]

Nice answer Trixie. No real good and honest answer, so you turn to an attack?

That is usually the response of someone who is guilty as charged.

Alex

[Trixie]

I'm avoiding responding to it because MOST PEOPLE are getting tired of the off-topic B.S.

The red/period stuff has been hashed over a number of times on this board to no avail. If people who weren't already involved in those discussions had an honest desire to understand why I make period porn and what is socially redeeming about it, they could simply go to my site or do a search for those threads.

As for Useless' initial charge, it is clear that he didn't understand my points the first time, so what is the point of trying to make them a second time? But fine, I'll try again: I don't think all or even most porn needs to have redeeming qualities. My point was that if we're presenting arguments to anti-porn people, being able to provide examples of porn that DOES have socially redeeming qualities might help us make more convincing arguments.

It seems like you guys read animosity into things where it doesn't even exist, and then you start a flame war.

Examples: FurryGirl says, "many feminists are against us" and a few people hear, "FurryGirl is a feminist and she hates us! US! And she is not one of US! Begone, foul feminist!"

I could say "the sky is blue" right now and you guys would be like, "but you want to paint it red with your menstrual fluid and the blood of tgp and linklist owners! Arrr! You can't fool me, I *know* you're a she-devil!"



This is why I try not to waste time hanging around here and other boards -- judging from your posts, it's feels like a waste of time and energy to try to dialogue with some of you guys. My time is better spent talking to the people who pay me: those guys with their cocks in one hand and their mice in the others.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Trixie

As for Useless' initial charge, it is clear that he didn't understand my points the first time, so what is the point of trying to make them a second time? But fine, I'll try again: I don't think all or even most porn needs to have redeeming qualities. My point was that if we're presenting arguments to anti-porn people, being able to provide examples of porn that DOES have socially redeeming qualities might help us make more convincing arguments.

Do you honesty think you will be able to convince anti-porn people that ANY porn has "socially redeeming qualities"? Trixie, I know you're an intelligent woman and I'm not about to insinuate something other than that, but do you fully understand who those rabid anti-porn people are? We're talking about people who lean so far to the right that they can't go sailing due to the fear of keeling the boat over. Unless we can convince them that their god of choice wants people to lounge naked and fuck on the internet, they aren't going to care about what we've to say. This is my whole point of contention. There is no way for us to add value to pornography. The only thing we can do is hammer home YOUR right to express yourself as you wish, whether they find it objectionable or not.

Red porn is not my bag, baby. But that doesn't mean that I want those cocksuckers saying that you can't do it.

Originally Posted by Trixie

Examples: FurryGirl says, "many feminists are against us" and a few people hear, "FurryGirl is a feminist and she hates us! US! And she is not one of US! Begone, foul feminist!"

Never heard of her.

Originally Posted by Trixie

This is why I try not to waste time hanging around here and other boards -- judging from your posts, it's feels like a waste of time and energy to try to dialogue with some of you guys.

That's not true. I hardly ever argue with people who agree with me.