hundredmillionlifetimes
Banned
dHarry said:I honestly can't remember where I encountered the falsely-attributed "sex is rape" concept, although it is widely mis-attributed and has attained the status of urban myth ...
As we have seen, and continue to see, on this thread, falsely attributed statements propagate and transform into "fact" at the speed of light.
Tea said:I, on the other had, credit women - as mentally-competent adults - with the initiative to make their own decisions about how best to make a living. Don't like sucking cock on camera for cash? Then don't do it. Get a job in, you know, an office or a school or a shop or a bar or something, like most people do. Or claim the dole
Presumably the many millions of girls, boys, women, men throughout the world [half a million in Bangkok alone] who don't like "sucking cock" (whether for cash or not) but "choose" to do so anyway are therefore "mentally incompetent" ... For Tea, prostitution, de-politicised into anti-feminist consumerism, a matter of individual "choice" not collective outrage, is a lifestyle choice, a career progression, for the "well-balanced" never-deluded egoist. I know what I want and I'm going to have it! [Tea's ideology, the tired old social-Darwinist/liberal capitalist one, is preaching that the poor or oppressed have "chosen" to be poor or oppressed because, being endowed with the magical property of "free choice", they are free to choose otherwise (get a "proper" job, shop, engage in guilt-free fucking, etc), and those who don't do this - who don't "choose" to be poor but who nevertheless remain so - therefore lack "initiative", lack the entrepreneurial spirit, are obviously then "mentally incompetent". I'm not British, but isn't this how the 2.6 million people there on disability benefit are smugly and routinely defined by the Tea-towel heads of this world?]
Tea said:Exactly where you get the idea that I'm supporting child porn is equally mystifying to me. Not to mention the fact that I'm apparently a 'mysogynist' for daring to disagree with Andrea 'All Sex Is Rape' Dworkin
By, among other things (already amply demonstrated in previous posts), arguing that it is not, in fact, porn:
By automatically excluding child pornography from your "definition" of porn as something taking place between "willing participants".
By dismissing child pornography as not being an instance of "porn as rape": "I must have missed that bit. In fact, I just re-read it, and I still can't see it. Would you be so good as to point out exactly where you prove this statement?"
[As I already said, it is not that you support child pornography, it is that you have fallen into the trap of defending it in order to persist in your well-documented (now pathological) agenda of ridiculing everything I say here.]
And apparently, Tea's dismissing of Dworkin as a "damaged woman" is his notion of "daring to disagree," as opposed to a misogynistic description. Presumably he suscribes to Idlerich's version of a misogynist (as utilised in Idlerich's last post), as someone (myself seemingly) who opposes the pornographic abuse of women (or anyone else). Questioning pornography [or indeed, questioning a person's "right" to be abused and to abuse] is - misogynistic!
dHarry said:Of course Hundred Million Lifetimes never said "sex is rape" either; but he is insisting that "porn is rape". I still can't find a clear explication of this - does it rest on paedophilia/child porn? Care to clarify HMLT?
Needless to say, child porn is a huge factor [the commonplace practice of excluding it from "proper" porn, of treating it as porn's evil Other, should alert us to this; confronting such a false dichotomy opens up the possibility of serious debate and analysis of pornography], but I introduced "porn is rape" as, obviously, a hypothesis, and - sadly - I have not seen, as I've previously stated, any arguments or evidence to suggest that such a hypothesis is as yet manifestly false. I do not consider appeals to consumerist choice [the only arguments presented here to date] as "evidence" to refute such a hypothesis, such liberal-ideological choice being a self-defeating illusion [even the pro-paedophilia lobby use the very same ego-based rhetoric, the same "free choice" ideology to justify their "rights"].