Can a pornographer's political views be trusted?

[East Coast Pirate]

Last edited Sun Jun 30, 2013, 05:59 PM - Edit history (1)

I guess I have to add this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023133791#post27

[uppityperson]

1. Not enough information. Personally I try to not stereotype people by 1 thing they do.

[baldguy]

2. Sure, if he's honest & consistent & isn't a hypocrite.

Like Larry Flint.

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. Can yours?

You are as subtle as a hurricane!

Cheers!

[Hell Hath No Fury]

7. ...

[Sherman A1]

31. +1

Indeed....

[Hell Hath No Fury]

4. ....

[kenny blankenship]

5. More so than the publisher of propaganda rags like Time magazine or the WaPo, I would guess.

But since you are asking a general question, that is just a generalized reply.

[whatchamacallit]

6. Can a low-post-count provocateur's political views be trusted?

[backwoodsbob]

8. can a pirates political views be trusted?

just asking

[Autumn]

9. Sure, one has nothing to do with the other.

[East Coast Pirate]

10. Must one always use the "sarcasm" tag?

(A quick look at my recs would tell you I'm not a member of the wrecking crew.)

I think this latest Greenwald smear after he'd blown the other ones out of the water is as ridiculous as it gets.

[sibelian]

24. I've run afoul of that problem myself.

I hate it. I hate it's smug, patronising little rain of red blobs.

[East Coast Pirate]

27. That's why I don't use it. It's garish.

I'm a fan of dry humor. The sarcasm tag reminds me of a canned laugh track for dumb sitcom jokes.

[In_The_Wind]

11. Why wouldn't they be trusted ?

[The Straight Story]

12. Sure - if they align with mine

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. What could be more obscene that a "kill list"?

[noamnety]

14. No, absolutely not.

I need my sources to have 100% agreement with ALL of my views 100% of the time. If they are wrong on one issue, they are wrong on 100% of the issues. The world IS that black and white.

That's why I disagree with ALL politicians, on ALL issues, 100% of the time, no matter which side of the issue they fall on.

[frylock]

15. i trust Larry Flynt more than i do just about any politician

[Orrex]

16. Are we talking about Neko Case?

Or are we only discussing old pornographers?

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. Define "Pornographer"

Does your definition include ANYONE even remotely associated with the industry?

[LittleBlue]

18. Can we trust an atheist's?

A used car salesman's?

I don't see why it would matter except to prudes.

[Posteritatis]

19. This OP cost me nine IQ points. (nt)

[East Coast Pirate]

29. Don't underestimate yourself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023133791#post27

[oldhippie]

20. It depends on the political views .....

I mean, really, how hard is that?

[Scurrilous]

21. I wouldn't shake on it.

[treestar]

22. Sure, if they are honest

and they are likely to be libertarian. They won't approve of the government attempts to restrict them.

[Bluenorthwest]

23. What is not trustworthy is the lable 'pornographer'. Right here on DU a poster

told me I was delusional if I did not understand that prime time network TV is pornography. James Joyce was called a pornographer, Larry Flint calls himself one.
The political view that is suspect is the one that seeks to label things and people with words like pornographic as if that actually meant something.

[MrSlayer]

25. Can a librarian's? A shepherd's? A nurse's? A farmer's?

Can anyone's?

I guess it's all really subjective. If a bus driver spouts off Rush Limbaugh talking points I'm going to say his views cannot be trusted.

[Catherina]

26. Can a liar's? Or a propagandist's?

[East Coast Pirate]

34. See post #10 in this thread.

[Catherina]

35. Haha! Yes lol

Sometimes the sarcasm is too well done

[Deep13]

28. No. They're opinions, not promises.

One does not usually rely on mere opinions, so trust really isn't the issue.

Now, if the question is whether or not pornographers can make valuable political observations, the answer is "yes." Assuming you consider a pornographer's profession to be immoral as the OP's question seems to imply, he or she can still make valid political points even if his professional life is a train wreck.

[jazzimov]

30. I don't think it makes any difference what occupation

anyone has - what matters are the views themselves. The exception would be if their Occupation defines their political views - for instance in the case of the Koch Brothers. However, Warren Buffet is also part of the 1% and yet his political views are valid in and of themselves.

[Half-Century Man]

32. How does what someone does with their dick contaminate their politics?

Or should I say, how does helping people masturbate contaminate politics? Maybe jerking off stopped some disgruntled gun nut from shooting up a shopping mall today.
Why are you questioning the past profession of somebody who saved the lives of so many?

[galileoreloaded]

33. Can a sitting or former presidents? Nt