This message was self-deleted by its author

[thucythucy]

84. I think, for starters, it should be subject to the same criticism

and analysis that any other "product" would get if it used terms like "slut," "whore," "bitch," "cunt" or whatever else to describe women (and teenage girls) in a description of what's for sale. If a car company produced an ad that said, "Buy this to impress the whores in your life," would you shut down any condemnation of such a term by claiming it as a free speech issue? You wouldn't see it as sexist?

Why should porn be immune to the same censure we--as supposed progressives--would bring to anyone or anything else who uses those terms? It's particularly weird to see so many people defending an industry that does this--as if the manufacturers of porn were somehow great altruists, as opposed to being about as concerned for their workers safety and well-being as your average Walmart executive.

It really does puzzle me: why is it that whenever anyone here raises the idea that this sort of language--let alone the imagery--might be detrimental to the struggle for equal rights for women, it's immediately defended as a free speech issue?

Just to be clear--because I'm sure this will come up, since it always does--I'm opposed to censorship. At the same time, I think any progressive ought to be concerned about how women are so often described and portrayed in porn. Just as I can critique "Birth of a Nation" or "Gone with the Wind" for their racist, reactionary content, I think I and others are entitled to bring up the sexist reactionary messages so often imbedded in so much porn.

You disagree?