Why does Belle Knox consider herself a feminist?

[BainsBane]

139. You don't have a position

other than mocking feminists. Understood. I should have realized that was the more important goal. To pretend you weren't doing that and don't do it all the time is ridiculous. It is your standard response in these threads. If you truly don't have a position, why the compulsion to trivialize the arguments of others?

No, I don't like what you say because you consistently refuse to deal with arguments women actually make and instead ridicule anyone who dares question your fantasy version of the sex trade.

Sure, you can ignore child prostitution and human trafficking. That is your right, but doing so signals you seem them as inconsequential in comparison to your fealty to capitalist notions of individual rights bound by class, race, and gender.

You do see commodification of sex as sacrosanct, as demonstrated by your adamant support for all things related to its commerce--SI and the industry of objectification, porn, and prostitution. Many here have decided anything relating to sex must never under any circumstances be questioned. Any discussion of the absence of consent, underage sex workers, child rape, or human trafficking is immediately dismissed for the absurd trope of "consenting adults."

As for ism's OP, you ignored it by never commenting on it or showing any concern for those people. That you again invoke choice and consenting adults, when she talked about child rape and how such "choice" was often a product of severe abuse. Instead what you went on as usual to mock people like her, who were lucky to survive that life, who have the nerve to articulate views you disagree with. You treat with derision her, me, and others who actually have experienced some of that industry, unless they share your view that all that matters is "choice"--the neoliberal mantra used to justify myriad forms of exploitation.

In your post immediately preceding the last one you criticized me for raising concerns about underage prostitution in a discussion you insisted was about consenting adults.

Sort of like the single-minded determination to make arguments about consenting adults
about non-consent and non-adults, anything except the consenting adults the arguments are actually about.

You ignore reality and think call people irritating who care about the reality of prostitution as opposed to the theoretical notion you hold in your head. If it were just about consenting adults there would be far less concern. I know it isn't because I was at a very young age regularly targeted by Johns, as was my sister. The creepy comment by the other poster PROVES it is not just about consenting adults. Insisting otherwise is to ignore evidence--evidence I have already linked to for you multiple times.

You'll have to forgive me if I confuse your responses about porn with prostitution since you engage in the same ridicule of opposing views in both subject matters. As for porn, we had a thread where people discussed LA's requirement to use condemns, condemning it, and showing no concern for the lives lost as a result of their selfish desire to see porn without condemns. So to pretend that is some sort of exalted status is ridiculous. I fault consumers of porn for those deaths. They set the demands for the industry and in doing so contribute to those lost lives.

And Cuba most certainly is a good example for the connection between poverty and prostitution. Why wouldn't it be? Rampant poverty under Batista was eradicated and prostitution waned to a trickle. The country lost Soviet subsidies, life got harder for ordinary Cubans, and prostitution again resurfaced. The sex trade depends on economic privation.

You have an excellent sense of humor and a keen wit, but there are times where it's just not appropriate. In my view, Redqueen's thread about the porn actress (though I disagreed with parts of her argument, mainly that the woman didn't know what she personally found degrading) and that libertarian nonsense on prostitution are two such cases, unless of course your point is to appeal to the peanut gallery by ridiculing feminists.

I wouldn't bother with any of this if I didn't think you were capable of better. Perhaps I'm just wrong about that.