Fucking creeps

[BainsBane]

74. Did you see we supposedly believe all porn depicts only women?

and that no such thing as gay porn exists? I saw NO ONE in that thread claim all porn was heterosexual or that women were always the objects of the rapists rage. In fact, I specifically mentioned boys. They accuse feminists of creating strawman while they are erecting a hay field. All because they are afraid someone is going to take away their precious, extreme rape porn.

Any moron can do an internet sex and see how much porn is targeted at women as the consumer audience. Certainly some exists, but the vast majority is targeted at heterosexual men, with gay male audiences coming second. But some use the fact that women consume any porn, or that gay porn exists, to pretend there is something gender neutral about porn--clearly a bold faced lie. (Funny how all the evo psych arguments about men being more visual than women and supposedly needing sex more than us fly out the window when it comes to erecting false claims about gender parity in porn.) Does anyone here for a second doubt that if the porn industry were built primarily around images of the rape and degradation of men that it would have been outlawed ages ago. Christ, we can't even play online poker anymore because too many men blew through money, while any and all depictions of violence of women, girls, and boys are available to access at a moment's notice.

Yet the discussion about the British law was not about porn in general or even rape porn in general. The law makes illegal possession of porn that results in the death or injury on a person, or kills an animal, or where the depictions make it impossible to tell if a person is truly being raped or not. If want the voyeurs wanted was, as they claim, consensual depictions of rape, they would have no problem with that law, since it bans none of that. If all they cared about was the simulation of violence, they could watch animation or CGI created porn. Of course that doesn't interest this audience. Its viewers want to believe women who are the objects of porn are actually being raped and tortured because that is what these men wish they could do. What they get their rocks off on is the absence of consent, watching the violation of women against their will, and their beating and torture.

Funny how freedom of expression extends to watching women raped and mutilated but have the audacity to suggest that they might think about the circumstances of the workers who make that porn is an outrage. These so-called leftists relish right-wing arguments about and "choice" in porn and sex work, deliberately and willfully ignoring the fact that porn is also produced with enslaved women, girls and boys. While those who do choose that work do so out of economic privation. As they consume that porn, they subsidize slavery and exploitation of free wage labor--free in the Marxist sense, meaning the coercion that propels people to work is economic rather than extra-economic, like physical force or debt peonage. Yet asking them to think about the rights of women workers is an outrage. Of course, there is nothing remotely leftist about such people. They celebrate capitalist commerce in women's bodies, while working diligently to maintain systems of labor exploitation. They might, on occasion, fret about low wage work in fast food, but when it comes to porn and sex work, the conditions of workers mean exactly nothing. Like other reactionaries, they willfully and proudly refuse to think beyond their own wants. It's all about them and no one else on the planet matters in the slightest, and least of all women.

The only choice women have is to be objects of porn, as far as they are concerned. If we dare articulate an argument that suggests violent porn is problematic in anyway, our speech is illegitimate. Freedom as they define it exists for men only. These are people frightened of ideas that in any way challenges their "right" to spend their days and nights thinking about raping and torturing women. Everyone who doesn't seek to normalize violent sexual predatory behavior knows exactly what they are so desperate to justify.

These same individuals are outraged that the WHO would do a report on the global health effects of violence against women. They are outraged that anyone dare talk about the most prolific serial killings of our time in Juarez. They describe rape prevention campaigns as "haranguing." So while working to silence discussion of the actual effects of violence, they defend with great zeal a pornographic genre that profits from rape and mutilation of women. Is it any wonder they seek to silence discussions of the impact of violence against women? Rape and domestic violence depends on silence to thrive, and that is exactly what they work so diligently to enforce. Violence against women has no place in the public sphere unless it is about their arousal. The contrast between their outrage on discussions of violence and women and unyielding support for the most brutal forms of rape porn says everything there is to know about those individuals. They have laid themselves bare for the entire web to see.