#133

It’s like he doesn’t actually feel anything but just wants to show how right/right-on he is

#134

uploaded by one of those people without the knowledge of the other in, I’d estimate, about 95% of cases

#135

I got two happy people and a smartphone. Where it’s at!

2 Likes
#136

Seems like a strange personal attack when he’s made pretty reasonable points, maybe cause I know EMO IRL IDK

3 Likes
#137

That’s a crazy figure you’ve pulled from your arse*

*Now a banned act

2 Likes
#138

And I’d be worried about other kinds of coercive control in the other 5%

#139

Probably because people have been unnecessarily hard on her on this thread, despite expressing something perfectly reasonable. Different opinion to the hivemind =/= trolling u guys

1 Like
#140

well even if it was 30%, which seems ridiculously optimistic to me, that would be pretty awful given the sheer volume of content (act now banned).

#141

I don’t understand that point. If the people involved aren’t making money and doing it for fun it’s till a problem because the site they upload to is making money from it? What about a site like flikr that isn’t exclusively for/aimed it nude pics?

Is it anyone using their naked body to make money that’s the issue? If so why? Is posing as a life model acceptable but posing for top shelf mags not?

(this is all a bit steam of conciseness and not an attack, just trying to grasp the angle)

#142

Now a banned act.

#143

:smiley: I so nearly said that myself

#144

Yeah there’s been a bit of an unecessary pile-on. But I also think there seems to be two different debates going on. Like Casseroles (correct me if I’m wrong) seems to be railing against the porn industry at large, which is a different, long argument for a different time. I would argue that this ruling has nothing to do with the porn industry and the way it’s run, nothing to do with protecting performers, and is instead about defining a ‘normal’ and demonising and estranging people whose behaviours fall outside of this

7 Likes
#146

That logic didn’t save sheeeeit!

#147

I just think you’re not necessarily wrong in your opinion, but it wilfully ignores a lot of things out there, as well as not really being relevant to this specific act of censorship.

You’re right though, I was being a bit dismissive because I very much did think you were trolling, plus I wrote that post at god knows o’clock after several drinks. Also I feel like you’re attacking, shaming and being a bit ignorant towards an industry in which I have been part of and have a lot of friends and connections, who are wonderful people who are constantly stigmatised. Sorry if I got a little defensive :rolling_eyes:

2 Likes
#148

Well, you can prove anything with (totally made up) statistics.

4 Likes
#149

oh quel surprise!

#150

It shouldn’t be a surprised, I talked about my wine consumption in the drinking thread.

#151

SURPRISE! FFS, SEAN!

#152

this objectification of Smee really isn’t on

1 Like
#153

Lots of good points here: