Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Has it not occured to you that abuse, sexual exploitation and torture all could come from the same evil root?
No.
Whereas I strongly support the right of any consenting adult to produce and distribute porn and I severely disagree with snooping on such actions by any government, under the guise of looking for terrorists or otherwise, I would like to call Greenie's attention to the fact that Bush would not be the first president to be treated differently from a mere mortal.
The cues are "never had sex with that woman", Barbara Battalino and Lloyd Davis. How to use them, I leave it to the Internet savvy. For the rest, I include a link in my handle.
Of course I am sure that Greenie Greenwald thinks it is perfectly fine to lie - as long as people don't die from the lie. His very oeuvre is an attestation to that belief.
He is also very forgetful, he still has not updated his blog entry abut the hacked Palin emails.
BTW it seems I am being inspired by all these lies and dies to emit a little poetry, so here it comes, enjoy.
Lieses and Truthsesfor the Greenie Greenwalds of America
When Clinton lied
people don't never died
only when Clinton bombedd
that was when people succumbedd
no-fly zones, Belgrade, Khartoum,
the bombs went boom-boom-boom-boom
but that's okay with me
cuz i'm a librul you see
Bush is the devil, I'm cool
my teacher told me in public school
I thought that, because AKA said so, sometime ago during the great Hillary/Obama flame wars, she said something to the effect that she didn't want to talk about that stuff because she couldn't even bring herself to watch the news. If not, I stand corrected, and no snark was intended.
I don't watch television at all. I listen to the radio. However, why you would assume that that means that I don't care about torture is a puzzle to me. Is there some sort of contest going on that I don't know about concerning who cares the most about torture?
But, in the past, AKA has never wanted to make those kind of comparisons, has never shared the same sense of urgency and outrage over them as I do, because the urgency and outrage she feels over the abuse of children and women is about as much as she can bear. And I respect that, if I don't share it.
How do you know how I feel? Are you a mind reader now, Bob?
Have you ever noticed that they don't show people raping children on the news but they do show people getting shot and they do show dead bodies and that here in this thread Glenn has showed a man being abused with no thought to that man's privacy?
As someone who can instantly call up images past, why would I want these things in my head? So that they can trigger the child abuse of my past for me? So that I can suddenly be back in PTSD-ville?
Do you know what I can still see in my mind as clearly as if it were yesterday: Lisa Steinberg sitting at her school desk with her hair uncombed. The expression on OJ's face when he was found not guilty. The Twin Towers falling over and over again.
I don't watch television, Bob, and I avoid all dramatic violent images that are real. That's because I get where I can't sleep. I start flashing on other people's pain.
You surely have made lots of assumption about how I feel.
Perhaps you feel that I should have a ghoulish fascination with brutality in order to validate my care-about-torture-creds.
I am sorry but my mind and my stomach are not strong enough to want to make myself depressed and suicidal again. I really resent your assumption that you somehow care about torture but I don't?
But if AKA wants to talk comment about the porn censorship conviction side of the case, I'm still trying to figure out what she is getting at, what the bun-fight she is having with two or three people is actually about. Because honestly, I can't figure out what is under dispute.
If you will go back to my original post, you will see that I only asked questions and people assumed from my questions things that I do not think. Few people bothered to verify what I do think.
Kind of like you just did.
The only person whom I found interesting enough the really engage with is ondelette. I was interested in what she had to say.
I believe that the type of porn that Paul Little was producing was violent porn with young girls (18 but still young) dressed and as part of the "plot" intended to be underage.
I think that there is a relationship between all violence and am interested in trying to explore/figure out what it might be.
I have sort of figured out who I shouldn't bother discussing it with. For instance, I was never interested in discussing torture with you during the primary because you seemed to have some sort of partisan political litmus test -- which you thought I failed by supporting Clinton.
Sad, isn't it? You might have taught me something if you weren't so into blaming.
Goodnight to you.
"I think you misuse "torture" - there seems to be a difference between prisoners of war and porn actors. One is being paid for a job they willingly signed up for, while the other is being held as a prisoner of war - captive - against their will. Needless to say, the porn actor can get out while the POW can't."
POWs are victims of chance. They signed up to be a soldier or they sign up to be a spy they get paid for one job and ended up having to give up more of themselves than they thought was possible. I think that (some) young women who get into porn are the female equivalent. They go in thinking it's going to be sexual intercourse for payment, and instead it's more akin to rape and torture. Especially if they hook up with someone like this guy.
"In this example, the actors in question were not (being coerced)"
Do you know that for sure? Everything i read on the net made him sound like he pretty much took advantage of people and was heading for a crash. Would it make a difference to you if they were coerced?
"So then it seems you're saying Max Hardcore's porn is "wrong" as in "immoral" or "something that doesn't sit well with you," but I think that perspective has already been established as irrelevant to the point of Glenn's post, which seems to be to highlight the hypocrisy of a government jailing people for fictionalized, consensual scenes of humiliation/degradation while protecting or ignoring its own tendrils that actually do those things in reality to non-consenting prisoners."
Actually I read BSDM stories sometimes, so it's not a sexual morality issue for me, it's a physical issue. My books don't involve hurting real people. I bought a tape when I was much younger- it ended up getting doused with nail polish remover. The women on my tape were obviously doing stuff for money, and allowing people to hurt them. It wasn't sexy to see it happen to a real person. I'm not sure why, but I don't seem to work that way. They don't fake the torture in porn. They are getting paid to actually be tortured. In that sense it is very much like paying a soldier for his body.
"Ironically, inherent in your claim that it's a matter of humanity instead of law is a negation of the validity, or even existence, of choice - which many would argue is essentially to negate the thing that makes a human a "human," as distinct from all other living beings. Conscious choice. After that, your contention that it's about "the humanity" is kind of self defeating."
I'm not for cutting out conscious choice. Like another person said, we made these laws, we can change them. None of them are written on stone. Either they reflect our society, or they need to be changed.
I'm not trying to be snarky - if I understand the definition of that term correctly.
Me either :) just trying to figure out what I feel and what the people around me feel and trying to make sense of it all.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
