Person A mentions that yes, sometimes "anti-kink stigma" is more than a mild thing:
And Joan Kelly, whose anger I commented on in the other post, flips the fuck out, half amusingly and half scarily:
Bean said on Please, somebody, come and defend Kink.com. I triple-dog dare you.February 7, 2009 at 1:18 am
The reason I don’t feel defensive when anyone critiques or even flatly condemns kink from a supposed radical feminist perspective is that to me it seems like anti-kink radfems = just about zero sociopolitical clout and pro-kink kinksters = carrying the day.
And I live in a country which has a long, long history of censoring queer and kinky literature/media and justifying it with obscenity law based in part on the writings of radical feminists.
Thank you, try again.
Uh... so let me see if I understand this (I already know that I don't, but):
Joan Kelly said on Please, somebody, come and defend Kink.com. I triple-dog dare you.February 7, 2009 at 1:18 am
And *I* live in a country where billboards in high traffic areas (one of the poshest portions of the Sunset Strip in West Hollywood, California) depict male models as being in the act of over-the-knee spanking fenale models. This ad was for clothing. It is not unusual. It is mainstreamed in all kinds of ways here.
So take your references to Canadian court decisions on PORNOGRAPHY – not the sex people are having – and also take your misplaced condescenion, and go fuck yourself with both. Thank YOU.
"Someone brought up a highly salient point about how anti-pornography legislation has been used to censor queers, and...
...that's off-point because there are pretentious artsy-fartsy billboard ads in California depicting OTK.
Also, I'm really angry and dropped an f-bomb, so I must be right."
I can't tell whether this is ridiculous US-centrism or just Bizarro World.
My money's on Bizarro World, though.
Really, how can these people lament that they lack credence in the larger society when they adamantly refuse to make any fucking sense?