REALLY GOOD ARTICLE JULIE! Thank you so much for standing up. I am an unpaid subsciber who really really appreciates that you make some of your content available to me. I totally get that you deserve and need to be paid for your work. Just know there are those of us in the background who whole heartedly support what you doing!
The issue of porn is the thorniest and most difficult one for me to address as a feminist that believes I have a right to READ and SEE even the most disturbing images and ideas so long as no real crime of force is employed.
Unfortunately, this essay did not make it any easier.
I agree with you on trans ideology, but must disagree when it comes to censoring porn. While I see where you're coming from in objecting to it, I still hold to the position that it is dangerous to let authorities ban particular sorts of expression as "harmful", because that will always end up being used against your own expression when it offends somebody else, as gender critical feminists are finding now. Back in the '80s and '90s I was critical of the censoriousness of anti-porn feminists, who at the time were aligned with the "political correctness" movement that had lots of clout in certain circles. Now those sorts of feminists are on the outs with the current "woke" movement, but still stick to their desire for censorship where it suits them. I have a more classical liberal, libertarian, individualist approach here.
Very timely from my pic, thank you, Julie. I have, reluctantly, just joined the FSU in the distant hope that they might be able to help visual artists. I'm not holding breath. I've decided to give them a year to see how it goes. Will report back.
OK, lets try this one: Why do so many free speech champions support gender-crits when transphobia silences trans people? Now I don't buy that argument either, but it's exactly the same as your your logic, but simply from a different standpoint about who holds privilege in that dynamic.
The fact is, porn doesn't "silence" anyone, and you personally have been pretty damned vocal about it for years, and had access to some pretty large platforms and NGOs in disseminating that message. Meanwhile, there are all manner of long-standing laws on the books in a number of countries that actually censor porn and sex worker speech, and new ones as well like SESTA/FOSTA that radfems helped lobby for.
So, basically, I don't see why anyone outside of the radfem/gender-crit cult should buy your special pleading that porn is such an egregiously "silencing" form of speech that should be an exception to free speech protections, but speech from radfems like you that other marginalized folks claims does them harm is deserving of full protection. Not buying your hypocrisy here at all.
REALLY GOOD ARTICLE JULIE! Thank you so much for standing up. I am an unpaid subsciber who really really appreciates that you make some of your content available to me. I totally get that you deserve and need to be paid for your work. Just know there are those of us in the background who whole heartedly support what you doing!
The issue of porn is the thorniest and most difficult one for me to address as a feminist that believes I have a right to READ and SEE even the most disturbing images and ideas so long as no real crime of force is employed.
Unfortunately, this essay did not make it any easier.
I agree with you on trans ideology, but must disagree when it comes to censoring porn. While I see where you're coming from in objecting to it, I still hold to the position that it is dangerous to let authorities ban particular sorts of expression as "harmful", because that will always end up being used against your own expression when it offends somebody else, as gender critical feminists are finding now. Back in the '80s and '90s I was critical of the censoriousness of anti-porn feminists, who at the time were aligned with the "political correctness" movement that had lots of clout in certain circles. Now those sorts of feminists are on the outs with the current "woke" movement, but still stick to their desire for censorship where it suits them. I have a more classical liberal, libertarian, individualist approach here.
Very timely from my pic, thank you, Julie. I have, reluctantly, just joined the FSU in the distant hope that they might be able to help visual artists. I'm not holding breath. I've decided to give them a year to see how it goes. Will report back.
OK, lets try this one: Why do so many free speech champions support gender-crits when transphobia silences trans people? Now I don't buy that argument either, but it's exactly the same as your your logic, but simply from a different standpoint about who holds privilege in that dynamic.
The fact is, porn doesn't "silence" anyone, and you personally have been pretty damned vocal about it for years, and had access to some pretty large platforms and NGOs in disseminating that message. Meanwhile, there are all manner of long-standing laws on the books in a number of countries that actually censor porn and sex worker speech, and new ones as well like SESTA/FOSTA that radfems helped lobby for.
So, basically, I don't see why anyone outside of the radfem/gender-crit cult should buy your special pleading that porn is such an egregiously "silencing" form of speech that should be an exception to free speech protections, but speech from radfems like you that other marginalized folks claims does them harm is deserving of full protection. Not buying your hypocrisy here at all.