My article on why people shouldn’t donate to the Salvation Army gets conservatives into a real tizzy. In the latest love letter from some woman (Sarah) I never heard of I’m called a “liberal fundamentalist” because I’m “automatically offended by a conservative viewpoint.”
Now, the fact that I’m a libertarian doesn’t sink through this woman’s skull at all. Nor are my views automatic responses, they are long thought out response and I’ve periodically changed my mind. If the viewpoint is truly conservative, then based on history and reason I am opposed to it. Offended isn’t exactly the right word. Bigotry and hateful statements offend me but I’m more amused by conservative logic than anything else. But the default position to “not being conservative” doesn’t mean one is a leftist.
I am told that “the fact that you have a problem with them claiming a fetus is a person and that porn is unhealthy” proves I’m this liberal fundamentalist.
Actually I grew up anti-abortion and changed my mind on it when I thought about the issue and there is no evidence porn is “unhealthy;” unlike conservatives pushing anti-vaccination nonsense.
Sarah attacks the piece on the Salvation Army because it didn’t produce “any evidence that the right’s stance on porn is wrong.” True, it didn’t, but then the article wasn’t about porn, it was about the Salvation Army. I have posted my testimony before the South African parliament against censorship legislation and did address those issues there, but an article about the Salvation Army is not the place to dissect anti-porn hysteria. At the end of this piece I will post links to some articles posted here dealing with porn, contrary to Sarah’s assertions.
She is also deeply upset I didn’t prove porn “isn’t linked to human trafficking.” I also didn’t post anything proving Sarah — the woman who wrote the diatribe — isn’t a mass murderer. One doesn’t prove innocence, one proves guilt. Surely it behooves her to prove there is a link in the real world and not just one in her imagination.
I’ve known several porn performers over the years — both male and female — and all were doing it because they really wanted to. They weren’t being forced. Willing adults seeking to do this work constantly contact adult film studios. They really don’t have to snatch them off the streets — a ludicrous idea when you think about it. After all if you start buying involuntary sex slaves and releasing films of them you are handing evidence over to the police. Sarah then asserts, without a shred of evidence, that if there “was less of a demand in porn there would be less money in human trafficking.”
Now, there have been some incidents of trafficking in prostitution rings, where women are brought to the U.S. under false pretenses and their passports taken to force them into sex work, but none of those incidents involved women (or men) acting in porn films. If anything their pimps are trying to hide them from the police, not put the evidence up online for everyone to see. And even these incidents are few and far between. The whole “trafficking” hysteria, much like “stranger danger” is a gross hysteria pushing falsehoods and lies. What is a relatively small issue is exaggerated well beyond the evidence.
Today porn producers not only have to bid for labor in the free market like anyone else, but technology has made porn a home industry — quite literally. There are an unknown number of sites where individuals post their own homemade porn films of themselves or themselves with others on line for viewing. They charge fees to download the videos or to subscribe to their channel. These are individuals, couples, or groups who get together and do this entirely on their own over the Internet.
The reality is when it comes to porn there is no shortage of willing participants. People send in photos requesting to be considered for the “job.” Considering people are literally asking for porn jobs it would be highly inefficient for producers to grab unwilling performers out of Walmart parking lots. The adult industry doesn’t need unwilling participants — the costs are far too high — and it’s much easier and cheaper to just open their mail and go through the applications.
Sarah quite literally did what she accused me of, she jumped to an automatic response and asserted that since I disagree with conservatives that makes me and my readers “left-wing automatically.” I am not left-wing nor am I right-wing. I don’t want to shackle the social freedoms of people, nor do I want to shackle economic freedoms. I tend to support both. So that means on Tuesday some Left-wing ideologue comes along and denounces me for being Right-wing and then the Sarahs of the world respond with accusations I’m some radical leftist. I don’t like Donnie or Bernie—I see them more alike than different.
I’m an advocate of something I consider truly radical — what I call the Radical Center. It’s the idea that people should be free to make their own economic choices and make their own choices in regards to their private life. I don’t want to regulate the bedroom or the boardroom except to the extent necessary to protect the equal rights of others. That means I’m opposed to both social and economic authoritarianism. But apparently sad Sarah, much like the Karens of the world, didn’t bother to check out the facts before jumping to conclusions.
SUPPORT THIS PAGE AT PATREON
If you are a follower of this page, would you consider donating $5 per month toward keeping it alive. We do not hide behind the pay wall Medium allows. (Lower than $5 usually means much of it is now eaten up by fees to process it.) You can also make one time donations to the page.