It's a difficult thing to really justify or demonize because sex is a head game, a dance but also a match of submissiveness versus dominance; it can become violent and abusive through the ebb and flow of permission and denial. One moment I'm smacking her ass during sex, after a year of smacking her ass, she needs to be spanked before sex even begins, and now 10 years later there's whips and clamps and shackles. It all started with a mildly amusing smack to the ass that over time became a mutual fetish.

All of that extreme abuse porn is a matter of course, just like the secret fetish in a relationship starts with something innocent then leads to something semi-professional. This is the end result of a fetish that started with Deep Throat in the '70s opening the world to oral sex. Now it's facial abuse. She doesn't need a deep throat, now she just needs to undergo a hazing.

Will regulation change an industry piloted entirely by desire and sex starved user demand? Or would the culture simply evolve around the regulations?

Japan blurs out genitals, so what happens? The culture evolves around the restrictions and now we have a thriving bukkake subgenre. You want cum in eyes? Niche. Cum in hair? Niche. Cum on teeth? For real though, the focus is on teeth. We don't even need genitals now! Just pick a spot on the body and then ejaculate in mass! What a phenomenon.

Niches form and when they trend, that's when you end up with a popular site like facial abuse.

But hazing porn exists in the reverse and is also quite popular. Pegging? Come on, where's my face sitting fans? Hey now, there's also a lesbian variety of big assed Brazilian women who abuse skinny blond girls. I don't know what they're saying, but clearly it means something along the lines of dig that white caucausian nose further up my brown latin pussy. One woman is empowered, the other not so much, but she likes it, so... empowered? But who watches it? Men? Surely not women. Well, I know several women who watch the shit out of lesbian domination porn.

I had the absolute pleasure to sit with some really open lesbians and watch lesbian domination porn where the women wrestle each other, and the winner gets to fuck the loser in humiliating and abusive ways. I mean... the topic of empowerment is tough here. If you do porn just own it. Damn. Come on, it's just sex. People just like giving each other a hard time and they're always worrying about the next generation, even though they know humans are all dirty, filthy, sex craved fiends.

I think the most abusive porn I've watched (was sort of forced to watch) was a man having his penis hit with a hammer by a very mean woman. He liked having his penis hit with a hammer for some odd reason.

Not torn at all here. They utilize the resources of a stable society then they have to provide their services to all their members without basis of discrimination. The other way of looking at it is this. Do gays and lesbians have the option to avoid paying taxes on this business owner's benefits? Ie., he probably went to public school, his water bills are artificially low, the roads that are serviced so people can get to his place, the police provided to protect and prevent crime in his area, etc.

If gays and lesbians can opt out of paying taxes for anyone who could potentially deny them services (ie, as of right now everyone) then they wouldn't have a problem.

I don't think it's supposed to be taken in a general way and applied to "gay" people, but rather telling the story that isn't very often heard about those people who don't identify as either gay or straight, or who fall into the bisexual, asexual or questioning (gay/bi/trans curious) categories of the LGBT[QIA].

The truth is, we want to believe SO BADLY as a society that we are either gay or straight. And then we want to label ourselves to find community and identity SO BADLY, that some people get caught in the middle of two (or more!) different worlds, and that neither normative communities quite describe their sexuality. Hence the final comparison with the romantic comedy Sliding Doors. Also, that's why these crazy parties exist in the first place. (You're NOT invited.)

Let's see, there's:

L is for Lesbian, which is women's special gay letter. Technically you could just call LGBT, GBT, as some women identify as gay but not lesbian, or vice versa, or both. But women are special because of feminism, so they get L and G but men only get G.

Don't get on my ass because I speak the truth. I attend plenty enough GBT events to know the fluctuating social stigmas within the group, as well as the bitter rivalries between different letters of the acronym (or those who want to lengthen or shorten the representative letters). It's confusing to people who have this misconception that all stories of gay or lesbian people apply to all gay or lesbian people. It's so diverse, what's even the point of labels any more?

Anyway, moving on.

G is for Gay, which is women or men, but in common usage was (or is, depending on your perspective) for men. Yet as time goes on and the information age fills in our social gaps, women have begun to identify as gay. In fact, I have a genderfluid friend who was born female, but often identifies as a gay male, and has even been accepted into the ranks of the the Gay Men's Chorus. Take that label obsessed society!!

B is for Bisexual, which is a broad category that I'd say more aptly covers this situation, but even more so I think the Q (Questioning) with a little or a lot of A (Asexual) of the greater acronym LGBTQ or LGBTQIA is an even better term for these two star crossed lovers.

T is for Transgender, which is another broad category but with very specific splinter factions of crossdressers, transexuals, transvestites, genderfluid, etc. etc. Some of these terms, depending on the context are either outdated, have new or older and more specific defining characteristics, or even more often, people define themselves as the umbrella term itself, transgender, because the feelings of one or the other specifics oscillates and changes as transgender people (male and female) age. I know trans people of all ages and wow, the perspectives are vast, and are rarely consistent throughout the years. (You just DON'T know how you'll identify at the age of 65+.)

Q is for Questioning, which is for people who just don't know what they are. This one is really an open ended letter and often isn't included because it represents an ignorance of the self. Maybe you figure out your sexuality or gender specifics right away or maybe it takes you years of experimentation to find your niche. Or maybe you transcend the boundaries forever, always changing and never staying the same throughout the years. The main thing here is that you don't know. Maybe you have a gay romance and then you're like, "Damn, I'm definitely straight" and now you're not even part of LGBT. Q is like the gateway letter. lol

I is for Intersex, which is for people who have genitalia or other gender defining anatomy which is different, not entirely present, is equally both, or more of one than the other. Look it up, because I'm the least familiar with this one, though I do have friends who are intersex. I just haven't asked them enough specifics out of respect. Also, recent research into genetics has shown that you could have a portion of your body that isn't gender defining, but which is made up of the opposite sex's genetic code. I've heard of people who have had their toe or their heart identified as male, but the rest of their body is female. Some people will never even know they're intersex, and depending on what part of their body is intersex, may not experience any feelings other than their body's dominant sex. (I don't have a scientific link, but it was part of a topic that I attended at PRIDE.

A is for Asexual, which is for people who don't have sexual feelings, or who don't act on sexual feelings for any number of reasons intellectual, physical, or both. I don't know how broad this category is but I myself go through periods (sometimes years) of asexuality. A defining characteristic for some people who have misidentified as gay or bi. For example, my parents thought I was gay and I had friends who would openly call me gay, despite me not showing ANY sexual emotions towards either sex. Though I did have both guys and girls who would hit on me or have sex (oral or otherwise) with me on the down low, despite my half interest in both! People are curious and when you can't figure out someone's sexual identity, some people will lay it on so thick, it could be seen as sexual harassment. I knew several girls that just wanted to have sex with me so bad to figure out if I was gay or straight. I just didn't care about either sexes at the time, though I was pleasantly stimulated to varied effects.

I think this is the story that isn't told. If you're asexual or going through an asexual period, that doesn't make you gay!

There could be more movies or shorts out there telling this story, but this is the first honest look into the Q and A of LGBT that I've ever seen. Shit, and I thought when I published my book I'd be the first. Damn. heh

Lesbianism!

The key word is "implied". You're making a judgement based on what you have read in to his comments, not what was said...

And yes, polygamists have a choice. A gay man could be a polygamist as well, but he's always going to be gay. That should not be seen as criticism of polygamists (as long as everyone can legally consent, I don't see why the state should step in), but someone else made the slippery slope argument as in, if we allow same sex marriage, we open the flood gates. He is pointing out why that is a fallacious argument to withhold the right of SSM, not that we should extend the right to gays/lesbians only and not go further. You're shooting the guy pointing out what a ridiculous argument it is rather than the person promoting said argument, and then flailing at anyone who doesn't agree with you...

re. the second paragraph quoted below, that is your opinion of marriage and you are entitled to it, but the mistake you are making (the same that most conservatives who don't want gays to be able to get hitched let alone polygamists) is believing that your view is the last word on the situation. Ultimately, the right to be able to marry (in which ever configuration suits you, again, as long as everyone is legally consenting) should be up to you, and how others choose to define their love is none of your damn business. Once you start trying to define and dictate to others what their relationship is (or is not), how are you any different to the judgemental assholes you apparently abhor?

If men of GOD trip and fall, they're usually landing penis first in other men or children.
I loathe gay clergy not for staying in their closet of self-hatred, I loathe them for actively speaking out against their own nature and therefore making it harder for those who chose not to be liars.
I chose to discard the bible because of the immoral, unethical, cruel and simply made up stuff that's written in it. That should be reason enough.
I detest christian churches for supporting pedophilia and actively covering up pedophile's crimes while having the gall to tell me what I should or should not do sexually. I detest them for claiming the authority to make up rules of morality when they refuse to obey the rule of law and human decency. The Duggars are just a recent example of that.
The reason society won't allow sexual relationships with children is simply because we recognise that children aren't able to make informed choices regarding sexual consent. That's why the world frowned on Courtney Stodden and Doug Hutchinson, because everyone knew it was a shitty idea made by weird, creepy people.
Consent is something grown ups can give. And millions of gay men do it all the time, without your approval or not. All they want is equal treatment.
If pedophiles wanted that (and they did try in the past), we tell them to go fuck themselves because the people they want to, are simply too young to make that choice. There's a legal limit for drinking, driving and fucking and it's there for a reason.
If they claim "I was born this way!", which they often are, we tell them we have therapies for that. They don't go there because their sexuality is weird, out of the norm or gross, it's because it always hurts the other people involved. Always.

You are the one ranting "But what if you take away the rule book?! Goats will rape our children!" You seem to be the one worried that all goes Mad Max if we're not threatened with eternal damnation anymore.
I for one are not worried any place turns into Sodom and Gomorrah. You want to know why? Because I have all those gay, lesbian and transgender people to remind me that everybody deserves respect. They can walk up to me and start a conversation and don't have to worry I will yell "Abomination!" and start throwing my own poop.
Maybe I can learn something from their expirience. Maybe even somebody like you could. I hope somebody you truly love turns out to be gay, it would be quite educational for you to know what they know.
And you're right, I don't know anybody called Jack. I can only offer a Johannes but he was an idiot.

@JustSaying

I'm gonna be nice cause I don't have any experience with you or your opinions yet. And, to an extent, I agree..

Hopefully you can contribute something meaningful to videosift, considering all the great voices who've disappeared from this place.

It's just extremely frustrating that these two goofballs are haven't left yet.

And in fact, your premise is a topic that I definitely have been meaning to discuss.

There's a Prager "University" video that addresses that exact premise of sugarcoated vs blatant belligerent racist.

The video itself is flagrantly patronizing.

That being said we have all three types of racist on videosift currently:

Bobknight is your classic Neo-Con Racist.
- He hates blacks, gays, jews & liberals and makes no qualms about expressing how subhuman those groups are.

Trancecoach is your more politically-correct racist.
- Seems pretty open-minded and accepting, until you reach the middle or end of his comment.
Then it's all like "isn't it sad that all black people have no fathers and live in the ghetto."

Lantern is a special case.
- He'll be toned-down yet flagrant at times. Openly belligerent at others.
But it's always under the guise of "I can't be racist cause I don't FEEL like i'm racist"

He even used the classic "Well I CAN'T be racist cause my DAUGHTER married a BLACK/BIRACIAL guy! See, not racist"

Then will immediately say some heinously racist shit like he has in this thread. i.e.

"Of course I didn't bother reading the article for context or facts.
I'm a cop, I know how the 'Criminal Element' thinks.
Clearly those kids were dangerous.
If we had just heard the audio, we would have seen how those punks are no better than those looting rioting savages in Baltimore"

So no, JustSaiyan.. I would NOT prefer to have some idiot saying idiot things whenever I come back to check out the site.

At least Bill O'Reilly is smart enough to have a somewhat substantive discussion.

Lantern just says racist shit, then cowers behind the "i'm a good person because my job & family FORCE me into being around lesbians & colored people.. and I put up with that pretty well. so.. yeah.."

But yeah, I just hate people like Lantern cause he's too chicken shit to just say he thinks black people are inferior whenever I press him on it.

At least Bobknight will straight tell you gays are immoral sinful perverts or whatever. The old-fashion, honest, terrifying-murder-clown bigot he is.

Then again, Bobknight can't admit he's racist either.
So.. maybe that's just a core Conservative talking point now.

Wow, you're an old white cop.

That explains a lot.

Accept it Lantern, you're racist. You're a cop. You're a racist cop.

Maybe - jingoist - is a better way to describe it.
But extreme nationalism & racism go hand in hand.

You regularly say shit like " [Obama] has next to nothing in common with American traditions and history. "

You don't think that's a racist comment. But it is.

You're implying Obama is a foreigner & shouldn't be trusted.

In other words, "Go back to africa! Stop corrupting our pure Anglo-Saxon traditions with your muddy brown multi-culturism! Damn socialist lib-tards!"

P.S. -

Just because you say - "I've got a black-asian-female-lesbian friend" - doesn't mean you're not racist.

Talk about deluded.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read, and I should know about cops and racism because I've been a cop for 30 yrs.

We have black cops, we have female cops, we have lesbian cops, we have asian cops. No one here cares what color skin you have, we only care if you are a problem or not.

I have inlaws raising a biracial child because his father killed his mother, he is now in a Christian college and is a great kid.

My nephew, who did 2 tours in Iraq, has been dating a biracial girl for years. Nobody cares about skin color. It's about what kind of person you are. But you won't believe that because you DON"T want to believe it.

You are so deluded, it's sad that you go through life thinking this kind of crap.

I'm going to be devil's advocate here and take the side of fearful American white trash:

Dear gays,

You're ruining the last good thing we had going on here in this country. We took care of the natives, forcing them into small communities where they slowly became psychologically oppressed and fraught with addiction.

But then we lost our control over niggers, who had their places down on our plantations. No matter, we can still push asians around because they're our bitches. But then we started to take them seriously. I don't even understand that.

I can't tell the difference between India people (Indians? Like our natives?) and allah-la-las -- and, really, I suspect because they're all in a similar area of the globe, they're the same. I might even believe Asia and India/Middle East are separate continents or somehow not entangled socially, economically and politically.

I think that's all the colored people, so lastly, addressing devil worshipers and homosexuals, who are really very similar in their connection to Satan. I can't tell you how disgusted I am about a penis going into an anus. It's just so gross. Hot lesbians are alright, but even that goes a little far, as I'm uncomfortable talking about that with people and church says no. Yes, that's bad too... and my wife definitely doesn't need to know anything about what I just said about lesbos. Now, a dyke, on the other hand, I think men are technically allowed to punch dykes.

I've already said too much. I feel gross.

In conclusion, it's been a downward spiral into immorality. Starting with the freedom of black people, who slowly made us lose sight on what is right and decent in the nation which God granted us. From negroes, came homosexuality.

She was someone who was trying to sell records and whose record label and management were adamant of the necessity to stay in the closet. Not the same thing as a private person.

If you listen to it again with that in mind, that she has been instructed to stay in the closet by folks eager to make money off her... she is subversively brilliant, I think. About as out and proud as you can be inside that straitjacket.

I remember when she came out of the closet. She was on the cover of a magazine, displayed prominently at the grocery store checkstand. Two women in line in front of me saw the cover. They were shocked -- SHOCKED I SAY -- that k d lang was a lesbian!

Different times. Nobody would be shocked today. She wouldn't be in the closet today.

I mean, look at Adam Lambert on American Idol. As gay as anything, and even he took a while to say it. (I think. I don't watch the show but I seem to remember huge speculation and then he finally just said it.)

And that was just a couple of years ago.

And that is why they couldn't just say it. Arsenio helped her say as best he could, she said it as best she could, within the constraints of the times.

First epic rap that failed to break 10 votes I think...and I can see why. This one honestly pissed me off. What, did they think because it had lesbian jokes that makes it funny? Yeah, tang lickers are funny...not... Anyways, bad taste in my mouth. Reminds me of a crappy sequel.

@newtboy
told ya he was pissed.
i admire this mans passion.
in fact,i applaud it.

while i do not agree with his attack therapy tactics and do not subscribe to his over-all conclusions.i absolutely ADORE how he calls out the cognitive dissonance of the american voter.

because he is right.

how can you subscribe to a law that makes prostitution illegal,yet porn legal?
or the guy who deals crack or meth as being a criminal? yet opiates are,by far,the leading cause of death in regards to controlled substances.so who is the bigger criminal?

and what,exactly,IS a criminal?is it because the state says so?if you subscribe to that,then i am a criminal.

i found his condemnation of the christian church to be the most delicious.
jesus christ was an insurrectionist,a radical,a dissident and a dissenter.a zealot in the face of the powered elite.

so how can you fight a war of aggression in jesus christs name?
how can you state that god blesses america with over 2.4 million people incarcerated?or to categorize and demonize those who may be different i.e:gay,lesbian or atheist and yet still call yourself a christian?

i giggled with delight when he pointed out that the very same people who are championing those insurrectionists,dissidents and agitators of the past as somehow being representative of their morals and ethics,are the very same people they are demonizing today for breaking the rules.

this man is so pissed off and i love it.
he says things that will make conformists extremely uncomfortable,and we NEED to be a bit uncomfortable.if only to shake off the apathy and lethargy.

as for the taxes argument..meh..i dont subscribe to the "privatize everything" ,because some things should not be profit driven,but i also do not subscribe to the 'taxes pay for essential services",unless wars of aggression,corporate welfare and big-agribusiness subsidies are considered "essential".

our democracy is broken,our government dysfunctional and serves only to keep the balance of the status quo on top..and fuck the regular dude.

can you REALLY say your government represents you?
ok,go ahead and vote.here are your choices:chocolate or vanilla but both are made by hagen daaz.

you really should watch to the end..he just gets madder and madder.
truths can often be uncomfortable,but that never changes the fact that they are truths.

and goddamn i love your optimism! just cant share it on this issue,though if you could bottle it up i am betting you would make a fortune.

ill have three bottles of newt please...to go.

You've just answered your own question.

The fact that the "target" is gay is irrelevant. It wouldn't matter if Keys character was a lesbian or transgender or a straight white dude. As a general rule, people aren't comfortable with work acquaintances sharing intimate details of their sexual life, regardless of orientation.

Put it this way. Let's say that Keys character was a straight guy bragging about "nailing chicks" and Peeles character was a woman who turns out to be a lesbian. That behaviour would be seen as creepy at best and most likely sexual harassment.

Lesbians in Spaaaacccceeee!