There was an interesting comment on NC's list of links yesterday, comparing Trump to Berlusconi.

This part, for instance, is quite poignant:

The exquisite thing about the modern reality show campaign/administration is that you get to keep your vices and actually leverage them. No need to hide your underage prostitutes (or worse not have any) when you can make them part of the Grand Show. This weeks episode is “Virility. Got caught buying a parliamentarian with 1 mil euros in a paper bag? This weeks episode is “Cunning”.

Three things I have to say, @bobknight33:
1. You're complaining about christianity being attacked. Ok, fine, I'll tell you something: I am tired of your religious beliefs invading my life like an middle eastern dictator a small, oily country. Oh, I have it good, I'm a straight, white middle-european man, I'm fine so far. Others are not. They're tired as well.
I can go on a meth-bender, marry one of the Kardashians in Vegas and annul the whole affair in less than a week. If I win the lottery, I can post on Craigslist and get myself a nice gold-digging whore who'll sign a certificate that makes us husband and wife if I'm willing to trade lackluster blowjobs for money. Best part, it ain 't prostitution if you're married, legally worldwide. Heck, I can even become an abusive piece of shit as long as I can beat her well enough so she won't complain to others.
Because marriage is sanctimonious.
If I was gay and would like to marry the guy of my dreams that I've been with for 20 years, that isn't possible. Because the book doesn't approve.
If my sister got raped, you people would force her to birth the child of her rapist. Her concerns don't matter, life is a holy gift from god. Care to explain to me the position of the catholic church (you know, those christians that make up the majority of christianity) on slavery during centuries slavery? How holy was life in all those european colonies back in the day with all these missionaries teaching the good book? What exactly was their statement as an organisation when millions or people were murdered during the third Reich?
All that silence but when it comes to abortion, you people show up with guns and show the value of this great gift by murdering doctors. Fuck my sisters concerns, right? It just rape, walk it off.
I'm well of, I could join the club as a full member anytime. As long as I'm not calling the cops on the pedophile priests and the self-loathing faggots can stand on their pulpits and tell little children they're broken. I could be among you.
But I have a conscience. I can't buy all that talk about love and forgiveness and ignore all that hatred and cruelty that is in the very basis of your beliefs, that wretched, old bible of yours.
I have to look that man in the mirror in the eyes.
The only way you can impose all that crap on me anymore if through the government. I believe your faith has as much place in there than Tom Cruise's. None.
The Prodigy said it best and I think the people who lived at the time the bible was written would agree: Invaders must die.
Your religion invades my rights as a human being.

2. Did he rise?
Nope, little, brown Jewish got killed. End of facts, begin of story. I don't trust the testimony of men (and I said this before) who consider a walkman witchcraft. People at that time could be convinced that they farted because they swallowed an angry spirit that wants to escape.
You book did a terrible job of explaining how the world came to be (we're golems that had so much incest that they inbred mankind), makes up the worst disastermovies (everything turns to Waterworld but we have a boat with a pair of every animal in existence [imagine all those different kinds of ants alone] and then incest till population is back up) and turns mushroomtrips/mental illness in supposedly accurate future predictions (you know it's the end of the world because none of the riders is called "Incest").
The only reason people buy into the mythology and the extended universe (where's that bible chapter about Satan ruling the Sarlac Pit and Santa being canon again? ) is because for centuries children were taught it at a young age. And then you told them not to question it as heretics get the stake. Ashes yes but not the quick Buffy way.
Don't get me wrong, I like that Jesus fellow and I'm willing to believe his basic message but let's be honest. If J.K. Rowling was born 2000 years earlier, we'd pray to Harry Potter and wear lightning shaped jewelery around our neck. You guys got big because the Roman empire made you relevant. That's it.

3. What's up with '53'? Is that the christian answer to '42'?

Hardly a good metaphor for what happened, given the investigations into the incident. Newt sort of fixes the analogy, but I don't think he took it far enough.

It's not like it was an illicit deal with a shady prostitute, but more of a wedding to a supposed good person. We thought everything was above board and that our significant other was true and faithful. While, in reality they were shagging every person they could behind our back.

One day we go to donate blood, only to find out we have HIV. In the aftermath of this discovery, it becomes apparent of our spouse's perfidy and the fact that they have HIV from their careless affairs. We find out they weren't wearing proper protection. Now we have to live with their mess.

Stewart Lee:

"It seems unfair, doesn't it, given that America is the largest consumer of oil per head in the world and they seemed annoyed with the bloke from BP for merely trying to provide them with the oil that they craved. Americans, picking on the bloke from BP. It's ridiculous. It's like a furious customer punching a prostitute in the face because he's sickened by his own desire"

It's interesting to note that by making the video and posting it, they've both technically skirted prostitution...

The problem with white culture is.. @lantern53, @newtboy & @AllWhitePeople

White Privilege insulated you from the reality of your advantages and the true suffering of others who aren't white

Hell, white people include if poor uneducated.

(I asked a white friend.
He said that white people just see other white people as strangers.
Makes sense now I guess)

You live in this White Privilege Bubble where "everyone's equal cause this is AMERICA!"

Everyone in your bubble has bootstraps. A safety net.
Reliable job opportunites and call-backs.
No fear of being harassed and/or murdered by police.
The general unconditional trust of society



In the bubble of impoverished black culture, however.. having a chance at leaving that poverty is a pipe-dream.

I know, because I live in Atlanta.
A place notorious for lots of poor black communities.

My girlfriend was born and raised in it.

Her parents were addicted to crack.
(Funny how crack possession carries a harsher sentence than cocaine possession, considering their the exact same drug.)

She saw a dead body in the street when she was 6.
(Gang violence is present when decent jobs and summer camps aren't)

She had Police SWAT invade her home & hold a gun to her head around the same age.
(Because busting potential drug dealers is more important that entering the correct house.)

Her cousin, who was probably a prostitute since 12 or 13, is currently very happy that her new "boyfriend" doesn't beat her.
(She feels like that's a win. Hell, my girlfriend was herself convinced that she'd "grow up to be a prostitute."
You know, the norm.)

For the last 5 months, my girlfriend has lived with a 21 year old prostitute (started at 14 when homeless) and her much older "boyfriend"/pimp because that was the only "affordable" housing near her work.

(She mentioned that earlier this month, there was a new girl there some mornings who was definitely probably 13 or 14.
She literally just moved out today and happened to spot her ex-roommate working her corner near West End Mall. )

So yeah, white people assume - No, righteously assert - all black people are just a equal as white people.

Because you all think:

"I've got bootstraps & dignity & great opportunites & everlasting hope.
Stop whining and take personal responsibility."

The reality is starkly different.

Black people are reminded of that difference LITERALLY EVERYDAY.

We're remind everytime an unarmed black youth is murder, just for "looking threatening".

Even with civil rights laws, even with a brown president.

You'll never know what it's truly like to be non-white..

Because White Privilege prevents you from even having to acknowledge these issue.

Just call it all even and blame the rest on personal responsibility.

OK, re-read it...it said (among other things, and sorry to keep cut and pasting)...


Carrera is upset because:
Sar-sleaz-ian is an new-age-feminist hack who finds porn disgusting, and feels pity for any women who performs sex acts for money.
She belittles porn actresses like Mercedes & Cytherea as lowly abused victims.
Then, at Mercedes' request, refuses to support Cytherea when she ACTUALLY becomes a victim.
Yet, she denies the agency of sex-workers to choose their profession, referring to them as "prostituted women".
This is why Sar-shittyhumanbeing-ian is a hypocrite, a fuax-intellectual, and [as Mercedes succinctly puts it] damaging gender relations.

Which to me all boiled down to me wondering if she's really that silly as to disenfranchise what I see as the most feminist of professions, or are some people just portraying one out of context quote that way, because I know there was a smear campaign against her that made some things up about her, and had other actual factual gripes, and they confused everything.

The reason I 'cherry picked' ONLY that part of the comment was that I already knew the rest of it from seeing evidence of it, her being a fraudster and con artist. I needed no convincing of that, and it had no bearing on the other point, which was new to me.
That's why I never disputed those other claims, so I don't feel I need to explain why they aren't implying all you said, and why evidence of them misses my focused question's point.
OK?

Here's my original comment.

http://videosift.com/video/Porn-Actress-Mercedes-Carrera-LOSES-IT-With-Modern-Feminists#comment-1853296

Re-read it. Then explain why you'd cherry pick the legitimate claim that:

'[Sarkeesian] denies the agency of sex-workers to choose their profession, referring to them as "prostituted women".'

Better yet, explain to me how my statement that:

'Anita is literally profiting off the fuax-oppression of women in gaming media & culture'

or

'This is why [Sarkeesian] is a hypocrite, a fuax-intellectual, and damaging gender relations.'

or

'Anita Sarkeesian is a troll and a puppet.'

or

'She's only stirring up shit to further her career.'

Explain to me how all these statements aren't implying, suggesting, connoting, alluding, proposing, insinuating that Anita Sarkeesian is a fraudster & a con-artist.

Please explain those two things. No more, no less.

You didn't say "she's a fraud"
you didn't say "she's a con artist"
You said she degrades and denigrates sex workers...so show me more than the single quote 'prostituted women' to prove it, or is that really all you got, like I'm beginning to believe?

Just read the titles of your videos and see that not one is on that topic, not one.

I thought your main (secondary) point was that she's a well known anti-sex worker/porn star that insults them with labels like 'prostituted women' and....well...and nothing, no other labels have been offered....so I guess she's NOT a well known anti-sex worker then? What IS your position? It's confusing.

I never have asserted any such thing about her, I only asked you to provide evidence of YOUR claims about her...I made none, so I have none to back up.
Again, I never asserted she was or wasn't anything, I did assert that your contention that she had no reason to disable comments or cancel one event except to silence critics, she had a very good reason besides that, and she didn't silence anyone because she held other events and (according to you) left open other venues for people to discuss her.
That's why your argument didn't hold water...and still doesn't, but you seem to have dropped that line and moved on to simply 'why do you love her' kind of strawman.

I'm defending nothing but truth in discussion, and your primary assertion ran contrary to that, and your secondary one needs confirmation one way or another.
I enable no one in that, but you might enable her supporters by putting forth easily dismissed reasons for disliking her. If you had good reasons you had shown me, I would dislike her (actually, I should say dislike her more, I've said time and time again I don't like her, I'm not a fan, she's a terrible spokesperson for anything)
So you can continue to ignore what I say and say I'm supporting and enabling a con artist if you wish, it won't make it true and only means you don't understand what I've said.

Well, I'll try to explain then.
I have a tendency to not take the word of someone that obviously has a pre-conceived opinion. The 'evidence' you provided was not ample...the written parts were nothing but commentary (and one was just commentary about Westborough Church) The videos were preceded by the explanation by the creator that they were simply nothing but re-edited videos made to say what he wanted, not reality. There's absolutely no reason to give such videos a look at all, so after the first one I didn't.
I refuse to acknowledge them because I found them lacking in actual EVIDENCE and full of nothing but comment and snark, and in the case of the videos, just admitted lies. I asked for evidence of her actions, not evidence that other people dislike her.
I tried watching that video last week, didn't like it, didn't finish it.
As I said repeatedly, I'm open to EVIDENCE, just not pure propaganda presented as evidence. That's all you've linked so far, propaganda. I have not seen a whit of EVIDENCE about her actions/statements involving sex workers from you yet.
If you care to provide some real evidence of her actions, not someone bitching about her, not someone taking 2 words she said and making a 10 minute video about what THEY say she meant. How about a single interview where SHE said something derogatory about sex workers. How about a single article where she's QUOTED saying something derogatory about sex workers...and as I've said I don't think the phrase "prostituted women" cuts it, that can be 100% non-derogatory if said in a non-derogatory way...so provide EVIDENCE, or give up trying to make me have an opinion about her...I really don't care a bit about her, and don't think she's a worthy spokesperson for anything...isn't that good enough for you? Does every thing she does have to be seen by everyone in a bad light? I don't see why.

How would I know what the video was about if I didn't watch it. After the first one, that was nothing but a waste of my time, juxtaposing comments and (faked? Likely considering it's made my McIntosh who makes a living faking videos) web page screenshots, I ignored the other 4 assuming you put your best foot first.

So wait, you're saying the anti Sarkeesian "faked" video you linked was made by her 'partner'?!? WTF?!? Now that is odd.

Yes, we know she's a bad example of a 'feminist' trying to change gaming. I'm not a fan, as I've said repeatedly.

You contend she's also vocally anti-sex worker (waiting for the quoted proof)...which begs the question, if she IS a well known anti-sex worker activist, why would said sex workers go to her for support?! That means this entire video is based on a fraud, by the sex workers, pretending they thought she would 'support' a sex worker rape victim when they really were just trying to troll her because they don't like her stance...allegedly.

I'm still waiting for non-faked clear evidence of what you say about her to convince me....if you care. I simply don't, I haven't thought about her since gamer gate was in the daily news. Maybe she is totally anti-sex worker, fraud, liar, trixter, hustler...but you have not provided a whit of evidence to that effect beyond her use of the words "prostituted women", which carries the connotation you bring with you so is not proof of her distain.

I'm mid 40's, white, and lived (among many other places) in the murder capital of the world (East Palo Alto) when it was just that, the murder capital of the world (more murders per capita than anywhere on the planet in the late 80's) so sheltered is not a word I would use to describe myself. Untrusting of people who have an obvious bias, yes, I am certainly that, but I am always willing to examine new information with a critical eye (but not propaganda like the first set of videos you linked, or non sequiturs like the third article you linked) and I'm always willing change my viewpoint if it seems it's wrong in light of new evidence. I'm waiting for that evidence. The 3 articles you linked were 2/3 on topic, but amounted to only commentaries lambasting her for saying two words, that's not evidence of her tone/meaning when saying them, the third was completely off topic, as was the first video (the only one I wasted my time with) and I don't take the word of someone who obviously hates her with a passion as evidence, sorry.

Lazy bastard, yes, but not too lazy to read these...they were on topic at least....mostly.

Ok, the first one said what I said, that she used the term technically. It's maybe the listeners who don't understand that a 'prostituted woman' may be prostituting herself, so it's not pejorative or denying women having 'agency of their own'.
The second was the same thing, commentary about her saying the words 'prostituted women'.
The third was about the Westburrough Baptist Church?!?! WTF? Yes, it mentions "radical feminists" and derides their puritanical prudeness, but it never mentions Sarkeesian, and never quotes these "radical feminists" to support their claim that they really are puritanical.
I bothered to read all 3, and nothing there was in dispute, she did say sex workers are "prostituted women" (and disgustingly ignored the prostituted men, that uber bitch, burn her!). EDIT: because some took it as " agency-denying code phrase used by sex-worker-eliminationist radical feminists" does not mean it was meant that way, perhaps it was, but I'm not yet convinced. A video of her saying it with disgust on her face and in her voice would convince me....if that matters to you. She's off my radar.
I said originally that I think the term applies, and is only pejorative if the listener thinks selling sex is bad. That's why I can't understand porn stars being upset by it, but could understand them being upset by being called 'dirty whores on film' or something like that.
I still can't say if she meant it in a negative way, only that it's clear that she likely said the words about sex workers, and some took it negatively.

EDIT: I never said she was a good speaker, which is why I'm not a fan. She had a point to make originally, but her style and the over reaction to it overshadowed her cause. That makes her a terrible spokesperson for anything....in case you thought I support her.

Asshats. the lot of yuh

I shouldn't do this @newtboy you lazy fuckin' bastard.
It's definitely not going to change your mind.

Are you sure you're not autistic or something?

"Pro-sex-worker activists legitimately criticized the third Feminist Frequency for its use of "prostituted women" to describe sex workers, which is an agency-denying code phrase used by sex-worker-eliminationist radical feminists. "

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/06/17/new-feministfrequency-video/

https://www.readability.com/articles/24yxtecr

https://everydaywhorephobia.wordpress.com/2013/08/03/swerfsterfs-the-westboro-baptist-church-of-feminism/