• 66 Posts
  • 1.08K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 3rd, 2023

help-circle



  • Vespair@lemm.eetoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldThat explains it.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Are Hallie Berry, Drew Barrymore, Alexandria Daddario, Madonna, the singer Pink, or countless other people who have posed for commercial available photoshoots or video scenes “sex workers”?

    If no, I’m going to need you to articulate how they aren’t but Instagram and non-nude OF models somehow are.





  • Vespair@lemm.eetoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldThat explains it.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    Yellz0 and Kaitlyn Krems are not “sex workers,” unless you expand the term so broadly so as to include anyone offering titillation, at which point every model and most actors would fall under it as well.

    So no, I am specifically not assuming they follow sex workers, I am assuming they follow people who offer titillating content, as expressed.



  • How old do you think the women on pornhub are? What makes them more acceptable to look at over the women on instagram? I mean if we’re talking about dudes perving on private social media accounts of 15 year olds, yeah of course that’s fucked up. But that isn’t at all the implication I got here, rather I assumed he’s talking about OnlyFans models and other young women (not girls) who are offering their looks as a product, like Yellz0 or Kaitlyn Krems. In that case, this is extremely normal, and not really any different than the nearly 100 years of Hollywood; or did you assume the beautiful young starlets were only meant to appeal to their age peers (despite being cast and promoted by primarily older men)?

    Hollywood, magazines, art, sales catalogues, and pornography; they are all selling the sexual appeal of young adulthood. And so long as the men and women being gazed at are willingly and consensually offering the display of their body, and they’re of legal and intellectual ability to consent, then nobody is being wronged here, and nobody is behaving abnormally. These women deserve respect (as do the women on pornhub, to be clear; I’m still trying to understand what separates the two entities to you), and stepping over established boundaries, personal or social, is not okay obviously, but assuming the caveats I’ve outlined, I see nothing disrespectful about buying what somebody is willfully selling.

    As for the age gap… look, we can pretend to be this perfectly evolved species of always equitable and simple moral choices while ignoring literally the whole of human history which heavily implies an attraction in humans to young adulthood that doesn’t seem to wean with age, or we can accept reality for what it is, warts and all. Personally for me, I just don’t see how infantilizing young adults as if they are helpless children in need of constant coddling and viewing every relationship as an inherent competition of power and experience where any imbalance implies irreconcilable differences benefits us as a society.



  • This misses what makes Star Trek special and what makes the Nu-Trek shows such a failure, in my opinion.

    What make Star Trek what it is is that in a world filled to the brim with hopeless dystopian stories and prudent allegorical warning signs in story format, Star Trek offered a uniquely hopeful Utopian view of the future. No, things were not perfect, but it’s clear that many of the trivial problems of our world as well as nearly all scarcity issues were effectively “solved.”

    Meanwhile, Nu-Trek seems actively and solely focused specifically on tearing down or critiquing that Utopian view. I’m not opposed to critical consideration of a property, in fact in most cases it’s an excellent way to re-evaluate a property. But in the specific case of Star Trek all it really accomplishes is turning this uniquely hopeful thing of beauty into just another generic and cynical piece of mild social commentary in a field absolutely crowded with exactly that sort of content already.

    I’m not precious about Star Trek, I’m not above the idea of critiquing and reevaluating it, but when doing so accomplishes only taking away what makes it unique so it becomes just another interchangeable piece of Sci-Fi in the crowd… Well I guess I just have to ask “What was the fucking point?”



  • Important caveat: telling a person their ideology is hateful isn’t “an attack,” and letting them continue to wallow in ignorance is more unkind than enlightening them.

    That they feel attacked is another issue. We still have to deal with the consequences of this, and should be cognizant of it, but at the end of the day let us not lose the plot and start conflating their sensitivity with offensive language as if they weren’t two very different things.