Jezebel.com discovers unknown fact: porn is made of rape

[sam]

How many times have antip*rn feminists said that women are raped to make p*rn, and how many times were we insulted and our claims called preposterous along with other, nastier adjectives?

Jury Decides Consent Is Not Required For Girls Gone Wild
http://jezebel.com/5594774/jury-decides ... -gone-wild

Looks like when poor women, non-English women, Christian women, or prostituted women are raped to make porn that's certainly not okay, but it's also not rage-inducing to a point beyond the pale.

But when men raping to make p*rn happens to a woman that readers can see a lot of themselves in - an ordinary woman dancing in a club - no insults are tossed at the messenger and she is readily believed. It's not as if p*rnography isn't full of videos depicting rape complete with many non-Jezebelish women saying the p*rn made of them was rape, so why aren't Linda Lovelace and Shelley Lubben and Rebecca Mott and hundreds of other rape victims believed?

Pro-porn feminists understand that "Jane Doe" dancing didn't mean she deserved to have her rape made into p*rn, while simultaneously considering sexual assault an ugly but begrudgingly accepted consequence of prostitution. If anyone at Jezebel has ever gotten outraged at what multitudes of men did to Rebecca they haven't pulled out a finger long enough to say so on the internet, not like they've used all ten fingers to defend not-uncommonly-rape p*rn.

Sometimes you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet, and sometimes you gotta let a few thousand women be raped every year to make a diverse p*rn industry.

[sam]

And sometimes your website host decides that making and masturbating to p*rn is a First Amendment freedom but selling or speaking about it is not.

[thebewilderness]

We are conditioned to believe that objecting to the abuse is a far worse offense than the abuse itself.
Nowhere is the effectiveness of this conditioning demonstrated as clearly, as sharply, as painfully, as in a discussion of porn.

[pisaquari]

"Jury Checks Hard-Ons to Determine Female Consent"


In other news, Jezebel writes:"No means yes, and assault means it's okay to roll the cameras. If there were ever a time to get righteously angry, it's now." Filmed sexual assault that the Jezebel writers don't get off on= wrong, get pissed! Filmed sexual assault that Jezebel writers get off on= that's pretty hot--no, leave it on!

That's the part of the twisted and entitled relationship porn viewers develop with their content--their arousal determines the "performer's" freedom, will, interests and consent. A pathetic form of validation for a sad, sad world.

[berryblade]

I never liked Jezebel. I feel so awful for that womon and now I like Jezebel even less.

The verdict/case itself is ing. Even though she explicitly stated she didn't want to partake, her being guilty of being female and daring to be out in public makes it "consent"

errrrrgh

[demonista]

"Jury Checks Hard-Ons to Determine Female Consent"


In other news, Jezebel writes:"No means yes, and assault means it's okay to roll the cameras. If there were ever a time to get righteously angry, it's now." Filmed sexual assault that the Jezebel writers don't get off on= wrong, get pissed! Filmed sexual assault that Jezebel writers get off on= that's pretty hot--no, leave it on!

That's the part of the twisted and entitled relationship porn viewers develop with their content--their arousal determines the "performer's" freedom, will, interests and consent. A pathetic form of validation for a sad, sad world.

just wanted to highlight your awesome response. so f-ing true.