• Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
  • FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!

One question to anti-porn feminists.

Dear Stop Porn Culture and No More Page 3,

Is Mr. Hefner a sexist just because for him,




http://hmhfoundation.org/site/




female beauty is more than Avon Cosmetics?




Cindy Jackson understands very well that chemicals alone do not transform not-so-attractive-lady to very attractive:




http://www.cindyjackson.com/my-surgery.html




I understand that I can't compete with these hunks,




http://playgirl.com/




so if someone knows a hetero pornostudio which welcomes slightly handicapped male actors, please let me know. Thank you.
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
I find your questions very interesting - but I highly doubt there are so many anti-porn feminists registered members on this forum.

On the other hand, they might register to try and whoop your behind ;)

Anyways, Peace and have a great day!!!
 

Rey C.

Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
On the broader topic of (radical) feminism, there are some interesting blogs on the attacks being waged on freedom of speech in the United States, by way of using the term "hate speech" to ban any speech, words or visual images that the feminazis don't like. Anything that these whining shrews don't like will be met with claims of misogyny (the most overused/misused word in the English language right now), gender insensitivity or sexism.

LeanIn.org is but one thought-police organization that fosters this way of totalitarian thinking. It is headed by Sheryl Sandberg of FaceBook fame (a left-winger) and supported by Condelezza Rice (a right-winger), one of the neocon architects of the Iraq War. With the rad feminist organization, N.O.W., referred to as N.O.W.W.W.W. (the National Organization for Whiny Wealthy White Women), one has to wonder what Condoleeza is doing hanging out with Sherry's gang. When they go on a road trip and tell Condi to fetch their luggage, I figure it'll finally be clear to her then.
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
Rey, it's the same here. One of the biggest bigots in the feminist field is Alice Schwarzer. I don't know if there are so many english articles about her, but she is exactly what you describe.
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
On the broader topic of (radical) feminism, there are some interesting blogs on the attacks being waged on freedom of speech in the United States, by way of using the term "hate speech" to ban any speech, words or visual images that the feminazis don't like. Anything that these whining shrews don't like will be met with claims of misogyny (the most overused/misused word in the English language right now), gender insensitivity or sexism.

LeanIn.org is but one thought-police organization that fosters this way of totalitarian thinking. It is headed by Sheryl Sandberg of FaceBook fame (a left-winger) and supported by Condelezza Rice (a right-winger), one of the neocon architects of the Iraq War. With the rad feminist organization, N.O.W., referred to as N.O.W.W.W.W. (the National Organization for Whiny Wealthy White Women), one has to wonder what Condoleeza is doing hanging out with Sherry's gang. When they go on a road trip and tell Condi to fetch their luggage, I figure it'll finally be clear to her then.

Making the distinction between feminism and radical feminism is an important point. There are all sorts of feminists and people who put them all under the same umbrella merely demonstrate their ignorance, kudos for pointing it out!
 
My posts are often difficult to compartmentalize to just one forum.

http://board.freeones.com/showthread.php?832958-Political-babes

I'd like to say this time that although Mr. Flynt is paralyzed from the
waist down due to injuries sustained in a 1978 murder attempt by Joseph
Paul Franklin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Paul_Franklin>.[2]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Flynt#cite_note-2> he is a very strong
defender of freedom of speech.

http://www.larryflynt.com/free-speech-is-only-important-if-its-offensive/

But The Internet Party USA will probably be mainly a waste of funding money
to Kim Dotcom, like his The Internet Party New Zealand was. And probably
ends up to this list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_frivolous_political_parties

Or what makes he think that US Internet Party will be "Hillary's worst
nightmare in 2016!"? Do they even have an official web site yet?

On the other hand, the World Wide Web has helped the Pirate Party movement
to spread around the World. I think that many 1960's *hippies would have
traded The Woodstock to the Internet. Maybe the networking tool we are using
now would have made their **subculture to enter more into the mainstream
and last bit longer.*

If Travis Beynon, an Australian tobacco tycoon, someday goes to politics which one would be his party?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...for-posting-photo-of-his-wife-on-a-leash.html


http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au...promote-business/story-fnj94idh-1227347479938


Or I don't know, I have little information about him, but minor parties usually lack funding worldwide.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_party

http://www.sexparty.org.au/volunteer/donate.html

But one thing is certain, I will not donate a single cent to this party:

http://www.kristallipuolue.fi/

Zone Therapy is not a religion that is suitable for me, because it contemns my alternative history nostalgia and fearing, even if dangers are very real.

And if everything 100% happens or 100% do not happen, then failures are never acceptable?

And although I am a Winx Club fan, The Bach Flower Remedies work only in fairy tales, not in the real world.

Classic Anna Amore in a nurse outfit instead, please.

Rather than visit to a reflexologist, I'll go to Thai massage in
Kallio/Sörnäinen, and I don't robotically obey any divide and rule sex buyer laws that prohibit doing so.

Sometimes human right activists like me have no choice:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience

It's defamation to claim that all sex buyers support trafficking!
There are no Domino's Pizza, Little Caesar's Pizza or BlackJack Pizza
restaurants in Finland, and only few Pizza Huts. Even Kotipizza is not everywhere.
Instead there are a lot of ethnic pizzerias in my country, which sometimes are believed to use slave labour. So maybe
ordering pizzas should be fully criminalized?

In my country Big Pharma pays nothing to human guinea pigs,

http://www.ivetriedthat.com/2012/04/09/how-to-make-extra-money-by-participating-in-clinical-trials/

isn't it slavery?

And Thai massage parlors sometimes charge as much as 160€ for sex, so which side really is exploited?

The Finnish Pirate Party has a new brand,

http://viskipuolue.fi/vaaliohjelma/

so will they legalize brothels in Finland? Which is most safe way for both sex workers and their clients.
 
There is no difference between radical feminists and feminists. rad fems are the ones set the narrative and wrote and edit textbooks use by women studies departments in colleges and universities.

feminism is anti-male and anti-heterosexual sexual. it views men having sex with women as rape and oppression. it sees lesbianism as te way women can "liberate" themselves as men.

http://theothermccain.com/category/feminism/sex-trouble/

http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Trouble-Radical-Feminism-Against/dp/1508613745
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
There is no difference between radical feminists and feminists. rad fems are the ones set the narrative and wrote and edit textbooks use by women studies departments in colleges and universities. feminism is anti-male and anti-heterosexual sexual. it views men having sex with women as rape and oppression. it sees lesbianism as te way women can "liberate" themselves as men.


Amusing post inasmuch that it illustrates your lack of scholarship on the issue. Your definition of "feminism" is the radical feminist point of view and only defines that particular school of thought. The first link tells the reader everything they need to know in the title bar- "One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." Beliefs aren't necessarily facts and stating opinions as facts, particularly when the facts are easily demonstrable and contrary to the "truth" espoused by the "ruthless believer", it's especially revealing of the type of mindset of the person "writing" and when that person is spewing inaccurate information they certainly need to shutup and stop pushing an agenda fueled by lies and propaganda. The second link explicitly states that it's a treatise on Radical Feminism, a topic that's certainly worthy of scrutiny and criticism, but not at the expense of truth and reality.
 
Amusing post inasmuch that it illustrates your lack of scholarship on the issue. Your definition of "feminism" is the radical feminist point of view and only defines that particular school of thought. The first link tells the reader everything they need to know in the title bar- "One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." Beliefs aren't necessarily facts and stating opinions as facts, particularly when the facts are easily demonstrable and contrary to the "truth" espoused by the "ruthless believer", it's especially revealing of the type of mindset of the person "writing" and when that person is spewing inaccurate information they certainly need to shutup and stop pushing an agenda fueled by lies and propaganda. The second link explicitly states that it's a treatise on Radical Feminism, a topic that's certainly worthy of scrutiny and criticism, but not at the expense of truth and reality.



the man has dozens of books written by and edited by feminists who are radical anti-male lesbians that all believe that heterosexuality is oppressing women,



science research show feminists activists are masculinized women and a minority of women identify as feminists

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01011/abstract




82 percent of Americans don’t consider themselves feminists, poll shows

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenint...ont-consider-themselves-feminists-poll-shows/




this has links to the stories below

http://durkin62.tumblr.com/post/87242261442/but-what-the-fuck-is-a-radical-feminist-if


Feminists threaten to kill woman for saying men need abuse shelters.

Feminists prevent a meeting about male suicide.

Feminists stage mock murders to scare men.

Feminist attacks male cartoonist and is hailed a hero of feminism.

Feminists shut down forum for battered husbands.

Propaganda campaign against male fathers wanting custody.

Feminists wish to slander accused names before convicted.

Try to shut down female prisons.

Create rape laws that exclude female rapists.

Make it impossible to charge women with rape.

Feminists against equal custody.

Female felons should serve home sentences.

Told judges to be lenient on women.

Feminists cover up female domestic violence.

Feminists don’t want the gov to help unemployed men.

Feminists launch campaigns to help girls only while boys are doing worse in every facet of education.

Males who were raped as a child still have to pay child support.

Women should have the right to put a child up for adoption before the father gets custody.

Feminists against beyond reasonable doubt when it’s male rapists.

5 rights feminism ignores for men.

Feminists blame males for their abuse.

The primary aggressor clause where only men get charged with abuse.

Shame men into going to war.

Feminists dismiss female child rapists.

Feminists say men can’t talk about domestic abuse.

Feminists mock a man who has his dick cut off.

Strawmanning MRA members.

feminists attack church.

Feminists transphobia

Feminists slander the MRM

Again,

And again,

Call them terrorists.

Feminists say Men can’t be raped.

Feminists defend female raping minor.

Feminist defends why fucking an 8 year old boy isn’t rape.

Feminists primary aggressor clause discriminates against males.

Feminists cover up female domestic abuse stats.

Woman smashing bottle in mans face in public. Nobody gives a fuck.

Jezebel mocks men who are abused.

Feminists make sure the gov doesn’t spend money on male shelters or male research.

Female on male abuse in public is at best ignored, and at worst celebrated.

Public stops a man from abusing a woman in public, same crowd laughs when the roles are reversed.

No funding for male shelter.

Founder of Canadas only male shelter for abuse forced to close due to lack of funding before committing suicide.



more feminism in action

links to the stories below can be found here

http://lady-of-anti-feminism.tumblr...on-earth-did-you-get-the-idea-of-feminism-not



Feminists skewed the Definition of Domestic Abuse, resulting in only male abusers being arrested and female abusers not.
Feminists’s DV training hurts Police training
Feminist Mary Koss denies male rape victims.
Feminists violently protesting against Warren Farrell at U of Toronto
A mob of feminists at a recent protest attacking and sexually molesting a group of Rosary-praying Catholic men who were peacefully protecting the cathedral in the city of San Juan from threats of vandalism.
Feminists disrupt a forum for battered men
Feminists fought a law for equal custody to be the default if both parents want custody and neither parent is unfit. Multiple times.
Feminists started a campaign against Father’s rights groups
Feminists fought against laws granting men anonymity until charged with the crime of rape—not convicted, just charged.
Feminists fought against a law to end to the justice system favoring women simply because they are women, and giving men harsher sentences simply because they are men.
Feminist fought against men want equal treatment when victims of domestic violence, and to not be arrested for the crime of “being male” under primary aggressor policies.
Feminists in India and Israel fought against female rapists being arrested, charged and convicted of rape.
Feminists fought against a economic stimulus for male-dominated job such as construction, etc.
Feminist fought a law against Paternity Fraud.
Hateful Quotes by Feminsts
Feminist Harriet Harman has publicly requested employers to hire women in preference to White men if both job candidates are equally
Equality Minister,feminist Patricia Hewitt, was found guilty of breaching the Sex Discrimination Act by “overlooking a strong male candidate for a job in favour of a weaker female applicant”.
Elected in 2009, the lesbian feminist prime minister Johanna Sigurdardottir has vowed to “end of the Age of Testosterone
Feminists want to peeing while standing illegal
Erin Pizzey had to flee the UK because she and her family received death threats and her dog murdered all because feminists didn’t like that she discovered women were equally as violent as men.
Also Suzanne Steinmetz and her children received death threats and bomb threats she discovered that the rate at which men were victimized by domestic violence was similar to the rate for women.
Richard Gelles and Murray Straus have all received death threats from feminists, simply for publishing their findings (that female-to-male family violence was equal to the rate of male-to-female violence).
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
the man has dozens of books written by and edited by feminists who are radical anti-male lesbians that all believe that heterosexuality is oppressing women

"edited by feminists who are radical." Radical Feminism isn't hiding anything in how the movement is described. Sure, there ARE radical feminists, but not ALL feminists are radical, the fact that you don't understand the distinction is yet another example of your lack of scholarship. As I posted above, radical feminism is a topic that's worthy of scrutiny and criticism, but not at the expense of truth and reality. I appreciate your passion and conviction, BUT, never push your agenda at the expense of truth because facts are squirrely motherfuckers, just as soon as you think you've managed to pass your bullshit off, along comes some truth to blow it out of the water, and when you've been torpedoed by a fact-check patching up your credibility isn't always an easy task. You obviously haven't had any real education on the issue or you wouldn't keep insisting that radical feminism is representative of the feminist movement as a whole. To reiterate, YES, radical feminists exist, they're not a particularly savory bunch of precious flowers, they certainly deserve to be scrutinized, questioned, doubted, and criticized, BUT you do yourself and your agenda no favors by erroneously lumping ALL feminists together with them, because it just ain't true. If you can stand answering a question, what exactly IS your agenda? I'm just trying to understand here, and not jump to assumptions.
 

SabrinaDeep

Official Checked Star Member
Making the distinction between feminism and radical feminism is an important point. There are all sorts of feminists and people who put them all under the same umbrella merely demonstrate their ignorance, kudos for pointing it out!

You don't need to have studied to understand that the word feminist carries a discriminatory meaning, while the word egalitarianism does not. Any feminist, radical or not, aims at diminishing and changing men traits going well beyond social, political and economic egalitarianism among human beings. Men are the enemy and so are all the women who don't see men as their enemy. Try to ask any feminist, even the softest one, what they think of a woman who refuses to call herself a feminist and you will be told, in the kindest of the answers, that that woman is a product of patriarchy...in other words, she is a fool.

I believe it is important to keep the word feminism. It bears with it centuries of brave people fighting for equality. And we will only be free from patriarchy when men will accept to be called feminists. Women are not weak per nature, and a man with weaknesses isn’t less of a man. If we remain in a system where even men of good will are afraid of showing anything that could remotely sound or look associated to women, we‘ll always need feminism - Aurélie Wielchuda

- A man needs to accept to be called a feminist
- Women are not weak, but men can be weak and they should acknowledge that
- A man of good will is the one who shows inclination to female behavior
- There is no victory for feminism until a single one of those beings with a dick does not show his good will

If any of you would like to show them some good will, i suggest you to start shopping at

http://www.hommemystere.com/

Just refrain from sending me your selfies with that underwear on, please: i remain a big fan of the good old womanizer bad will cock pictures.

This is feminism. I'll pass.
 
http://historyoffeminism.com/


Feminism exists as a defender of the selfish sexual and reproductive interests of aging and/or unattractive women. This is its entire raison d’etre, the reason it first came into existence with the social purity movement reformers of the 19th century, led by their harridan battle cry – ‘armed with the ballot the mothers of America will legislate morality’.

And legislate morality these pioneering feminists quickly did, even before they had won the vote. That is, they successfully lobbied for restrictions on prostitution, a rise in the age of consent from 12 to 16, or even 18, and the closing down of saloons where their husbands might mix freely with unattached young women.
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
This is feminism. I'll pass.

Problem is, it's not. Some of that is radical feminism, which is certainly a part of the feminist movement, but not representative of the movement as a whole, other parts have been taken out of context. Without the feminist movement women would still be subservient, seen and not heard, and looked at in the same light as children and other minorities, fortunately enough of those minorities have been fighting back long enough that more people enjoy more freedom, liberty and equality in this country than ever before, but there's still a long way to go. That is a redefinition of feminism by groups with an anti-feminist agenda, a straw-man argument as it were to make it easier to discredit the whole group based on the questionable beliefs and actions of a small faction within the larger group. We see this sort of redefinition happen all the time from all manner of political groups, it's not accurate nor is it fair for opposing groups to use propaganda to redefine another groups core values, beliefs, and agenda. Radical Feminism doesn't deserve to be elevated to such a degree that when people think of the feminist movement Radical Feminism is what they think of because Radical Feminism isn't about equality, it's about domination and that's not ok, Feminists should reject Radical Feminism, if they really want to remain true to why the movement started and what the movement is truly about.

Feminism exists as a defender of the selfish sexual and reproductive interests of aging and/or unattractive women.

That is just laughably inaccurate.
 
[That is just laughably inaccurate.]


then how you explain the complaints of "objectification" at pictures of sexy women models? how do you explain the antipage 3 movment in the U.K protesting at pictures of attractive page 3 models in the U.K sun? how do you explain the protsts against the beach body ads in the U.K? can you explain why sexy attractive women like Sabrinadeep and the models in questions are not the the type of women that engage in feminist protests against depictions of themselves and other sexy attractive women?





Feminist activist women are masculinized in terms of digit-ratio and social dominance:

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01011/abstract


http://brokenworldnews.com/2014/01/04/study-finds-only-hot-chicks-objectified-by-men/

a science study shows only hot women like the ones i talk about are objectified. these that complain the feminists types complain because they are jealous of hot women

McCalister says the study’s findings suggest that women who complain about the sexual objectification of other women are likely just hoping to attract attention to themselves and the lonely desperate existence they find themselves mired within.



6015b3fbb7d4501236e3c76f26bf846f.jpg
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
how you explain the complaints of "objectification" at pictures of sexy women models? how do you explain the antipage 3 movment in the U.K protesting at pictures of attractive page 3 models in the U.K sun? how do you explain the protsts against the beach body ads in the U.K? can you explain why sexy attractive women like Sabrinadeep and the models in questions are not the the type of women that engage in feminist protests against depictions of themselves and other sexy attractive women?

You are correct that all of these examples fall under the "feminist" umbrella. Are you familiar with Venn Diagrams? Just because some things share some traits does not mean that those things share all traits. I'm sorry that you can't draw the distinction between Radical Feminists and The Feminist Movement as a whole. I suggest you read the link I provided above- http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/ I'll even paste the first paragraph to make it easier for you-

Feminism is both an intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks justice for women and the end of sexism in all forms. However, there are many different kinds of feminism. Feminists disagree about what sexism consists in, and what exactly ought to be done about it; they disagree about what it means to be a woman or a man and what social and political implications gender has or should have. Nonetheless, motivated by the quest for social justice, feminist inquiry provides a wide range of perspectives on social, cultural, economic, and political phenomena. Important topics for feminist theory and politics include: the body, class and work, disability, the family, globalization, human rights, popular culture, race and racism, reproduction, science, the self, sex work, human trafficking, and sexuality.

So you can continue to try to redefine Feminism as Radical Feminism, but again, it's laughably inaccurate.
 

Rey C.

Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
To reiterate, YES, radical feminists exist, they're not a particularly savory bunch of precious flowers, they certainly deserve to be scrutinized, questioned, doubted, and criticized

One of the problems is that it is impossible in the current hyper-sensitive, politically correct environment to scrutinize, question, doubt or criticize a radical feminist without (instantly) being the target of charges of sexism and misogyny. It's as if a page has been taken out of the Zionist book on how to shut down an argument involving aid to Israel: accuse anyone who doesn't support Zionism and/or Israeli aid of being an anti-Semite and/or a Nazi sympathizer and you win. The feminists argument often relies on that exact same tactic. And that's why so few will venture into a losing argument, where any sort of hare-brained feminist position should be up for possible discussion - better just to leave it alone. And if you do go there, you better choose your words very carefully, because they will be picked over with a fine tooth comb. As the extreme beliefs of radical feminism from 20-30 years ago (Wolf, MacKinnon, et al) have worked their way into the popular culture of what's "normal" or acceptable, the overall movement has adopted beliefs that many would say are no longer about achieving equality, but about achieving special treatment. The feminist drive (not just the radical wing) to classify women as a politically and legally "protected class" is but one example of that. "Sex" (but not "gender") was already a protected category. But Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein, among others, pushed to make women (specifically) a protected class. Is that equality or is that special treatment? In my book, it's special treatment. If every little societal niche has special rules that apply to it, what sort of a disjointed, confused society are we going to have? Kind of what we have now, but worse? :dunno:

Take a look at things that are representative of pop culture, as I believe they're often indicative of where society is going. Look at half a dozen or so TV commercials, where there are male and female characters. I believe that you will notice a very common theme. I'm not advocating that women should always be portrayed as sex objects or bimbos. But I find it rather curious that in the majority of commercials, the male will be portrayed as the idiot, the boob or the object of humiliation and derision and the woman is there to save the day. The female will be portrayed as strong. The male will be portrayed as weak. I never took women's studies courses in school (or as some are now titled "womyn's studies"), but from being around people who did, many of the things being taught 30 years ago were weird to me. Now, those things are considered normal. And other than the rad feminists, who refuse to wear tampons and like offending people with menstrual blood running down their legs and the foul smell, I'm guessing that the things considered weird, extreme or radical now, will be considered pretty normal 30 years from now... assuming we stay on the same "progressive" social path that we're on now.

I just think it's too bad that there are people who rely on making someone else look weak so that they can make believe that they are strong. And it's too bad that women and men, who actually have worked for equality, have been shouted down and marginalized by people who are not tuned into reality. And this isn't just happening on gender related issues. If anyone wants to get a laugh (or a cry), take a look at some of the oddball things going on at Harvard Law School and the University of California system - and I'm sad to say, what happened at my alma mater during the shameful Jackie Coakley affair. Where once there was a long standing, 175 year old honor code, which applied to everyone, because Jackie Coakley's elaborate lie involved rape, she was given a complete pass. And a university president, who was installed based on gender politics, having no previous ties to UVA, spent her time trying to destroy the fraternity system at the university (she only went after fraternities, but not sororities ;)), and not trying to get to the truth. Teresa Sullivan has been as silent as a church mouse since her political "tool" was exposed as a blatant liar. Sullivan has been a rolling disaster since she started, should have never been hired and should now be fired - but that is impossible to even discuss. That, I know from personal experience. Different rules for different people seems to be where we are headed.
 
You are correct that all of these examples fall under the "feminist" umbrella. Are you familiar with Venn Diagrams? Just because some things share some traits does not mean that those things share all traits. I'm sorry that you can't draw the distinction between Radical Feminists and The Feminist Movement as a whole. I suggest you read the link I provided above- http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/ I'll even paste the first paragraph to make it easier for you-



So you can continue to try to redefine Feminism as Radical Feminism, but again, it's laughably inaccurate.



pasting the dictionary definition of feminism does nothing to help feminism. feminists by their anti-male actions defines feminism. they are not putting an end to men getting longer prison sentences than women for the same crimes. they ar not shutting down websites and twitter hashtags where feminists openly advocate male gendercide and population reduction. women'studies profs at tax payer funded universities openly preach hatred against men calling them rapists and sex predators that can't control thier sexual urges. the U.K guardian currently employs a woman Barbara Ellen who openly supports women raping underage boys. she claims womn rapists don't deserve jail. that same newspaper regularly publish anti-male articles from feminists like the jealous ugly cunt Jessica Valenti. other news outlets like Huffington posts regularly publish articles from man hating feminists inciting anti-male hatred and are not being arrested or brought before human rights commissions, etc etc i can post examples all day long.
 
Top