bloodrose OP wrote
Reply to comment by Tequila_Wolf in We're banning people who are anti-porn now? by bloodrose
I did read your comment and it broke down into these areas:
-
Swerfy stuff - but I honestly didn't see anti sex-worker sentiment. I saw that Browse should've engaged better than they did but not someone who was anti worker.
-
Tank adjacency If we're banning them for going pro-China tankie, I retract my indignation. I'm kinda sick of "China is doing it right" comments, too. They send my yikes-meter off. But what it felt like, because we haven't outright banned some other pro-China folks, is that Browse's take on sex work was the bannable offense. Maybe that is a lack of consistency on our part and we're only human...but that is how I our humanness led me to read the ban.
-
Class-reductionism I missed that one. But they've done it in the past so I believe it.
I guess since we inconsistently ban for #2 and I didn't see #3, I assumed the real ban was over #1. If it was more complex than that, should we lock this thread? Or leave it open to discuss defining swerfy for future reference?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments