bloodrose

bloodrose OP wrote

This is a fair assessment of Browse. I nearly shot myself in the head for siding with them on this one. I have previously banned them from /f/feminism for class reductionist crap. I appreciate you taking the time to respond because the tone of the comment felt very different than your response to the meta post. I appreciate that dealing with disagreements on site maintenance sucks so thanks for being open to my thoughts on it. <3

7

bloodrose OP wrote

I did read your comment and it broke down into these areas:

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

5

bloodrose wrote

The argument is kinda flawed because porn of people without their consent is already illegal and nobody supports it.

Agreed. It would've been nice if someone had a "hey, analytics have been done on uploaders of content and found that x% are self-uploaders" to counter the suspicion that the illegal content is being ignored to support the legal content.

6

bloodrose wrote

I'm extremely familiar with the subject matter.

Off the topic of Browse, can I ask you a question about it since you are familiar with it?

One of the arguments I have seen in the anti-porn movement is that when we discuss sex-workers, we are prioritizing the voice of the volunteer over the voice of the conscript. So, we are prioritizing the rights of the person who uploads their own video over the rights of the person who has their abuse or their private videos uploaded without their consent. I think the assumption is that there are fewer volunteers than there are conscripts and thus the "prioritization" of said voice is unfair. Do you know of any data/info that would counter that argument?

2

bloodrose wrote

I'm sorry it has and will continue to cause you so much stress. I hope in the future you have less stress from this. <3

Yay for human contact. I am so lucky my child is cuddly. I get oodles of human interaction. I am very lucky.

7

bloodrose OP wrote

Reply to comment by lautreamont in The Children of Pornhub by bloodrose

I agree with you completely. I just find that in leftist circles when you bring up these problems, there becomes a lot of hand-wringing about moralizing and sex-work, and no one will say "hey, this is fucked up - we should care" because they worry about being attacked for being "anti-sex-worker."

3

bloodrose wrote

I am indeed an American and we say thank you so danged much. I literally sign my emails "thank you". When in the drive through, I think I say thank you every time an item is handed to me so if there are multiple of us in the car getting drinks, there's like 4 or 5 thank yous.

However, it isn't that I'm looking necessarily to say thank you, but to honor the person who provides a service. Like, what use am I to the world? I count money for shareholders. But people who make food and deliver groceries, they actually do shit. They should have some honorific that shows that I respect them as being useful and awesome without saying "you're useful and awesome" every time. I don't think "thank you" covers that sentiment.

I've been sad trying to think of what I could possibly replace it with.

4

bloodrose wrote

I should say I stopped doing the sir/ma'am thing about a year ago. But now I feel like a meanie-pants. I still say please and thank you a lot, but it doesn't feel the same. I want some way to verbally honor the person providing me a needed service. :(

5

bloodrose wrote

Reply to comment by kore in On titles and honorifics. by FuckCopyright

I think I picked up this habit from my uncle. I have always called people who are in service roles "sir" or "ma'am" as a way to show that I respect them and the service they provide and do not see myself as above but instead as grateful. I've been wondering how to do this in a gender neutral way, though. And wasn't sure how to ask about it because people would say "why are you using an honorific?" but your reasoning is, I think, why I do it. :)

4

bloodrose wrote

Welcome. I'm sorry you are having difficulties with isolation. My mother is going through similar. We see her every other week for a few hours. At the beginning of the pandemic, I used to rope her in for video chats but as she got more and more depressed, it got harder and harder to get her online.

You'll find Fridays are jumping for casual conversations around here.

4

bloodrose OP wrote

Reply to comment by lautreamont in The Children of Pornhub by bloodrose

I imagine these protests are being ignored by progressive groups in show of solidarity with sex workers. I think we need to figure out how to be anti-pornhub but pro-sex worker. It should be able to be the same as being anti-mega-corp but pro-worker.

4

bloodrose wrote

I hear you, friend. I hear you. I cook everything in this house, too. My husband tried but would keep leaving the dang kitchen while stuff was cooking and come back to it ruined, and then would blame the food product for his failure. I just couldn't cope with it so I took over completely.

4