http://storify.com/thinkprogress/romney-santorum-and-gingrich-promise-to-ban-pornog
According to the Justice Department: “Just about everything on the Internet and almost everything in the video stores and everything in the adult bookstores is still prosecutable illegal obscenity”
Betty Wein, former director of public affairs for ‘Morality in Media’ – the lobby group that is persuading the leading Republican presidential candidates to promise to ban most or all currently available pornography.
http://www.moralityinmedia.org/
My article here and thanks for so mush help.
http://mrafront.blogspot.com/2012/02/gawker-media-and-jezebel-promoting-teen.html
From your article : “Asking if my neighbor is there, lol, I am going to ask Jezebel readers if they are there.”
CLASSIC!
Maybe we should organise a campaign to flood Jezebel with comments asking if their readers are there? We could also ask Adrian Chen if he can spot his neighbour’s daughter there, on the child porn site that effectively pays his wages!
Thanks so much for the article MRA – I will probably post my own one devoted to this tonight or tomorrow.
Well, I commented on jezebel, letting a link right there, lets se what happen.
I don’t think there’s much to worry about with this one – they also tried to ban alcohol in the 1930′s and in some ways it was great – they had much cheaper booze, speak-easy’s and all the other little specialties associated with illegal booze and the people that participated in social settings where drinking was central to their activities, generally had a much more exciting night-life anyway.
The spin-offs of course were the gangsters that had total control of it all (not unlike the equally futile zero-tolerance / total prohibition they use to try to control certain drugs today), which eventually forced the US government to admit that prohibition could not work.
If they ban all this porn, it will only force it all further underground and would effectively ‘camoflage’ what they claim as the biggest threat to western society today: child-pornography. If they pass this one, all porn including child-porn will be forced underground and controlled by sleazy gangsters and the law enforcement agencies that are currently trying to destroy the lives of ‘child-porn’ users, will suddenly have a huge burden added to what they are already having difficulty policing. They would no longer have the time or the resources to find the child porn traders and end users, as they’ll be flat out charging and sending to prison the millions of extra ‘standard porn’ dealers and end-users. All porn including the dispicable child porn will be confounded under one single crime – Pornography. The child porn and the ‘paedophiles’ that consume it will more or less dissipate into the huge mass of the ‘Pornography Sea’.
I must say (and I’m sure everyone else here would feel the same) it comes as no surprise to me at all.
They want any reason now to call us sick perverts and destroy us.
But it cannot work: there are too many men that will be affected by it and all of those men have families that would not be happy about the men in teir families being labelled a pervert etc…
I think if this one ever was passed, America would descend into a state of anarchy within a couple of days.
“If they ban all this porn, it will only force it all further underground and would effectively ‘camoflage’ what they claim as the biggest threat to western society today: child-pornography.”
This is already to some extent becoming the case. The Bush administration created so much bureacracy for legal adult webmasters – particularly the ’2257′ law requiring record keeping of all models IDs to prove that they are over 18 – that it forced many of them out of business and only encouraged the growth of the illegal amateur porn tube sites that keep no records and often show girls that are probably under 18 (and probably criminilise half the male population of the western world).
Something of a vicious cycle is created – legal adult webmasters have their expenses and risks increase, whilst at the same time facing competition in the form of illegal porn tube sites that feature amateur 16 and 17 year old girls. Of course, 90% of men when faced with the choice of paying to watch silicone enhanced 19 year old professional pornstars looking bored whilst being fucked for money for the 10,000th time, or watching ’18 year old’ amateur college girls fucking their boyfriends on a free tube site – well there’s not much to choose is there? It seems most men aren’t particularly worried about being prosecuted for possibly watching underage models – so long as they go on to forums after they’ve jerked off and scream that anyone looking at 17 year old girls in bikinis is a fucking sick pedo who should be tortured to death…
Thus even ‘legal’ porn sites owned by the same company that owns Jezebel and Gawker have to advertise sites that at least present their wares as illegal amateur jailbait porn in order to make money. Of course, if you’re going to do that, you really shouldn’t allow your other ‘politically correct’ sites run puritan campaigns declaring that pics of clothed teens are child porn….karma is a nasty son of a bitch.
“According to peer-reviewed research and many, many personal accounts, harm from adult pornography is at pandemic levels. Exposure to pornography is leading to addiction among many children and adults, and is a significant cause of broken marriages and the sexual exploitation of children and women. Pornography is linked to increased demand of sexual trafficking and its role as a gateway to child pornography is a major reason why child pornographers are increasing at unprecedented levels, according to new studies”…
Yes, comments like these, typically made by hysterical (desperate / dateless) middle aged feminists such as the late femiservative Betty Wein (pictured), are the kind of nonsense that have elevated feminsit dogma, thus feminist law to where it is now.
Why are all the mangina puppets so afraid of these women, who would be ‘nobody’s', if they didn’t get up on their soap boxes and preach this kind of rubbish.
Why do they (mangina’s) think that these (poor excuses) for women deserve any sort of recognition or respect at all?
As usual, the statements made throughout the articles contain no references of any kind, let alone references to anything that can be substantiated by statistcics or any published scientific findings.
This would all be perfectly acceptable if only the representatives from the gynocracy would substantiate their comments with statements or references that expalin exactly HOW pornography harms children or HOW it destroys marriages and families; how it leads to sexual exploitation of women and children and how it leads to their favorite crime: sex trafficking.
All of the statements like this that I’ve read all have that in common: it’s all just hearsay, based on the whim of some frustrated, jealous, middle-aged frump.
When the same feminists begin to call for similar criminalization of online material that is actually harmful to children such as videos of REAL violence, ie. children being kicked to death by bullies and the numerous other sick and totally destructive ideas being conveyed through social networking sites – that any child can join at any time; I might begin to think they REALLY do have the interests of children at heart and perhaps even take them seriously.
However at present we all know that protecting children from harm is not their true agenda and is basically the reason why blogs such as this one exist.
One of the most interesting points the late Betty Wein made though was the one about what she believed to be the reason why pornography is still widely available, even though it supposed to be illegal. She said:
“Right about now, you must be wondering why this depraved material is being circulated with impunity if it is illegal. The answer to that can be summarized in three words: the public’s silence!
The obscenity law is unique in that it is based, in part, on contemporary cornmunity standards. If law enforcement officials do not receive complaints from the community, they are prone to translate that silence into acceptance of the hardcore pornography being sold in your neighborhood”…
EXACTLY!
Why don’t the stupid feminists and mangina puppets READ into that and analyze it?
She essentially admitted by that very remark, that from the public’s general perspective: pornography is not a problem or an issue at all…
So now using the same hysterical and emotionally charged propaganda, they will proceed to change the public’s mind about ‘normal’ or adult porn.
It’s only an issue to them and they now want to add it to the sex-hysteria to further demonize NORMAL male sexuality. No other reason or motive.
@Antifeminist
You are trying to scare your readers, aren’t you?
This woman looks like serial killer Gerard Schaefer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOYdxxevdFA (from 0:43)
http://murderpedia.org/male.S/images/schaefer_gerard_john/schaefer-007.jpg
http://jezebel.com/5885420/tsa-agents-singling-out-sexy-women-for-multiple-body-scans
The TSA is being accused of singling out hot, sexy young women to go through the body scanners.
My theory: As it becomes common knowledge that TSA agents select the most attractive young females to be scanned, the women who aren’t chosen will become increasingly bitter.
Of course it won’t manifest that way. Aging feminists won’t come out and say that they’re pissed off over not being selected (and thus validated as ‘hot’). They’ll do it under the guise of wanting to protect women in general.
One of the comments at that feminist site:
“I watched this exact thing happen to three young, very attractive women at JFK around Thanksgiving. The TSA agents were splitting people between the scanner and the regular metal detector. They sent all the guys and most of the women through the metal detector, but, when they got to these three women, who were traveling together, suddenly all three in a row had to go through the scanner.
Might have been a coincidence, but if the TSA at JFK are anything like the ones in Dallas, I’m guessing not.”
‘Pimpin’ for Paul’: Republican presidential hopeful wins support of ‘bunny ranch’ sex workers after saying states should be free to legalise prostitution.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087496/Republican-presidential-hopeful-Ron-Paul-wins-support-Moonlite-bunny-ranch-Nevada.html
———————————————————————————————-
American model and actress Andie MacDowell tells women over 50 not to wear short skirts
“She added that women in their 50s should never wear tracksuit bottoms designed for teenagers.
She said: ‘Women my age should not wear Juicy Couture sweatpants or anything that looks like junior high school.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2102898/American-model-actress-Andie-MacDowell-tells-women-50-wear-short-skirts.html#ixzz1mjNOLyqS
She is right but 50 is to far, I ll say the same as one of the top comment up to 144 dumpups
“What you wear in stage is one thing, what you wear in daily life another. I think short skirts look silly on anyone over 20. I don’t mean “too sexy” or anything like that – just silly. Like the woman thinks she’s a little girl.”
- saon, sweden, 17/2/2012 21:17
Look how good looking are her daughters, these shorts skirts look good on their amazing legs.
Good finds MRA – at last a post-menopausal woman with some grasp of reality.
Her daughters look hot as hell. I was thinking of doing an article posting nothing but pics of female celebs and their nubile daughters – I’ll definitely include them.
BTW, I posted your article to reddit/r/mensrights and it got a lot of upvotes.
Thanks, I notice today, it is second in traffic just behind jezebel. They haven’t say anything about it. It is hard when the reality hit you right in the fucking face.
I’m now posting to Adrian Twitter.
The colloquial term for what you’re discussing here is “Mutton dressed as lamb”…
Thank you, just added to my collection of anti old women term.
I was thinking of doing an article posting nothing but pics of female celebs and their nubile daughters – I’ll definitely include them.
“Madonna’s daughter, 15, will join her mother on stage”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2103269/Madonnas-daughter-15-join-mother-stage.html#ixzz1mrkGHeGE
I remember you posted this picture here:
http://theantifeminist.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/AVA-SAMBORA.jpg
If you notice something with this mothers very common, is the way they try to show as mush skin as possible because is the only way (at least they think) to compete with with their daughters, Miley Cyrus mother cheated on his husband as soon Miley start to having fun during teen years, she wanted that fun her daughter was having.
When you look at pictures specially from red carpets of this mothers and daughters is how along side from show skin they keep closed as possible like “give me the same attention”
http://s11.bdbphotos.com/images/orig/a/2/a2xyt2z92x5w9zxy.jpg
Taking self pictures like teenagers
http://popdirt.com/images/misc/Miley_Tish_Cyrus_Revlon_Run_Walk.jpg
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS4pix05QyUg6QNAD6N2J9XJqeyE17YWwW4OIjvGqY5mE9X04QZhZkehdXPPg
This women is ugly even with make-up on
http://www.metrolic.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tish-cyrus.jpg
The dresses should be reversed
http://pics.wikifeet.com/Tish-Cyrus-Feet-99671.jpg
Heather Lockler and her daughter face off:
http://ll-media.tmz.com/2010/03/22/0322_locklier_sambora.jpg
When women are getting old they know their teen daughters will gain more attention than them which is the indicator that women know post-pubescent girls are in their peak of attractiveness after all they were there years ago too.
That is why as soon feminists specially the childless ones started to be out of the sexual market they try to rise their value, pedo-hysteria, age of consent, shame male sexuality, now feminists specially form the second wave 60s-70s, totally out of the sexual market are in total in radical campaign against older men young women relationship, even like you posted here rise the age to 21 or women WHO LOOK underage.
It is all about keeping the pussy price as high as possible. no more no less.
@MRA
Yeah and another thing they do which at least from my perspective looks HORRIBLE on ANY girl / woman anyway, is this relatively new fashion of tattoos. YUK!
I don’t know what that’s all about – why anyone thinks they are supposed to be ‘sexy’ or pretty, because in my youth, the only women that ever had tattoos were whores and I was told the only men that may think they look sexy were men that were at least 3 parts pissed! (Drunkards).
It’s ironic because I can remember a group of girls at my school discussing the topic of tattoos and how ‘revolting’ they were (on men) and now at least two of those girls, now aged in their early 50′s have the stupid things! (They both have a ‘ring of thorns’ tattooed on their upper arms and those hideous designs on their lower backs which they expose by wearing those low-cut jeans. These ‘tatts’ make them look even more ridiculous, because they of course don’t have slim or petite figures and their exposed midriffs make them look more like fat muffins, than hot ‘girls’!
Talk about ‘mutton dressed as lamb’…
Maybe today, they’re a sort of feminist (man-hating) statement of their new-age ‘femininity’.
Whatever they’re meant to signify or prove, they certainly ensure that they will never be bothered by, or arouse any kind of attention from me.
@Alan Vaughn, right, I remember Kim Kardashian’s mother getting a tattoo, for a woman who keep using botox and is totally old, the same night she gets drunk, but remember, if something happen to her it is not her fault, she will be a victim.
Here
“Kim battles against Kourtney and Khloé after she purchases a Bentley. Kris gets drunk with a friend and gets a tattoo. Bruce experiences a mid-life crisis. “
This is the episode from their reality show, take in consideration teen girls and adult women are the viewers of this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Keeping_Up_with_the_Kardashians_episodes
I laughed at a comment undeneath the Daily Mail photos of Madonna and her daughter – a reader stating that she will be a stunner when she ‘grows up’.
In the photo she’s already practically the same height as Madonna, as well as having similar sized breasts. In fact she’s probably almost completed puberty.
But you’re still a pervert if you even find her attractive, and yet her mother is still a supposed sex goddess!
“It is all about keeping the pussy price as high as possible. no more no less.
Other MRAs will readily accept that every new feminist law on rape is about female sexual power over men, but when it comes to feminist laws that define men as criminals and perverts for even finding beautiful girls such as Madonna’s daughter, or Ava Sambora, attractive, then we’re bringing down the movement if we question them! Simply for suggesting that feminists might have a selfish sexual motive for criminising men here too – even though it’s transparently obvious that they do!!
People like Ernest Belfort Bax must turn in their grave sometimes.
Don’t know if you read this post from a couple of years back : http://theantifeminist.com/more-mother-teen-daughter-jealousy-exposed/
In the photo she’s already practically the same height as Madonna, as well as having similar sized breasts. In fact she’s probably almost completed puberty.
If you look close to their shoes, Madonna has higher heels that her daughter so without doubts her daughter is already taller than her.
Madonna spend more of her time dancing and working out that is what keep her in some way presentable, but the facts are facts, her former husband said once…
Guy Ritchie has compared having sex with Madonna to “cuddling up to a piece of gristle.”
http://www.hecklerspray.com/guy-ritchie-compares-madonna-to-gristle-the-cockney-charmer/200816773.php
If her daughter start dancing she’ll get better and judging from the clothes dancer tend to use she’ll be taking attention from her mom soon.
Don’t know if you read this post from a couple of years back : http://theantifeminist.com/more-mother-teen-daughter-jealousy-exposed/
Thanks, I read it some moths ago making a Google search on your site, very interesting by the way, how women are so competitive with their own blood, something you don’t see on men.
“but when it comes to feminist laws that define men as criminals and perverts for even finding beautiful girls such as Madonna’s daughter, or Ava Sambora, attractive, then we’re bringing down the movement if we question them!”
I guess they’re not really MRA’s then. Many that like to call themselves MRA’s are victims of the looney feminist constantly changing ‘rape’ laws and / or: equally changing (against men) DV laws. Understandably they are very bitter about that aspect of feminism, but as far as the paedo-hysteria is concerned, they cannot see how it is related to to feminism. They like almost everyone, have been successfully manipulated or brainwashed into the ‘child-protection’ belief and even believe that ‘child’ means someone under 18 years old.
Sadly it is this belief (which is about as false as beliveing in the tooth fairy or Santa Clause) that has given the sexual trade union its current status and position in todays sick society…
The MRA’s that do know the truth are too afraid to comment as you suggest, or worse: are actually in prison being arse raped and beaten on a daily basis, experincing the effects of the ‘child-protection’ laws first hand; or are on parole and on publicly accessible sex-offender registries and therefore cannot, or in the latter case: dare not utter a word…
Yea, and IF she is like the average 15 year old young lady in the West today she would have swallowed miles of you know what by now & spread dem cheeks more than a time or two.
Female Sexual Trade Union commenters are such In-Denial Morons.
OMG
Warning
http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/madonnaarms.jpg
This is funny : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJtknVWOyrU
@theantifeminist
Surprise! Hackedaccount is no longer being show on fleshbot maybe the’ll deny it, good thing I took a capture and added to the article.
It’s either because someone there saw your article on reddit, or else because the new owners of Fleshbot have a greater sense of morality than Gawker Inc!