Porn is War on Women, Part 3 of 3

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, read on;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Porn is War on Women, Part 3

 

Part1     Part2      Part3

Welcome to the 3rd and final part of the “Porn is War on Women” series. As you may remember, on part 1 we compared feminism to the Westboro Baptist Church as well as elaborated on the implication that feminists hate porn because it reminds them of their own rape. On part 2 we examined the many varieties of functional porn and the thin kinky line between functional porn and actual paraphilias,  we also elaborated upon the very problematic possibility that contrary to what feminists propose, porn may actually decrease sexual assault rates due to the “Porn-Rape Correlation.” Logically, ugly feminists should not be that obsessed with rape, or, as Natasha Leggero put it:

 

“That’s not funny” is what most feminists would say about Natasha’s joke. Yeah, there is a very good reason why they call feminists “Kill-joys”.

See, humor does not count with feminists prudes like Anita Sarkeesian. To them, men are the attackers, the deviants that only want to fuck and rape while preparing to attack by watching violent porn at home. The reality is that feminists like Anita are just hypocrites that like to claim all men are rapists for effect. They say that only to manipulate their followers and extract money from them. If all men were rapists we would have more prisons than Walmarts.

Contrary to Anita’s lucrative narrative,  most men are not rapists, instead it is very likely that only a very small minority of males and females are the ones who assault most victims. That small minority can be referred as “serial rapists”. Serial rapists work like serial killers. You cannot “teach” the former not to rape nor can you “teach” the latter not to kill. That is where feminists’ toddler-like logic falls apart.

If “teaching away” criminal behavior worked, we would not longer have jails. It is just foolish. Add to that the fact that feminists dial their paranoia all the way to 11 with serial rapists. Then all that paranoia only yields their belief in the mythical “rape culture.” Paranoia words so well that if you also dialed it all the way to 11 with serial killers, it would not take long before we had a “Serial Killer-Culture”

But explaining this logic to feminists is a fool’s errand. Feminists’ belief in rape culture s a matter of faith, not logic. They are so obsessed with rape that all porn looks like rape to them. Add to that most of the rape-obsessed feminists are godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly. It is no wonder they complain about everything to desperately fish for the attention they cannot with their horse-like faces.

catcalls_Horsey-Brianna WU

 

Again, jokes and logic just fly over the heads of both feminists and religious people. They cannot be persuaded. If confronted with logical arguments, radfems will cover their ears and yell over and over:

“No! Porn is porn!”

Just the way members of the Westboro Baptist Church would cover their ears and yell:

“No! Sin is sin!”

(Ironically, WBC members also consider porn veeeery sinful. Perhaps they should consider merging with their radfem sisters now that Freddy Phelps has long kicked the bucket).

However, the definition of “sin” is incredibly broad and includes perfectly lawful acts (even worse, it also includes thoughts) here is where the definition of “porn” mimics “sin” because it is such a broad definition that it even attempts to ban both perfectly legal acts and thoughts related to porn. And just like you do in front of religious people, “thou shall not speak/think of porn” in front of feminists.

The second problem is that, unlike lawful acts versus purported “sins”, porn is easily placed in a shameful often “indefensible” category based on morals. The phrase “too much porn on your computer” is often used for social shaming, despite the fact that “too much porn” is in and of itself a blurry definition.

Possibly as long as you can work and function in society, you can watch as much porn as you want. Yes, as kinky as it sounds. In my case, I watch around an hour of porn per day and much more on weekends and I am proud to admit to that.

But this yields a far more interesting question: How many times a day do we think of porn? How many of us are willing to admit to that number publicly? 

How about religious people themselves?

Do they think of sin too much?

How much is “too much temptation”?

How about feminists themselves?

Do they think of porn too much?

How much is “too much porn temptation”?

 

See? People with broken, repressed sexualities have a hard time admitting to their temptations, you know why? Because:

 

“Temptation” means there is closeted sexual desire.

 

How many religious people who claim to reject porn but secretly watch it, jerk off to it and then end up feeling “dirty” and guilty? Even better: How many feminists who claim to reject porn but secretly watch it, jerk off to it and then end up feeling “dirty” and guilty?

See, religious people watch porn. Feminists watch porn. Most people watch porn. They just do not admit to it. Men over report and brag, women under-report and play coy. Look, even Iran, the prudish theocracy has some rather unusual searches according to PornMd, after all why would you search for male performers if you are 100% straight? Coincidence? MAybe Iranian women are the ones addicted to porn? Hard to say:

iran

 

 

 

Even the most religious people in Iran might be secretly watching  their deliciously sinful hard-core gay porn at this very moment. But depending on the morals of the culture, demagogues may attempt to make all porn look as bad as illegal porn. Which brings up an interesting question: What is illegal porn?

Illegal porn is not what feminists or religious people are quick to decry as “sinful”. No. We are talking about the forms of porn that are authentically illegal and detrimental to humankind.

FORMS OF ILLEGAL PORN

 

Again, this list elaborates upon the forms of porn that are illegal. Not what feminists want to make illegal, which would be all of the currently legal porn. The list of authentically illegal porn ranks the following way:

1. Child porn
2. Rape/Snuff porn
3. Bestiality porn

NOTE ON CHILD PORN: Even though leftists and websites like Salon.com have recently tried to shamelessly normalize pedophilia via the argument “Virtuous pedophile” pedophilia itself is a completely indefensible argument. Pedophilia destroys the future of a human being and normalizing it will only lead to more child porn.

NOTE ON RAPE/SNUFF PORN: The second one features authentic acts of executions and rape. However, when it comes to public executions or gore due to events like road accidents nearly nothing can be done legally because recording gory images is not illegal (unless the family of the diseased sues). What is entirely illegal and should be punished with life imprisonment or  the death penalty is the cases of snuff film featuring authentic private executions. The most difficult one to discern is the last one, rape porn. The reason for this difficulty is that actors and actresses can portray acts of rape that are indistinguishable from an authentic rape and unless the person presses charges, we cannot know if it was authentic. However, there are limits to the levels of body harm an actor/actress can withstand and if the injuries are life threatening then the likelihood of it being an authentic rape are much higher.

NOTE ON BESTIALITY PORN: Even if there are people who actually date and marry their dogs (even if treat them excellently) they still have no case in court because unlike humans, animals have no capability to give consent to sex (however being a female feminist and claiming past “abuse” may allow the twisting of the law to get away with marrying her German shepherd or a smaller dog as it has already happened)

 

THE UNPERSUADABLES

Now despite the fact those 3 are out of the way, feminists will still try to obsessively compare all legal forms of porn to child/rape/snuff porn. Even with the writing on the wall, feminists will still try to label all the legal colorful variants of porn “illegal“. It is not short-sightedness, it is feminists behaving like pig-headed, unpersuadable-regardless-of-all-evidence, willfully ignorant, intellectually disonest, moronic creationists.

A creationist will still say that the earth is only 10,000 years old even if you make them major in archaelogy as much as a feminist will still insist legal porn is a crime even if they have majored in….never mind, women’s studies is glorified theology.

unpersuadables

Both feminists and creationists are unpersuadable.

For the sake of argument, let’s entertain the possibility that 5 porn “stars” are actually raped every year. If these crimes took place, did they file a police report? Here is where the noise starts as the typical anti porn feminist will try to do the following:

  • Bring up colorful excuses for the adult performer was “prevented from taking legal action”
  • Say the crime took place in the third world
  • Do an hypocritical “switcheroo”

What is the hypocritical “switcheroo” you may ask?

Well the “switcheroo” is a tool well-known for demagogues, it consists of telling a victim’s sad moving story (real or imaginary) then the demagogue stresses and theatrically tells the details the victim’s suffering, their struggle, their pain and once the audience is moved and engaged (or enraged by the double espresso emotional noise) Their outrage is wide awake & ready to be exploited by using the switcheroo. This is done by making the subtle, fleeting implication the same suffering experienced by the victim ALSO happens to the public the demagogue is speaking to. THEN they are convinced they too are victims then the demagogue convinces them they are the “oppressed” too. Allow me to show you who brought the “switcheroo” tradition into the mainstream:

 

Oppressors!

The “switcheroo” is the art of subtle verbal sleight of hand to manipulate the masses.

See? Our charismatic little buddy Hitler stole the“switcheroo” technique from the religious demagogues. But, in the case of feminists, they just painted their stolen “switcheroo” in bright radical pink. It still is the same thing and has very similar stages. First, feminists start by speaking of the authentic and real hardships female sex workers in the 3rd world have to go through and how they are mistreated and underpaid then, they do the “switcheroo” and now the feminist demagogue claims women in the 1st world are suffering EXACTLY as much as those in the 3rd.

This is a careful form of verbal sleight of hand (instead of just plain lying) by manipulating the audience’s emotions and making them believe porn is a mixture of violent, illegal prostitution combined with rape with zero distinctions between the 1st and the 3rd world.

Again, the oldest form of switcheroo can be found in churches where the charismatic demagogue starts talking about a martyr’s suffering then they do the “switcheroo” aaaaaand, what do you know? All of sudden the demagogue and all the people in the church are victims too! Just like the martyr. (also, at this point is where they pass the basket for you to tithe, a pretty slick business strategy to steal money by guilt-tripping sheep also demonstrated by feminists).

These masters of the art of “switcheroos” play around with the audience to artificially reduce their perception of their own agency (but not their agency as a whole as they can still undertake the task of retribution), to make them feel “oppressed”.
Hitler used similar techniques to those used by feminists and the church. But what Hitler focused on was making the Jews look as the dominant class then portraying the Germans as the “oppressed” ones. He successfully portrayed the Germans as  “Aryan victims” of sorts. It is all about convincing the audience they have no agency, no power to control anything, that they are the ones acted upon. But the Germans were not alone using the switcheroo, look:

dolfie

The Nazi “switcheroo”

poppy

The Roman Catholic “switcheroo”

freeddy

The Westboro Baptist Church “switcheroo”

danny

The Anti-Porn Feminist “switcheroo”

anita

The Commercial Feminist “switcheroo”

Eliza chavez I am a videogame character

The Insane Feminist anti-GG “switcheroo”

 

 

screenshot325
Sure…

Since the church of feminism uses the same “switcheroos” during their fundraising “masses” we can separate the noise from the facts. They make emotional noise to control people but the fact is that they just lie for profit. Let’s not forget these hypocritical “switcheroo” manoeuvres date back to even before the inquisition, it is therefore, not surprising, demagogues and religion are like pigs and bacon. (Unlike porn and bacon, they are far from being delicious.)

Besides lying, feminists need to push for laws and lobbying to avoid learning any science, which, in and of itself, is also a potential risk, because the prospect of feminists invading science (less likely but they have tried) to co-opt it or, more likely, they just try to bypass Science through their demagogy. Why? Because they want to get all porn banned and are slowly achieving those goals (I am looking at you citizens of the United Orwellian Surveillanced Kingdom). But since feminists can go and fuck themselves let’s get back to the main question,

Is there hard-core porn that is legal but still “harmful”?

If so, what is authentically “harmful” porn?

What scientific criteria outside religious morals can be used to identify authentically harmful porn?

Also, this begs the question: Harmful for whom?

Harmful for a handful of the adult consenting performers or to all of them?

There is no sexual pleasure without struggle. But extended intense pain is unlikely to yield authentic sexual pleasure. This is where this article will go into a different territory, so, please bear with me for a moment. I am gonna ask you to think about the future and how science may want to accurately and scientifically classify the many expressions of human sexuality by studying porn and its performers. But in order for science to do that, we might have to stop looking at the performer’s genitals and instead see if their brains are experiencing more pain than pleasure.

 

 

THE DARK NEURAL AGES

screenshot
The dark ages

Imagine that in the year 2016 we place a couple of performers under an MRI and make them watch their own performances then we see their arousal and pleasure centers in their brains. They would have to be strapped to the machine because the MRI scanning is easily interrupted if the subject moves even a tenth of an inch. (In short, current technology is not ready for serious porn research because the performer’s brain needs to remain static and that is too limiting for sexual intercourse)

 

 

FUTURE PORN RESEARCH

Future porn research
Let’s say we travel to the year 2031 and in the future, a technology comparable to MRI no longer requires you to be immobilized to be scanned and rather you have to wear a rather bulky helmet, (Porn Daft Punk + Porn Teletubbies MRI porn or sorts. Yes told you it would get weirder) then we would ask the performers to have intense rough intercourse (whichever the most controversial is in 15 years) then we would see if their brains would light up with mostly “pleasure” or mostly “pain” or to get the resulting ratio of sexual pleasure: Sexual Pain.
If that form of future porn were to be considered “harmful” for one of the performers their brains would be blinking like Christmas trees with only pain and no pleasure at all. Problem is, in life, there is no pleasure without struggle and authentic human sexual intercourse involves all intensities of both pain and pleasure. So hypothetically speaking, we would go by percentages to declare the porn in question “kosher porn” which would be at least roughly 51% of the time pleasure + no safe word use. Those rules would make the hard-core porn qualify as lawful because the performer enjoyed himself/herself with 51% of the time pleasure. Add to that the fact they did not have to use the safe word plus they got paid handsomely. You can see where this is going right? Opening that can of feminists worms would result in the following “problematic” situation:

Feminists’ Possible impulsive rebuttals to the 51% pleasure rule.

Opposition (feminists)
“Your science is misogynistic! It should be 95% pleasure at the very least!”

Supporters (producers and performers looking to get paid )
“Can we lower it to 10% pleasure? Pay is higher…”

You could not make anybody happy, not now, not in the future, mostly because emotional thinkers are not authentic thinkers, so science would be “misogynistic” and would demand “neurological enthusiastic consent” or some other form of blackmail bullshit to game the system and prevent the science. Like any religion, feminism is an obstacle for the advancement of science.

Science becomes “misogynistic” when it prevents feminists from lying. Let’s just imagine that in the future the same technology used to study the 51% rule was used to analyze the brains of authentic victims of rape. Let’s say the sample is 1,000 brains of authentic rape victims.

Let’s say the data of the 1, 000 victims is cross referenced with data scans from authentic rape victims coming from war-torn countries (most likely African ones, unfortunately) we would then see a pattern of how the brain is affected by sexually induced PTSD regardless of geographical location (it would stand to reason human neurology would have neurological averages)

Let’s say the sample group grows up to 1, 000,000 scans of rape victims. Let’s imagine the technology becomes so accurate to identify real rape from false claims that it starts being used in legal cases. Just imagine the fits feminists will throw to have all evidence dismissed in court thanks to a scientific test that would detect authentic rape and isolate false rape accusations. They would still insist rape culture is “real” and label science as pure “misogyny”

See, to feminists that future technology would be “misogynistic” simply because it would be a reliable lie detection test to prevent false rape claimants (often feminists carrying mattresses around for effect) from using the law for revenge. If that technology were to exist, it is likely feminists may have to learn how to lie better or try have it banned. Just as they do today with porn.

 

 

 

the beauty of rape culture

Back to the present, (and thank you for taking that future detour with me) the constant today and in the future is that be feminists need to lie for effect. Make no mistake, feminists will keep it lying about porn being “a war against women” or all porn being “rape” or even that “rape culture” exists.

This obsession feminists have with “rape” taking place everywhere and all porn allegedly being rape put a giant dent in the myth of “rape culture”.

Why? Well, if rape culture existed wouldn’t snuff/rape porn be considered legal and even “kosher” instead of illegal? Why would a father kill his daughter’s rapists as it has happened so many times from the dawn of time? Rape has been punished with savage beatings and death possibly from the paleolithic. As soon as your mother, wife, sister or daughter told you she had been raped you possibly had dead man walking: The rapist.

But, for the sake of argument let’s indulge in the utopia of feminists and their rape culture myth. If rape culture existed wouldn’t make more sense for fathers whose daughters were raped to obsessively track the rapists down only to stop, give them a pat on the back, smile have a beer with them? Fathers would greet them and thank them for the merry raping of his daughter. They would even hug them, shake their hand and say:

“Oh! Thank you so much for raping my daughter Mr. Rapist!

After all these years I thought I was gonna have to pay to have her raped. Thank you kindly!”

Then, after a few beers both the proud rape-culture father and his daughter’s merry rapists would all hug, rise their beers and offer a boisterous toast:

“TO RAPE!”

Then the father and all of the merry gang-rapists would ride their horses towards the sunset while holding their beers as the “chariots of fire” theme plays in the background, this song:

Just add this Rape Culture Music to your sunset

the beauty of rape culture

Of course, the beer, the song, the hugs and all of that would be customary if the myth of “rape culture” existed. (But if you instead liked banjo music to celebrate the merry raping of your daughter, who am I to judge your music taste?)

 

To be entirely honest, there is a rape culture most feminists do not like to admit: The jail system. If there is a place where rape is almost 100% guaranteed is a male jail. And it would not be too far-fetched to think that radical feminists who hate men also get all wet horny and goopy at the thought of men raping each other. Obviously, not that feminists will ever admit to that. The Gabbana variety? It is as real as the feminist rape culture.

gabbana

 

But the reality of human sexuality is that porn does not encourage rape in functional individuals (the vast majority of us) and the vast majority of human beings do not rape otherwise we would have more jails than Walmarts (or jails would not exist anymore).

We humans, despite all of our flaws, have survived incredible tests and against all religions and dogmas, we have made it to this day because, more than 51% of the time, we were doing something right; we cared for our community and for our population, for each other.
Every population has its criminals and for a society to work, criminals cannot outnumber the functional individuals as much as a society exclusively based on cannibalism will not last. Imagine a past where the first human tribe dictated everyone should try to rape everyone at all times, then people would have sooner or later snapped and the mass revenge killings would have prevented us all from being here today. So if porn does not encourage imaginary wars or imaginary rape what does it do?

 

THE HIGH COST OF RAPE

The energy investment between watching porn and going out and raping someone is exponential. Of course that between the sexual junk food of porn and the purported “act of war of rape” most males are just going to stay home and jerk off. One because they are not criminals and two, well, raping is too much work.

Allow me to enrage all of Jezebel and Tumblr radfems readers with the following statement:

“The problem with rape is not the morals.

Rape is just too much work.”
-Jack Outis

(please quote me to oblivion, hang on, let me get it for you)

 

On one hand, (unfortunate pun) jerking off while watching legal porn involves no crime and almost no energy involved whereas rape is a crime that will land the male in jail for decades and involves so much work. Why work to lose your freedom when you can fap?
However, the feminist religion rhetoric demands logic to be secondary to morality thus males have to prove their “worthiness” by apologizing on behalf of all men. By this “feminist logic” we would have a world where all ethnic groups would apologize for the following stereotypical crimes:

  • all black people apologizing profusely for all the car stereos stolen in the 20th century? (That surely was a “war on stereos”, or “crimes against music”).
  • Asians being required to apologize preemptively before driving and apologize/feel ashamed for all past and future traffic accidents
  • Declaring Pearl Harbor an Asian act of war on driving?
  • Requiring a preemptive apology from all Mexicans living in Mexico for all diarrheas caused by bad burritos in the US?
  • Requiring all Japanese men to apologize for all their weird rapey anime.
  • And so on…

No. None of it makes no sense. There is no need to be ashamed for someone else’s wrongdoing as much as there is no need to feel any shame for the crimes committed by serial killers.

Outrage? Yes.

Shame? No.

Or, in other words:

whedon

IN CONCLUSION

 

How many men are nurtured rapists but not natural-born rapists?

Here is the insult upon the injury: Single mothers provide us with the most criminals in society, including 60% of all convicted rapists along with more than 70% of all inmates single mothers producing more than 70% of all inmates in American prisons statistics and massive literature conclusively show. Yes, it has been proven over and over that the vast majority of inmates in American jails were raised by single mothers.

What a sublime irony when feminists declare porn to be “rape” while feminists+single mothers raise at least 60% of actual rapists in American jails, we can’t imagine a more blatant exercise in hypocrisy than the one performed by feminists.

No. Porn is not war on women. The reality is that feminists are mentally ill human beings with broken sexualies trying to force reality to conform to their delusions. Just the way Creationists do with their arguments against evolution. Feminist ignorance is not a point of view. Facts are universal and shared by everyone. Opinions? They don’t have to be shared.

Or, in other words:

 

Daniel Patrick Moynihan

 

PS: I look forward to the day when feminists raise their hemlock cocktails and offer the following boisterous toast:

FEMINISTS: “TO MY SON, THE RAPIST I CREATED!”

This is the end of part 3.

End of the series “Porn is War on Women Series”.

Thank you for reading.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: