“Fox News masquerades as a defender of traditional family values, but behind the scenes, it operates like a sex-fueled, Playboy Mansion-like cult, steeped in intimidation, indecency and misogyny.”

I disagree only because Amber Rose is herself a woman, and she is excellent at helping herself.

THERE IS NO ROOM FOR REASON ON TWITTER!!!

All the YES to this statement. Thank you.

It is a legitimate point. Doing things in the name of fame and publicity is what that whole family does.

For any other transgender person I’d say yes, it’s transphobic. However, we’re talking about Hollywood, we’re talking about reality TV, and we’re talking about a pressure to stay “relevant” that often trumps family, health, reality, morality and everything else. It may very well be that Kaitlin was an occasional…

What an awful story.

She’s got loads of dough. Crossdressing was Bruce/Caitlyn’s sexual FETISH that has now been shared with the whole world. Imagine how great it must feel to be a multimillionaire narcissist, to have your fetish validated by being hailed as being “stunning and brave”, appearing on magazine covers in lingerie and not even…

Agreed. I get being offended at thinking of being trans as a phase (but I don’t think that was the intent of the joke, as far as good/bad intentions matter). I also get the joke of the Jendashians being willing to do anything (including transition) for ratings. And I think BM, though she may have spoke out of turn,…

You are right, they’re absolutely not. I had the exact same thought Bette did.

yup. I honestly got no problem with the tweet.

First of all, just because something isn’t classified as BDSM doesn’t mean it isn’t BDSM.

Never suggested it could or should be banned. It’s speech that can hurt some people, just like white supremacist hate speech and radical Islamist recruitment can inspire direct or indirect harm. People gonna people. So fuck people.

Most likely, they’re all around you. You may be meeting bad guys, but good people- men and women- are everywhere.

There are guys who are extremely respectful of women but who like (consensual) gangbangs (not gang rape), for example. So yes, it’s possible to raise boys who watch all kinds of porn but still believe in consent.

The problem is, one cannot have a porn czar who decides to allow sensual videos but to ban gangbangs. Once you go down that road, you could wind up with a ban on, say, gay porn, or S&M, etc.

Violence is less harmful than sex? That seems like a matter of perspective. I consider two people fucking less offensive than simulated murder.

I disagree that this is a harmless cause - shaming people who watch porn to the point that they hate themselves and repress their sexual urges can be really dangerous. This organization she’s advocating for wants people to replace their interest in porn with prayer (though they claim not to be a religious movement,…

Seriously. I feel for Elizabeth Smart but the anti-porn lobby is using our pre-existing sympathy for an abducted rape victim and it’s a gross tactic. Porn = Sex. Sex requires consent. Neither porn nor sex is good or bad in and of itself. Context is always key—for the makers and consumers of pornography.

I feel like a person whose introduction to porn was their rapist abductor kind of doesn't have the most level starting point for a conversation about the subject. But maybe that's just me.