Arguments like this have a hard time explaining the existence of female/gay/lesbian/non-binary dominants.

Ah, I see. Ok. There’s definitely a valid point to be made that the mainstream porn gaze combined with BDSM elements is dangerous in a way kink itself is not, if that’s what you’re getting at.

Well, non-consent play (“simulated rape”) of various degree is a pretty huge part of BDSM as it is normally understood, so you can see how one might have been confused. Are you saying that the former should be excluded from BDSM entirely? I’m actually asking.

I mean yes it would be obviously inappropriate to do that but you would presumably know your best friend’s comfort level in advance...

I don’t think that’s a reach at all so much as clearly the intent of the ad.

Of course it isn’t really about rape, but you have to admit it’s a bit iffy sounding when you listen to it now.

It’s definitely tone deaf.

Ok I mean that’s a bit of a reach

You presumably would know these things about your best friend though?

This is the correct answer, not so much because of your specific preferences, but because of the “I was uncomfortable with something, so we talked about it, and then we converged on a mutually satisfying solution” approach.

...why not...?

Speaking as a man,it might be true that masturbation reduces sensitivity (surely this is also true of vibrators?). But I strongly disagree that it accurately simulates sex. Vaginas etc. just feel - physically - better. There is no comparison.

I think you mean “wolves”

To be fair it’s quite believable that schoolchildren/highschoolers might use a lot of big words they don’t know

Was he surprised by the quality because you were a woman or because you were, you know, writing fanfic?

I mean, yes, the Pope is Catholic

“you could over-represent both groups for decades without ever being able to reach any sort of parity for the white homogeneity of the past”

This is true, to be sure. But surely the goal is to make race no longer a predictor of success as a writer (or at all)? If the world were like that, why would the identities of…

It just seems to me like legalization and human trafficking are different issues. Heavily exploited migrant labour is a problem in many industries: child care, farm labour, unskilled manufacturing. Should working as a nanny therefore be illegal?

I don’t understand why you feel sex workers should be expected to account for this. It’s like saying we should make factories illegal because sweatshops exist.

Are you at least arguing that legalization would result in *more* human trafficking? If not I don’t see how the two issues are even connected.

I think the idea isn’t so much that legalization would stop rape as that it wouldn’t worsen the problem. This neutralizes a common justification for keeping sex work illegal.