Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



A Guy Named Goo ([info]the_clansmen) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2005-01-17 20:04:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
On the [info]feminist comm on LJ, someidiotone posts on an article regarding pornography. Among other inflammatory comments, the poster says, "First of all, I think the age of consent should be 16. Most people who aren't ugly or stupid have lost their virginity by then anyway, and are perfectly capable of making that decision."

Of course people have to check in.

And as a bonus, a wank from yesterday on the same comm: Someone throws a fit and leaves the community. No one is quite sure why. Also, her personal journal is impossible to read.

EDIT: Am trying to resist the urge to wank on this. Am slowly losing. May have to move this to [info]i_wank.

Edit Strikes Back: All gone! But I have a copy saved. Have fun. Guess I won't get to wank much after all.


(Post a new comment)


[info]frenzy
2005-01-18 05:06 am UTC (link)
If invoking Godwin's Law means the thread is over, and Godwin's Law is invoked in the OP, does that mean the thread never happened?

In other news, the post in the first link got bahleeted while I was reading it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]the_clansmen
2005-01-18 05:08 am UTC (link)
I just saved it and linked it. Yay!

It's no fun if G's Law is invoked too early.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]plazmah
2005-01-18 05:19 am UTC (link)
If invoking Godwin's Law means the thread is over, and Godwin's Law is invoked in the OP, does that mean the thread never happened?

If a wank spurts in the forest and no one is around to hear it... uh, how does the rest go?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-18 05:23 am UTC

[info]sarajayechan
2005-01-18 05:22 am UTC (link)
"First of all, I think the age of consent should be 16. Most people who aren't ugly or stupid have lost their virginity by then anyway, and are perfectly capable of making that decision."

*points and laughs*

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]beccastareyes
2005-01-18 05:31 am UTC (link)
::joins in on the laughter::

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]greypearl
2005-01-18 05:49 am UTC (link)
It happens all the time, but I couldn't help laughing at the ad for the Naked Women Wrestling League on the anti-porn article that started the wank. Revenge of the keywords!

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]sluggirl
2005-01-18 07:27 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, it's not actually an anti-porn article. It's an article on "Adult Video News" about an anti-porn advocate. Hence the ads.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]greypearl, 2005-01-18 07:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sluggirl, 2005-01-18 08:01 pm UTC

[info]ladydisdain
2005-01-18 06:07 am UTC (link)
Eh, why not? I'll add to the virgin wank.

First of all, I think the age of consent should be 16. Most people who aren't ugly or stupid have lost their virginity by then anyway...

Oh, just what the world needs: another feminist community making gross generalizations about female sexuality and assuming that people are all the same?

Erm, don't mind me.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]kijikun
2005-01-18 06:17 am UTC (link)
You know I think there are worse things than thinking good girls don't have sex until marraige...like you have to have sex as soon as possible to validate oneself.

/wank

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]khym_chanur
2005-01-18 06:52 am UTC (link)
another feminist community making gross generalizations about female sexuality and assuming that people are all the same?

Well, if you're going to have something like an age of consent law, you need to make generalizations, so that you can make an age that applies to everyone. Otherwise, the government would have to make a case-by-case decision, which is impossible.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - meshou, 2005-01-18 06:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ladydisdain, 2005-01-18 02:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2005-01-18 06:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tempslut, 2005-01-18 07:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-19 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]thewashinator, 2005-01-19 02:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-19 02:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]thewashinator, 2005-01-19 02:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2005-01-19 06:29 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-19 07:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tempslut, 2005-01-19 03:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]teratologist, 2005-01-19 04:44 am UTC

[info]kerikeri
2005-01-18 07:05 pm UTC (link)
The community wasn't making generalizations. Someone trolling the community was making generalizations. Considering no one else actually agreed with her, I don't think the entire community can be held responsible for one moron's now-deleted opinion.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]smo
2005-01-18 07:18 pm UTC (link)
Funny, almost everyone I know who'd had sex by that age wishes they'd waited. Mainly because the sex was lousy.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]chaimonkey
2005-01-18 06:58 am UTC (link)
Take a peek at the OP's userinfo. I smell troll bigum time(um).

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]the_clansmen
2005-01-18 07:20 am UTC (link)
Yeah, I just noticed that and was thinking that...not to mention her username. But I looked and not all her comm posts are totally rude (there was one that wasn't too wanky in religious_debate or whatever it was).

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]chaimonkey, 2005-01-18 08:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-18 08:15 am UTC

[info]gal_montag
2005-01-18 07:13 am UTC (link)
First of all, I think the age of consent should be 16.

Isn't the age of consent 16 in most places anyway?

Or does she mean 16 y/olds should be allowed to do porn?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]the_clansmen
2005-01-18 07:21 am UTC (link)
I think it varies a lot from state-to-state, but it's often 18.

I tend to agree that it should be lowered, but certainly not for any of the reasons she stated.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]rinoared
2005-01-18 08:06 am UTC (link)
It is 16 in most areas. A quick look at www.ageofconsent.com clears that up.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-18 08:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rinoared, 2005-01-18 08:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kraken_sleeps, 2005-01-18 11:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]adora_spintriae, 2005-01-19 01:36 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]andsoyoudied, 2005-01-18 02:21 pm UTC

[info]mael
2005-01-18 04:23 pm UTC (link)
14 and *fair* here in Italy. Yay!

But I don't know why this applies to *porn*, given that it is illegal to buy porn (or star in porn) if you are underage, and if you're old enough to *do* so it is certainly illegal to have sex with minors and/or watch them have sex with each other.

So unless we are talking about expanding the market to teenager porn for teenagers (Good luck with that, folks!) age of consent means nothing to the porn industry.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]andsoyoudied
2005-01-18 10:25 am UTC (link)
Calling anyone a "bitch" is also degrading to women.

Is "prick" degrading to men? And what about my porn, that objectifies men rather than women? Is that degrading?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]khym_chanur
2005-01-18 11:16 am UTC (link)
Haven't you learnt from the batshit-wing of the feminists that all porn degrades women, even gay porn?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-18 11:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2005-01-18 11:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-18 12:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2005-01-18 12:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]electricchick, 2005-01-20 01:56 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]andsoyoudied, 2005-01-18 02:24 pm UTC

[info]smo
2005-01-18 07:13 pm UTC (link)
Wow, guess I must have been ugly and stupid for a long-ass time.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]sluggirl
2005-01-18 07:51 pm UTC (link)
Hey, me too! Still am, in fact.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]smo, 2005-01-18 07:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sluggirl, 2005-01-18 08:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-19 12:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]smo, 2005-01-19 12:38 am UTC

[info]sluggirl
2005-01-18 07:37 pm UTC (link)
The problem with our system is that there are few viable alternatives, but they include getting a different job. It's basically impossible to starve in America if you're working hard, even if you have kids.

*boggles*

I especially like her "I offend people on purpose because it makes them challenge their beliefs!" argument. *eyeroll*

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]phosfate
2005-01-18 08:39 pm UTC (link)
Unless you're working for Wal-Mart, of course. Then, it's basically mandatory.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(no subject) - [info]the_clansmen, 2005-01-19 12:23 am UTC

[info]adora_spintriae
2005-01-19 01:38 am UTC (link)
Ahh dear. And yet, everyone I knew who'd popped their cherry by 16 were some of the ugliest and stupidest examples of homo sapien DNA on the planet.

Seriously though, "uppity_raghead". *trollcalls* I'm sure I've seen his/her/its name around somewhere before though.

(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map