Hi, my friends and my female enemies! Here I will put sequentially three excellent texts, by two authors, showing that censorship against pornography becomes a general censorship: "Mercedes Carrera's #ImmoralSupport - Moral Panic: Pornography and Gaming" and "Mercedes Carrera's #ImmoralSupport Vol.2: God Save the Porn (and the Games)!", both by the pornstar Mercedes Carrera; and "British Re-Invent The Wheel - and Fail", by Dr. Marty Klein. The text by Dr. Marty Klein shows unexpected results of the blocking websites in England in the name of delivering children from sex, among them the blocking of "the site of Claire Perry, the Member of Parliament who campaigned so prominently for the new law". As the Brazilian humourist Millor Fernandes said, "it's democracy when I rule over you, it's dictatorship when you rule over me". I recommend also "Banned in the British Library", by Daniel Pipes, at http://www.danielpipes.org/14262/british-library, in which he shows that British Library's wi-fi allows anti-semitic websites but blocks websites against Islamic terror, like his, labeling them with something like "intolerance" or "adult sites". But I did not reproduce the text here for not to abuse of the reader's patience. I copied those three texts in the same post, though the reading would be a little long, for you to see the parallel. I will explain it better in the next post.
Abigail Pereira Aranha
Mercedes Carrera's #ImmoralSupport – Moral Panic: Pornography and Gaming
November 30, 2014 10:09 am, http://therealpornwikileaks.com/mercedes-carreras-immoralsupport-moral-panic-pornography-gaming
By Mercedes Carrera
If some of you have been watching my Twitter activities, you'll see that I'm actively involved in the gaming community, and often the conversation includes the consumer revolt which utilizes the hashtag #GamerGate. While more information can be gathered at http://www.gamergate.me than I could possibly consolidate into an article, I'd like to highlight a few important points which, whether one is involved in gaming or not, affect the porn industry.
The adult industry has, for years, been a bastion of free speech and first amendment rights, no matter how controversial (see this article for an interesting analysis of the matter). While pornography might be taboo or simply distasteful to many, it is an accepted and sizable portion of web viewed content and commerce. It has been argued by those who oppose pornography that the viewing of such content has an adverse effect on society, particularly in regards to sexual violence. However, once studied it was concluded that not only is there no causal link between pornography and rape, in fact the opposite may be true. While this information may be irritating to the many so-called and self ordained moral bastions of society, it proves that pioneers of freedom of pornography have been correct all along, and now there is data to support their claims.
The gaming community has for years faced similar controversy and claims. Currently games are censored throughout the world, largely for violent content although sexual content is often frowned upon as well. Again though, we ask, what are the statistics supporting linking violent crime with violent games? Is it true that there's a causal link between gaming and violence? Recent studies indicate not. In fact, the study cited found no noticeable causation at all between violent video games and real world violence. In addition, prior studies have found that violent video games may in fact reduce real world violence by creating a kind of psychological outlet for violent impulses. Sound familiar?
Recently, the gaming community has been accused of being filled with nothing but "misogynists", and ironically the opponents of this supposedly "misogynistic, largely male gaming community" (not true, by the way: roughly half of all gamers are women) are the same type of radical feminists who have been opposing pornography for ages. These radicals are outliers even in the feminist community for their lack of inclusivity and hatred of those who are outside of their party line. Even negating data from studies previously cited (as they often do with pornography), these same groups are citing moral grounds, fear-mongering illusory threats to society and making unsubstantiated claims that video games in some way promote "male supremacy." Ironically, the last time feminism took up a cause against society that has so little grounds was the suffrage movement's pet project enforcing temperance upon society, ie. prohibition. And while third wave feminism subgroups may dislike pornography greatly, due to various laws and interpretations of rights and free speech, it's not going away anytime soon.
However, we are seeing now that the same radical feminists that have had their eyes on pornography are now also eyeing gaming, and under similar moralistic judgmental grounds. Once again negating evidence to the contrary, the charge at this point is similar to that against porn: that games support the mythical "misogynistic, patriarchal" structures that many radical feminists like to imagine they live within to support their internalized victimhood pathologies. But are we seeing a real reaction to games, or little more than a group whose members secretly hate all men and would like to censor any activities which normal, typical males might enjoy and find fulfillment from? If the lens through which such groups are viewing gaming is from the vantage point of the hatred or fear of an entire gender, it's important that such concerns voiced by said subgroup be understood from the context of fear and hatred and not treated as academically investigated truths.
Recently, we saw radical feminist groups react with extreme vitriol to a shirt senior scientist Dr. Matt Taylor was wearing on television the day the Rosetta mission landed Philae lander spacecraft on comet 67P. Fortunately, aside from the hysterical shrieking of harpy non-scientist "social justice warriors", the internet community was largely appalled at the treatment Dr. Taylor received for his fashion choices.
Equity feminists such as Dr. Christina Sommers swiftly and academically rebutted the false rhetoric regarding shirts keeping women out of science. And as this article so justly points out, in regards to #ShirtGate we are seeing fascism cloaked as liberalism.
As a former engineer who worked on space-based satellite programs, it was saddening to see such an important day of scientific achievement overshadowed by the petty sex-negative radical feminism fashion police. Hip shirts with sexy pin-up girls never kept me out of STEM, and methinks that perhaps those not bright enough to cut it in the hard sciences are grasping for straws to explain away their own ineptitude. Ironically, the shirt worn by Dr. Taylor was designed especially for him, as a birthday present and for good luck, by a supportive female friend.
(In response to this, and due to a general interest in science and technology, the gaming community is now tentatively planning launching a satellite under the flag of gaming, freedom and lewdness. In fact, should the mission go, I shall be combining my two favorite interests- porn and space- by donating the proceeds of gaming theme porn to the mission. To find out more about this project go to www.spacechan.org.)
Be aware, fellow supporters of free speech and pornographers who live in full creative expression: should this societal creep continue, we may not only be seeing hip shirts censored on scientists, but many other forms of expression deemed "lewd" or "misogynistic" such as gaming and pornography under fire and restricted. We might be seeing the genesis of prohibition 2.0, and this time it won't have the interesting cultural overtones of a speakeasy in downtown Chicago. Instead, it will creep into the fundamental freedoms of entertainment you enjoy in your own home; and for those of us in the adult industry, into our place of employment. It reminds us of this prolific quote, "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross". Yet this time it will come wrapped in liberalism and carrying mandates on post-modernism and moral panic.
About Mercedes Carrera:
A card carrying member of the Illuminaughty, Mercedes is often known as: High Priestess of Depravity, BasedMILF and Social Media Slut. She's a card carrying engineer, gamer, pornographer, whore, good-time girl and all around irritant to anti-sex radical feminists. She enjoys chess and can drink absinthe like nobody's business.
Follow Mercedes on Twitter.
Mercedes Carrera's #ImmoralSupport Vol.2: God Save the Porn (and the Games)!
December 6, 2014 12:17 pm, http://therealpornwikileaks.com/mercedes-carreras-immoralsupport-vol-2-god-save-porn-games
God Save the Porn (and the Games)! and Other Censorship Musings
If you read my article last week entitled "Moral Panic: Pornography and Gaming", I examined the current social trend toward censorship. When written, the article was largely referencing the conversations that I had been observing on social media and mainstream news platforms regarding censorship, but I had no idea that the article would hit so close to home, and so quickly be relevant, even prophetic. In the week following that publication we saw both the censorship of pornography and of gaming, events I shall examine below.
On December 2, 2014, the UK decided to censor certain forms of pornography. This has not been the first time the UK has ventured into censoring porn, however it's certainly a step backward in an era that, given our technological progress, would seem to be socially progressive. In fact, the list of banned activities in UK porn reads like a mandate from the Victorian era and appears to target specifically activities that women would traditionally derive pleasure from such as female ejaculation and face sitting. Further, It also targets "kinky" and traditionally "queer" activities such as spanking, fisting, and caning. But most potentially problematic is the interesting inclusion of the provision: "Penetration by any object 'associated with violence". Given prior radical feminism attempts to equate all penis in vagina sexual activity as rape, the inclusion of such provisional language is exceedingly worrisome given the recent trends towards feminist extremism. Is this legislation a precursor to banning all forms of penis in vagina pornography? While such a question may seem like an absurd idea, the banning of largely benign femme-domme activities such as face sitting leads to the question: who is behind the ban and why? And what is the endgame of this social trend?
Additionally, this week both Target and KMart Australia decided to pull Grand Theft Auto 5 from their shelves. Citing an online petition with 40,000 signatures, Target AU folded to pressure from the petition citing GTA 5 as “…a game of bashing, killing and horrific violence against women.” The omission of the petition to reference the violence against men is particularly egregious, and makes it easy to deduce which moral policing group was behind the push for censorship. While the violence depicted in GTA5 might not be to everyone's liking (as caning and fisting may not be everyone's cupp'a tea), there is a tremendous chasm between being offended by a product and denying said product to other people based on one's own matter of taste. However violent GTA might be (and indeed, there are scenes of brutality and violence, hence the controversy over the series since it's inception), the more pressing issue is that of censorship creep. Another interesting overtone of this level of moral policing is the perception that women as a whole are unable to handle scenes of violence and men are unable to separate video games from reality. And if this in fact the case, or at least the perception from some specific members of agenda focused lobbying, then would it not seem that their next step will be further censorship of games, then media, and eventually books, art and academia, all in the name of "protecting women"?
Well, in the case of the latter, it's already happening. According to the previous article:
"What do a students' 'pole fitness' society, the song 'Blurred Lines', the Sun newspaper, a poster advertising a summer ball, and lads' mags have in common? They've all been banned from UK universities on the grounds that they promote the sexual objectification of women. Suggesting that something objectifies women seems to be the No.1 justification for moral outrage among a vocal minority of student activists, and it nearly always results in campus censorship."
Evidently the need to feel 'comfortable' is more important to modern students than allowing for discourse. In fact, even more than going silent, this article aptly describes them as "Stepford students". In fact, author Brendan O’Neill, has this to say about this generation:
"Sitting stony-eyed in lecture halls or surreptitiously policing beer-fuelled banter in the uni bar. They look like students, dress like students, smell like students. But their student brains have been replaced by brains bereft of critical faculties and programmed to conform […] anyone who's spent more than five minutes in their company will know that these students are far more interested in shutting debate down than opening it up."
Somewhere along the way in society, presumably due to the millennial generation practice of "participation trophies" and the entitlement complex that accompanies such activities, the youth culture of traditionally rebellious thought is now mute. In history, it was taken for granted that youth culture would push the limits of prior generations, socially, economically and technologically. However, the millennials driving current cultural ideals are much less rebellious than prior generations. Some, such as this author, claim that poor economic markets and lack of employment lead millennials to be more focused on entrepreneurship and collectivism. Some would argue it's simply a result of weakness due to excessive coddling at the hands of baby boomer parents.
Whatever the reason, the overall trend in society seems to be toward ensuring that nobody is "offended" by materials, and this trend is spreading its tentacles into creative fields. For years academia has kowtowed to the preferences of social liberals, so a tendency to attempt to relate to the lowest common denominator and cater to those easily offended has been expected in that arena and become progressively worse over time. And, given what we see in the UK recently, while it's a surprise that moral conservatives have determined that attacking pornography is more important than addressing issues of social inequity and bankruptcy that currently plague the UK, it's not surprising that lawmakers obscure real issues with moralistic ones.
What is most interesting however is this current social squeeze resembles closely the Horseshoe theory commonly discussed in political science. This theory holds that the extreme left and the extreme right are extremely similar in social ideology. By having such inflexible moralistic lines, the extreme groups on both sides have very little tolerance for free or dissenting thought and opinions. Both ends of the spectrum also are authoritarian in nature and desire greater government control (ie censorship) to achieve the aims of quieting discontent.
Observing history we find societies ebb and flow and authoritarian elements are in fact cyclical in nature. As H.L. Mencken most insightfully mused:
Off goes the head of the king, and tyranny gives way to freedom. The change seems abysmal. Then, bit by bit, the face of freedom hardens, and by and by it is the old face of tyranny. Then another cycle, and another. But under the play of all these opposites there is something fundamental and permanent — the basic delusion that men may be governed and yet be free.
– H.L. Mencken, The American Credo: A Contribution Toward the Interpretation of the National Mind
Therefore, the real concern here is not the violence of a video game or the lewd nature of various forms of pornography. The concern is that it is becoming increasingly socially acceptable to impose one's own preferences and feelings onto others, and to dictate what goods may be available to society in a commercial marketplace. When we determine to police the thoughts, and art, of others rather than to educate people to make responsible choices for themselves, we end up with nothing more than a dependent society of mental deficients. As a result of the restriction of liberty, freedom of thought and expression, we shall be left with a society in which stagnation has taken hold, rooting in every field be it commerce or academia. Be aware my friends: if the events of this week are an indicator of our future, we must battle against such tyrannies at home and abroad. This time, these battles will not be for parcels of land or gold and silver, but for the last remaining freedoms within the recesses of our minds.
About Mercedes Carrera:
A card carrying member of the Illuminaughty, Mercedes is often known as: High Priestess of Depravity, BasedMILF and Social Media Slut. She's a card carrying engineer, gamer, pornographer, whore, good-time girl and all around irritant to anti-sex radicals. She enjoys chess and can drink absinthe like nobody's business.
Follow Mercedes on Twitter.
British Re-Invent The Wheel - and Fail
December 29, 2013 6:10 pm, http://sexualintelligence.wordpress.com/2013/12/29/british-re-invent-the-wheel-and-fail
By Dr. Marty Klein
To our British cousins:
You needn't have bothered.
When your Prime Minister David Cameron announced his intention to "protect young people" by requiring your ISPs to impose mandatory internet filters on their customers, we Americans already knew what was going to happen.
See, we tried that a long time ago, and it failed miserably—just like you are now. Our Congress proposed its first such internet filtering law all the way back in 1995, and has frequently attempted to control material "harmful to minors," even criminalizing "virtual child porn" involving no actual children. And to receive federal funding, American libraries and universities must install computer blocking systems (some of which block this blog, by the way), whose blacklists are protected corporate secrets.
Back then, many of us predicted the results—that filters would be over-broad and disruptive. Not surprisingly, sites were blocked that refer to breast cancer, sexual orientation, and rape. Congressman Dick Armey's site was blocked, as was Middlesex County's. And http://www.Maplesoccer.org was blacklisted because it described teams for "boys under 12."
Your British attempts to censor the internet are creating the same results. One of your ISPs blocked access to the website for Glasgow's St. Mary's Cathedral, the blog of its provost. A second ISP blocked access to charity sites including ChildLine, the NSPCC and the Samaritans. Other websites blocked include the British Library, National Library of Scotland,you're your Parliament.
And your best unexpected blocking of all is the site of Claire Perry, the Member of Parliament who campaigned so prominently for the new law. How's it feel, Claire? Oh, your site is legitimate and shouldn't be censored? That's how the owners of every single other site being blocked feel. When simple imagery is concerned, danger is in the eye of the beholder. Some would say that a legislator who doesn't trust democracy or British adults is pretty dangerous.
Even if internet filters could be perfect—which they can't be—their use is still a problem in democratic countries. Democracy demands the free flow of information. Democracy demands that government trust its people. Democracy demands that people, not the government, decide what they want to access themselves. Internet filters are domestic terrorists.
I've been in countries with mandatory internet filtering, like China. And I've just returned from Burma, where until just 2 years ago they didn't bother with filters—they just regulated who could own a computer and a modem. Do you want to be in the same censorship club as China and Iran?
My British cousins, if you want to protect young people, address the real dangers they face: texting while bicycling, texting during school, texting people instead of learning how to talk to them, watching sports instead of playing them.
And did I mention texting while bicycling? It's the single most dangerous junior high-school activity in America. I'd never let my kid play high school football, but its danger pales in comparison to the dangers of driving while texting—which at least 1/3 of American kids do. What's the British data on this?
Porn? Yeah, kids learn the wrong stuff about sex from it, but there's a great, non-censorship approach to that problem. It's called parenting—talking to kids about sex. Apparently, you British need more of that. I know we Americans do.
This selection with the original texts in English: http://avezdoshomens2.blog.com/2015/03/18/pgraphy-and-csorship-excellent-articles or http://avezdoshomens2.blogspot.com/2015/03/pornography-and-censorship-excellent.html Esta seleção traduzida para o português: http://avezdasmulheres.blog.com/2015/03/18/pgrafia-e-csura-artigos-excelentes ou http://avezdoshomens.blogspot.com/2015/03/pornografia-e-censura-artigos.html Questa selezione traducida al italiano: http://avezdoshomens2.blog.com/2015/03/19/pgrafia-e-csura-ottimi-articoli o http://avezdoshomens2.blogspot.com/2015/03/pornografia-e-censura-ottimi-articoli-2.html Esa selección traducida al español: http://avezdoshomens2.blog.com/2015/03/20/la-pgrafia-y-la-csura-excelentes-articulos o http://avezdoshomens2.blogspot.com/2015/03/la-pornografia-y-la-censura-excelentes.html