Would be more fun if xhamster required a certificate of sexual orientation before allowing you to switch to straight or gay porn.
What I haven't seen discussed is the real objection going on is that NC insists you use the bathroom as defined by your birth certificate, and you can change that post-op. So people think that's too onerous, so what _should_ the standard be? Should you simply file something stating you are whatever gender? Do you have to present as the gender to some degree? Who decides if you are doing it enough? Etc.
Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
41–50 of 123 posts
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#42The lack of self-awareness is pretty funny. Setting aside moral judgements, consider: a state passes a law based on traditional religious morality, and a company that violates traditional religious morality then refuses to do business in it as "punishment". At some level, I guess it's good. The Big Sort continues apace.
Then they came for the pornography, and there was a mass uprising.
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#43My concern is two fold. One, for transgender persons, who will fear the reaction they will get every time they enter the restroom. And second, basically any person can claim to be of the opposite gender, and walk in to fulfill a sexual fantasy, even a mild one.
I simply don't understand what is the huge effort in using the restroom appropriate to your physical gender, and simply avoid the psychological conflict with the rest of the population. Especially considering the high rates of mental illness and suicidal thoughts and attempts among transgender persons. This, for now, will only add to that. Do they really need to be subjects in a future study that will show the impact of such laws? Or used as ammunition for 'transphobia' accusations in the media or elsewhere? Will the victims of the first line in the war of imposing a policy in the society be really worth it, especially if that increases their chances of committing suicide?
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to be aimed more at pushing constituents into action than law makers.
Are xHamster users going to be contacting their reps to complain that they can no longer access it? That's another situation that seems unlikely to me.
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#45I can't see this having a big impact on law makers. Is porn in limited supply now?
It's about raising awareness by generating headlines just like this one. Porn is a taboo-ish topic, so the news loves to cover it. More coverage of and negative pressure on these reprehensible laws is only a good thing.
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I haven't seen discussed is the real objection going on is that NC insists you use the bathroom as defined by your birth certificate, and you can change that post-op. So people think that's too onerous, so what _should_ the standard be? Should you simply file something stating you are whatever gender? Do you have to present as the gender to some degree? Who decides if you are doing it enough? Etc.
The problem with that approach is that not all transgender people elect to have operations, so making that the minimum bar is unreasonable. A much more reasonable (non-fear mongering) approach is to use the gender the person identifies with. I don't know how you set that bar, maybe it's obvious, maybe it requires a note from a physician or similar. I think it would be fairly obvious to discern someone who's actually…
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is the notion of pornographers fighting for equality a joke? XHamster seems to have a pretty progressive corporate view towards sexuality. Obviously not all the content on the site is that way, but you seem to be implying pornography is inherently bad? Besides, you're naive if you think the Republican lawmakers who push this type of legislation are actually so wholesome that this is totally irrelevant.
Sexual exploiters fight for "equality" to sexual exploit just like the local bank robber fights for a no-guns-allowed policy among the bank staff.
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#48So a porn website (by far, the most effective mean to objectify women) is protesting a law that adds a new layer of social pressure towards women and girls. I don't see men having a problem with women entering mens room. But I do see women feeling uncomfortable with a man entering woman's room. No matter how far will the theory of subjective gender go, it will take decades, if ever, until women and men will simply ig…
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to be aimed more at pushing constituents into action than law makers.
Are xHamster users going to be contacting their reps to complain that they can no longer access it? That's another situation that seems unlikely to me.
Re: Porn site xHamster blocks North Carolina users to protest anti-LGBT law
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I haven't seen discussed is the real objection going on is that NC insists you use the bathroom as defined by your birth certificate, and you can change that post-op. So people think that's too onerous, so what _should_ the standard be? Should you simply file something stating you are whatever gender? Do you have to present as the gender to some degree? Who decides if you are doing it enough? Etc.
We already have laws against harassment. What are you trying to prevent from happening? Why are those laws insufficient?