PETA Plans An Adult Site

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by Castout

In fantasy or playing your fantasy is PERFECTLY fine but NOT in REALITY.

Their campaigning is not a private matter but it is a campaign in public thus has its effect that it is propagating degrading image of women as merely sexual pet for men and that they are just another animal, all under the disguise it is promoting environmental protection and animal rights.(Does animal have rights? They never demanded it, anyway. Surely not to mean a free hand to cause them unnecessary suffering but that's because as an enlightened being we shouldn't)

Greenpeace all the way when it comes to environmental and animal protection.

PETA is when Hugh Hefner goes green which is not far.....if you know what I mean.

Wait a second here.... if PETA creates a site that meets the definition of explicit sexual content, then they have to secure it from minors. So its not "in public" - aka accessible to all.

As for making women into sexual pets, you do realize that the PETA subjects of photography and participants in whatever acts they portray are willing subjects, don't you?

One of my girls was accepted @ suicidegirl. She voluntarily sent a set of shots in. When she decides she is ready for a shoot, she will let them know. Everything is voluntary. No one forcing her. In fact, part of my role is to play the "devil's advocate" and insure she is making choices she has clearly thought through, choices that will not harm her (physically, emotionally, professionally, etc). It is something that can be a positive experience for her - if framed correctly.

Look, many here will tell you I am as "right wing" as they come. But your talking about a site where adults will be screened should they want to enter. That is a mandatory thing for an adult site. So the people perusing the site will be doing so by choice. The models will be "performing" out of choice.

You may disagree on a moral stance, but your talking about consenting adults that have the right to do this. As for the whole "but it objectifies women" arguement - your opening up a can of worms there.

Women throughout history have been objectified as sexual objects. Yet women themselves have often been their own worst enemy in this. Who here doesn't know of the office romance that happened so someone could get a promotion, or the wife who witholds herself physically as "punishment" to her husband for some percieved wrong? Sexuality has been a weapon in the gender wars throughout history, and thus sex itself has become an "object" to be gained.

Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self. A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.