Amen, amen, and AMEN, Matisse!

I would only add that allowing (non-psychoactive) hemp to be grown in the U.S.-- and eventually decriminalizing/legalizing marijuana in general-- would add enough positive tax revenue to our national economy that we'd be well on our way to getting out of the hideous financial hole we're in now.

But, NO... that would "send the wrong message," just as needle exchange and comprehensive, responsibility-based sex ed in schools "send the wrong message."

Give me an ethical candidate who advocates WHAT ACTUALLY WORKS, not what sends his/her "moral" message.

One of the things about politics that annoys me is this broad statement that "regulation" is bad. Actually, in the fiscal sense, I think most of us can agree that reasonable regulation is a bloody good thing (especially in light of recent events in the financial markets). Regulation says that you must deliver the goods or services that you've been paid for. Regulation says that a contract actually *is* worth the paper its written on.

However, *social* regulation is another matter. The Republicans are certainly big on that aspect, which is why your business is not seen as a business. It's just Sin (even if the wages of it are decent).

I also love how the Republicans play themselves up as being fiscally responsible compared to the Dems, when your economy is down the toilet, mainly directly due to Republican "small govt" when it comes to financial regulation (and social welfare, which pumps more money into the economy than any bullshit trickle-down, even if you just have basic healthcare covered), but *big* govt when it comes to oppressing certain social groups and promulgating expensive wars.

...not to say that you're not aware of any of that stuff. I just get surprised when other queers vote Republican. The Dems aren't much better when it comes to social polices, but something is better than nothing, or going backwards.

Well said Matisse, however you suggest a very interesting discussion on consent and it's limitations, and what society should tolerate in how its citizens treat each other.

I'm hugely socially progressive, but I can't deny a reaction that what Paul Little was up to should be stopped on some grounds. Not everything should be permitted between consenting adults - there have been cases of consensual castration that more readily demonstrate the issue with relying on consent.

I have no idea how we stage this conversation though, as I totally support personal accountability, and that consent between sane and happy individuals should permit any activity between them. The social implications of exploiting the compromised under the guise of consent - and some of Pauls videos readily demonstrate that some of his talent was very unhappy with the work, heck the videos relish in the fact - are I think severe.

You know, Edward, I'm going to have to go with the idea that the very few people who have been consensually castrated, while distressing to many people on many levels, are an insufficient reason to suppress the rights of a HUGE number of people who really like their rights to privacy and freedom of speech.
I really can't think of an instance of something that happens between sane, consenting adults should be illegal. Do you wish to discourage it? Sure! Personally, I would definitely try to dissuade a friend who wished to have himself castrated. On the other hand, I think that a lot of people get carried away thinking that everything they think is wrong should be illegal. I personally think it is wrong to call your mom a slut, cheat on your significant other, pick on people smaller than you, or preach hatred from pulpits and podiums. However, making those illegal is an entirely different proposition.

I agree with Trix. While you may get sick of the regulation in your industry keep in mind that it is rarely the case that Republicans are against unreasonable regulation while Democrats are for it. When it comes to economics, generally Democrats are for reasonable regulation while Republicans are against any regulation period (we see how that's been working). As a sex worker, Republicans are certainly much more of an obstacle for you than Democrats, simply because of their Puritan beliefs. Democrats aren't great (I'm a registered Green)...but generally the choice between a Democrat and a Republican is the choice between a tiny step forward or a large step backward.

Wow,that truly is a wild kink.I thought I was out in left field with the hula hoops,bunny ears and hiding the remote.I guess it takes more of an adventurous soul than I have.

Well put. Thanks.

Wow, that pretty much describes my stance on the Republican party exactly. They sound great in theory minus the social issues, but then they let those social issues dominate their philosophy.

Methinks a Libertarian I doth detect.

@Edwared:

I just read an article on Max Hardcore and I agree that his movies sound pretty brutal--and I watch a lot of hardcore bdsm porn. But if some of the stuff alleged in the article is true, for instance, that he told a model who wanted to stop the scene because she got piss behind her contact that "the only one who gets to say 'cut' in a scene is me," (as I think any filming of hardcore without giving models safewords is seriously fucked up), I think that incidents of harm against the model should be prosecuted as that--(e.g, assault, etc.) because someone was harmed, not because offensive material was filmed.

In other words, I think that if this case were about models suing Paul Little because they said they were abused, then by all means lock him up and shut down the website. But, it's not. It's about people in Tampa being offended by his videos, and some of the porn actresses in those videos were there defending him in court.

As to whether it's degrading to women, encourages violence agianst women, etc. all I can say is that I am a woman, and a feminist, who enjoys being degraded in a consensual context, and who enjoys watching porn which portrays these kind of scenes.

I also try to get my porn from sites that post their shooting rules, as well as interviews with models before and after, so that I feel reasurred that people weren't exploited in making the content I watch. And I have to say I won't be watching any Max Hardcore videos.