Cancel Culture

[Jaybifla]

Just a conversation thread about “Cancel Culture”. There’s been a few porn stars that have made some racist remarks on twitter, and their asses got “cancelled” last night. Billy Santoro got dropped by Just 4 Fans and Onlyfans and basically deleted his twitter to run and hide. Ben Masters lost his exclusive contract with CockyBoys for a video he tweeted. There’s a few more as well. I’m curious if you think this is fair? I do. I don’t want to watch or support anyone that is racist at all, and I think it’s important to let the community know so that other studios don’t hire them either. Your thoughts?

 

[Devo1124]

Just a conversation thread about “Cancel Culture”. There’s been a few porn stars that have made some racist remarks on twitter, and their asses got “cancelled” last night. Billy Santoro got dropped by Just 4 Fans and Onlyfans and basically deleted his twitter to run and hide. Ben Masters lost his exclusive contract with CockyBoys for a video he tweeted. There’s a few more as well. I’m curious if you think this is fair? I do. I don’t want to watch or support anyone that is racist at all, and I think it’s important to let the community know so that other studios don’t hire them either. Your thoughts?

I agree completely. People do not have the right to be racist. Or sexist. Or homophobic. Period. The problem is that people have confused freedom of speech, the right to say anything granted to us by the constitution, with the right to BE anything. Some people don't understand that you can't be a Nazi. Humanity says it's not fucking allowed.

 

[tampa24]

I agree completely. People do not have the right to be racist. Or sexist. Or homophobic. Period. The problem is that people have confused freedom of speech, the right to say anything granted to us by the constitution, with the right to BE anything. Some people don't understand that you can't be a Nazi. Humanity says it's not fucking allowed.

I would disagree with you Devo only on the matter of semantics. But I assure you though that we are on the same side. I would say that people (unfortunately) have the right to be racist. As the contents of one's heart or character cannot be legislated out of existence by government decree nor completely shamed out of existence by peer pressure. People should not be any of the hateful things you mention above. Period. Unfortunately at this point in human evolution there are still those who are not emotionally or spiritually mature in their thinking.

If porn stars (or even politicians) want to spew racist hatred and contempt in public, then they have to deal with the consequences of those words and actions.

 

[Repareur]

I would disagree with you Devo only on the matter of semantics. But I assure you though that we are on the same side. I would say that people (unfortunately) have the right to be racist. As the contents of one's heart or character cannot be legislated out of existence by government decree nor completely shamed out of existence by peer pressure. People should not be any of the hateful things you mention above. Period. Unfortunately at this point in human evolution there are still those who are not emotionally or spiritually mature in their thinking.

If porn stars (or even politicians) want to spew racist hatred and contempt in public, then they have to deal with the consequences of those words and actions.

Very well said. Unfortunately people do have the right to be racist our President is a prime example but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give them hell about it. And vote! That’s the real answer vote these ass holes out of office. All of them.

 

[juanjo]

I have been an attorney since 1982. I cannot begin to tell you the number of times I have had conversations with people who just do not understand free speech. Most of us posting or lurking here live in countries where there is some semblance of a right to free speech. In the US, the right to free speech enshrined in the Constitution protects one from government interference in one's speech [for the most part]. But far too often, people seem to have the mistaken idea that free speech means one can say or do whatever one might wish, wherever you wish, and however, one might wish and suffer no consequences. That is not how it works.

A racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, or whatever has the right to believe as he wishes. The communist, fascist, Democrat, or Republican have the same right. And anyone can speak out about their beliefs. But everyone else has the same right of free speech. They can agree or disagree about the issue the original speaker has raised. If they agree, no issue. If they don't, well, then the original speaker has a problem possibly. Yes, his boss can fire him for making racist comments, regardless of where he makes them. His family can disown him. His neighbors can ostracize him. Friends can refuse to associate with him. And that too is free speech.

In my world view, it is acceptable to hold differing political, philosophical, moral, legal or similar views. I have friends who run the gamut on religious belief or non-belief, on politics, or on other issues. But there are certain things I draw the line on - racism, advocating hatred against other based on religion, ethnicity, skin color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or the like is different. If someone is spouting hatred of a group of people based on race, I will speak out on that. If the person worked for me, I would fire them. If they were someone who was an actor or some other minor or major public figure I would tell their sponsors, informing them that I would not patronize the sponsors and urge others to also do the same. There are certain types of speech and action I find repulsive and because I do I will speak out about them. I have never eaten at a Chik-fil-A for example. I won't patronize a Hobby Lobby. That's me exercising my free speech.

So yes, someone has the right to be a Nazi and the rest of us all have the right to express how strongly we disagree with that decision. And that includes porn actors who do something stupid, of which there appear to be more than a few.

 

[Devo1124]

I would disagree with you Devo only on the matter of semantics. But I assure you though that we are on the same side. I would say that people (unfortunately) have the right to be racist.

*shrugs* Yeah, I get that it's semantics, but it gives them the loop hole to exist and get the support that allows them to spread their vile ignorance. As a human race, we simply need to accept basic equality as an inherent right and forbid anyone from behaving or even really believing otherwise. So again, no one should have the right to believe in nazism, or to put those beliefs into action. To do so is an aberration. My two cents.

 

[joninliverton]

Free speech is ok, but only where the person who is speaking can be seen and heard. Far too many people are hiding their identities behind Twitter and other social media, so they spew out vitriol in the knowledge they will not be prosecuted. If you want to say something, then say it in public and not behind your keyboard.

 

[tampa24]

Free speech is ok, but only where the person who is speaking can be seen and heard. Far too many people are hiding their identities behind Twitter and other social media, so they spew out vitriol in the knowledge they will not be prosecuted. If you want to say something, then say it in public and not behind your keyboard.

Yes. That's a very cowardly way to go about it. With online anonymity somebody can libel and tarnish someone's good name and reputation in a community with false or otherwise misleading accusations...and then suffer no ill consequences themselves because their own identities are hidden.

 

[Repareur]

I have been an attorney since 1982. I cannot begin to tell you the number of times I have had conversations with people who just do not understand free speech. Most of us posting or lurking here live in countries where there is some semblance of a right to free speech. In the US, the right to free speech enshrined in the Constitution protects one from government interference in one's speech [for the most part]. But far too often, people seem to have the mistaken idea that free speech means one can say or do whatever one might wish, wherever you wish, and however, one might wish and suffer no consequences. That is not how it works.

A racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, or whatever has the right to believe as he wishes. The communist, fascist, Democrat, or Republican have the same right. And anyone can speak out about their beliefs. But everyone else has the same right of free speech. They can agree or disagree about the issue the original speaker has raised. If they agree, no issue. If they don't, well, then the original speaker has a problem possibly. Yes, his boss can fire him for making racist comments, regardless of where he makes them. His family can disown him. His neighbors can ostracize him. Friends can refuse to associate with him. And that too is free speech.

In my world view, it is acceptable to hold differing political, philosophical, moral, legal or similar views. I have friends who run the gamut on religious belief or non-belief, on politics, or on other issues. But there are certain things I draw the line on - racism, advocating hatred against other based on religion, ethnicity, skin color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or the like is different. If someone is spouting hatred of a group of people based on race, I will speak out on that. If the person worked for me, I would fire them. If they were someone who was an actor or some other minor or major public figure I would tell their sponsors, informing them that I would not patronize the sponsors and urge others to also do the same. There are certain types of speech and action I find repulsive and because I do I will speak out about them. I have never eaten at a Chik-fil-A for example. I won't patronize a Hobby Lobby. That's me exercising my free speech.

So yes, someone has the right to be a Nazi and the rest of us all have the right to express how strongly we disagree with that decision. And that includes porn actors who do something stupid, of which there appear to be more than a few.

Very well said!

 

[juanjo]

Yes. That's a very cowardly way to go about it. With online anonymity somebody can libel and tarnish someone's good name and reputation in a community with false or otherwise misleading accusations...and then suffer no ill consequences themselves because their own identities are hidden.

It is a valid point but then again it is also how free speech operates. In the Colonial times and even after the Revolution, it was common for people to write under pseudonyms which we might now know but back then, no one did. Some of the most prominent Founding Fathers regularly used the shield of pseudonyms in political essays during the era of the American Revolution: Thomas Paine, John Dickinson, Alexander Hamilton, Arthur Lee, John Jay, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. Influential texts such as “Common Sense,” the Federalist essays, and the “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania” essays were all published without an author's byline.

But more importantly, numerous now completely unknown individuals wrote essays and letters which were published anonymous in newspapers or pamphlet form which was then distributed. They wrote for or against numerous proposals. In fact, the initial Constitution did not enumerate the rights of common citizens because the original drafters considered those as too obvious to need to mention. It was the result of a barrage of anonymous criticism by people that the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution. And those folks doing that probably needed to be anonymous because they were going up against the powerful elite of the new country - Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and Jay among them.

Setting up a system under which we decide what vitriol can or cannot be published means someone has to be the arbiter of that decision. Do any of you trust Trump to make that decision? Barr? I certainly do not. In fact, I do not trust myself to do so honestly even as strong an advocate of free speech as I am. The urge to suppress ideas I do not like would certainly be justified by the best of intentions, I am sure.

 

[tampa24]

The urge to suppress ideas I do not like would certainly be justified by the best of intentions, I am sure.

Indeed. It is the road to hell after all. Is it not? haha

For instance I certainly wouldn't mind stifling Trump's right to free speech sometimes. And I could feel very justified in doing so. Then I could wrap that justification in what I see as the most benign and altruistic of intentions. But as you say, that is not how free speech works. One person's best intentions are another person's worst nightmares resulting from sinister, self-serving ulterior motives in disguise.

 

[juanjo]

Indeed. It is the road to hell after all. Is it not? haha

For instance I certainly wouldn't mind stifling Trump's right to free speech sometimes. And I could feel very justified in doing so. Then I could wrap that justification in what I see as the most benign and altruistic of intentions. But as you say, that is not how free speech works. One person's best intentions are another person's worst nightmares resulting from sinister, self-serving ulterior motives in disguise.

Remember when Frodo offers the ring to Gandalf? Enough said. LOL

 

[Foxyman1961]

I have been an attorney since 1982. I cannot begin to tell you the number of times I have had conversations with people who just do not understand free speech. Most of us posting or lurking here live in countries where there is some semblance of a right to free speech. In the US, the right to free speech enshrined in the Constitution protects one from government interference in one's speech [for the most part]. But far too often, people seem to have the mistaken idea that free speech means one can say or do whatever one might wish, wherever you wish, and however, one might wish and suffer no consequences. That is not how it works.

A racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, or whatever has the right to believe as he wishes. The communist, fascist, Democrat, or Republican have the same right. And anyone can speak out about their beliefs. But everyone else has the same right of free speech. They can agree or disagree about the issue the original speaker has raised. If they agree, no issue. If they don't, well, then the original speaker has a problem possibly. Yes, his boss can fire him for making racist comments, regardless of where he makes them. His family can disown him. His neighbors can ostracize him. Friends can refuse to associate with him. And that too is free speech.

In my world view, it is acceptable to hold differing political, philosophical, moral, legal or similar views. I have friends who run the gamut on religious belief or non-belief, on politics, or on other issues. But there are certain things I draw the line on - racism, advocating hatred against other based on religion, ethnicity, skin color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or the like is different. If someone is spouting hatred of a group of people based on race, I will speak out on that. If the person worked for me, I would fire them. If they were someone who was an actor or some other minor or major public figure I would tell their sponsors, informing them that I would not patronize the sponsors and urge others to also do the same. There are certain types of speech and action I find repulsive and because I do I will speak out about them. I have never eaten at a Chik-fil-A for example. I won't patronize a Hobby Lobby. That's me exercising my free speech.

So yes, someone has the right to be a Nazi and the rest of us all have the right to express how strongly we disagree with that decision. And that includes porn actors who do something stupid, of which there appear to be more than a few.

Great post. So agree this.

 

[Jaybifla]

This has been on twitter all day. They say his nickname is Lady G.

 

[kgmets]

I have been an attorney since 1982. I cannot begin to tell you the number of times I have had conversations with people who just do not understand free speech. Most of us posting or lurking here live in countries where there is some semblance of a right to free speech. In the US, the right to free speech enshrined in the Constitution protects one from government interference in one's speech [for the most part]. But far too often, people seem to have the mistaken idea that free speech means one can say or do whatever one might wish, wherever you wish, and however, one might wish and suffer no consequences. That is not how it works.

A racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, or whatever has the right to believe as he wishes. The communist, fascist, Democrat, or Republican have the same right. And anyone can speak out about their beliefs. But everyone else has the same right of free speech. They can agree or disagree about the issue the original speaker has raised. If they agree, no issue. If they don't, well, then the original speaker has a problem possibly. Yes, his boss can fire him for making racist comments, regardless of where he makes them. His family can disown him. His neighbors can ostracize him. Friends can refuse to associate with him. And that too is free speech.

In my world view, it is acceptable to hold differing political, philosophical, moral, legal or similar views. I have friends who run the gamut on religious belief or non-belief, on politics, or on other issues. But there are certain things I draw the line on - racism, advocating hatred against other based on religion, ethnicity, skin color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or the like is different. If someone is spouting hatred of a group of people based on race, I will speak out on that. If the person worked for me, I would fire them. If they were someone who was an actor or some other minor or major public figure I would tell their sponsors, informing them that I would not patronize the sponsors and urge others to also do the same. There are certain types of speech and action I find repulsive and because I do I will speak out about them. I have never eaten at a Chik-fil-A for example. I won't patronize a Hobby Lobby. That's me exercising my free speech.

So yes, someone has the right to be a Nazi and the rest of us all have the right to express how strongly we disagree with that decision. And that includes porn actors who do something stupid, of which there appear to be more than a few.

Well put. There is a constitutional right to free speech, but it does not extend to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. Yes, you do have the right to swing your arm and fist in the air, but that right ends then you punch the face of another. Yes, you have the right to speak against a government stay at home order, but you do not have the right to infect another with the caronavirus by marching in large unmasked groups and spitting on others. Your constitutional rights end where you seek to take away the constitutional rights of others to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Right wingers just love to assert their claimed and false alleged constitutional right to take away the rights of others.

 

[mikeyank]

This has been on twitter all day. They say his nickname is Lady G.

View attachment 22612View attachment 22613View attachment 22614

If this is true, I would LOVE it!!!!!!

 

[Repareur]

He might be able to sue one or two porn stars breaking an NDA, but not a bunch of them. Plus the media attention such suits would bring would be more damaging than the disclosures.

When you pile on as much hypocrisy as Lindsey Graham does I loose my sympathy for him being outed. That’s one southern bitch who has earned getting her panties in a wad.

 

[Jaybifla]

He might be able to sue one or two porn stars breaking an NDA, but not a bunch of them. Plus the media attention such suits would bring would be more damaging than the disclosures.

When you pile on as much hypocrisy as Lindsey Graham does I loose my sympathy for him being outed. That’s one southern bitch who has earned getting her panties in a wad.

LOL. Well I’m pretty sure they could start a go fund me page for any lawsuits, and they would get enough people to donate to cover them. I would gladly donate. I’d love to hear details of the encounters. Like Lady G loved golden showers, or he loved poppers when he was getting his big butt plowed.

 

[juanjo]

Poor Lindsey-Belle must just be beside herself over this latest eruption of prostitutitis.

 

[Jaybifla]

Multiple gay male escorts from Washington D.C. and around the country have come forward claiming to have had sexual encounters with Senator Lindsey Graham. Remarkably, the one thing that corroborates all of their stories is that Graham has an unmistakeable, signature moan.
“Lindsey Graham is a surprisingly strong, incredibly physical power top who makes a high-pitched Mickey Mouse ‘Ha ha!’ sound during sex,” one escort stated. “It’s insane. There’s really no other way to describe it.”
Yet another commonality verifying the escorts’ reports is that everyone who came forward stated that Graham’s noises would only get higher and higher the closer he came to orgasm.
“It was hilarious. And he got really mad when I laughed about it, but I couldn’t stop,” one escort confirmed. “So Lindsey’s shrieking – hitting the highest note a human can hit, going ‘Ha ha! Ha ha! Ha ha! – and I’m laughing so hard I’m crying and snorting. Lindsey Graham was, hands down, easily the weirdest sex I have ever had.”