We take the latest South Park joint for a jaunt on the toilet... will it flush?
South Park: The Fractured But Whole Review!
We chat with the game director and creative head of Machine Games about the upcoming title where killing Nazis is all the rage.
A Happy Ending Filled with Nazis – Wolfenstein II Interview!
From the creators of Payday comes a new action title where you get to steal back treasure from Nazis.
Win a Copy of RAID World War II on PS4
Hugh Hefner DEAD AT 91
Tanaka Khan
Brisbane, Queensland
5802 posts
Story

He had a good run!
01:45pm 28/09/17 Permalink
system
Internet
--
01:45pm 28/09/17 Permalink
Ickus
Perth, Western Australia
622 posts
Quick, someone start a Hefner Commemorative Spoot thread!
03:51pm 28/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39217 posts
Apparently this news needs not one, but TWO of the top news slots on the ABC today:

https://trog.qgl.org/up/1709/hh.jpg
05:43pm 28/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40810 posts
the happiest and totally not weirdest man on earth is dead :(
06:25pm 28/09/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4616 posts
l8r hef

thanks for the knockers
07:45pm 28/09/17 Permalink
BladeRunner
Queensland
2777 posts
In Honour of him. I post Jenna J Ross. One of my favourites.

https://i.imgur.com/gjjQQmC.jpg
09:15pm 28/09/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7724 posts
His lady friends will have to get real jobs now
09:47pm 28/09/17 Permalink
mission
Brisbane, Queensland
9309 posts
^ Yeah, they'll be shocked to learn that a Blow Job isn't a real job.
08:07am 29/09/17 Permalink
BladeRunner
Queensland
2780 posts
No one else is posting ladies? For Shame.

Ashee Maree (cam girl and has clips for sale. Check her twitter)
https://i.imgur.com/yTl7K9h.jpg
07:44pm 29/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40813 posts
dont potential advertisers on the ausgamers frown upon the spoot?
08:52pm 29/09/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
1 posts
Good glad to see hes dead.

The porn industry is sexually immoral and disgusting i highly recommend you stay away from that s***. I'm not saying im perfect. I am however trying to encourage morality and the nonuse of pornography, prostitutes and callgirls its simply an industry that is taking advantage of you. oh and f*** spoot.

last edited by anonymousxvi at 03:27:37 30/Sep/17
03:26am 30/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39224 posts
Tony Abbott posts here now?
06:16am 30/09/17 Permalink
BladeRunner
Queensland
2781 posts
Tony Abbott posts here now?



lol, 10 points to Trog.

I'll post another one for Sudo Abbott over here.

Abigail Mac
https://i.imgur.com/8iBN6XG.jpg
07:21am 30/09/17 Permalink
Tanaka Khan
Brisbane, Queensland
5803 posts
anonymousxvi sounds like a dirty vegan
09:21am 30/09/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7727 posts
oh hai Tony! wanna head butt?
09:24am 30/09/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18452 posts
So is this thread now about guessing which QGL regular anonymousxvi is? My money is on fpot
09:48am 30/09/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
2 posts
Eating veges has nothing to do with it.

It's about morality

Man who think with d*** all the time end up having sex on mind all the time.

I will say i don't have anything against nude paintings cause its actually art, and for the purposes of anatomial study i have no problem with a naked pic of either gender.

last edited by anonymousxvi at 10:40:11 30/Sep/17
10:38am 30/09/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18454 posts
Man who think with d*** all the time end up having sex on mind all the time.


What, exactly is wrong with that? Who are you to decide what is moral and what is not? Who are you to tell a person how they should or shouldn't live? What makes you think that your beliefs are any more special or any more important than anothers?

Here is a secret for you.

Sex is easily one of the most important aspects of humanity. As without sex, humanity would not exist. It's quite simple.

Sex is as important as food, water, shelter and safety. You think about food and water daily. You sleep in the safety of your shelter daily. Why should you think any less of sex?

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 10:48:54 30/Sep/17
10:42am 30/09/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
3 posts
It's not a decision its simply truth :)

you can spin it any way you want but its not going to change.
10:56am 30/09/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
4 posts
I don't have anything against sex, its just you should only do it with one woman and you should be in a relationship casual sex is immoral and meaningless.
10:59am 30/09/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18455 posts

I don't have anything against sex, its just you should only do it with one woman and you should be in a relationship casual sex is immoral and meaningless.


It may be immoral and meaningless to you. Another secret for you. Not everyone thinks like you do.

For others it has meaning and there is nothing immoral about it.

The only truth about life, is that there is no truth. It's all in your head.

https://scontent.fbne1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21317621_1499130996819311_4729010699295270764_n.jpg?oh=cc6dcf8cd4f5efb109937d96979c7b96&oe=5A7DE57E
11:19am 30/09/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
5 posts
Nah your just explaining your subjective thoughts.
11:48am 30/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26057 posts
So is this thread now about guessing which QGL regular anonymousxvi is? My money is on fpot
It's not I'd never use an alt. It's Nmag.
12:12pm 30/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23779 posts
Hugh was a sexist misogynist who glamorised women as physical objects. Oh wait he was a campaigner for sexual freedoms. It's all ok. heeee
03:08pm 30/09/17 Permalink
Tanaka Khan
Brisbane, Queensland
5804 posts
its just you should only do it with one woman

So what you're saying is that women should only have sex with one woman? Because that is what you said.
05:29pm 30/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39226 posts
Hugh was a sexist misogynist who glamorised women as physical objects. Oh wait he was a campaigner for sexual freedoms. It's all ok. heeee
It is an interesting topic for discussion and a quick search shows a zillion news items on these topics for the last few days, with arguments on both sides. Free speech and libertarianism won this war long ago though & the only way to do anything about it is to vote with your feet/wallet and not buy pictures of naked ladies. (& I guess rejoice that the Internet and amateur pornography is slowly eroding the business model?)
05:44pm 30/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23780 posts
It's more interesting how he will be recorded in the annals of history, the former or the latter.
05:56pm 30/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39227 posts
It's more interesting how he will be recorded in the annals of history, the former or the latter.
I dunno, I think the days of the one dimensional history books could be over. Wikipedia is the informal gatekeeper to all knowledge so 'history' I think is now more like 'meta-history' and I think will generally be more about presenting multiple sides and multiple reports.

Jimmy Wales did a talk in London this week which was really interesting, talking about his new WikiTribune project and his focus on evidence-based journalism. It was really interesting (he's a very cool dude & the way he speaks makes it very easy to buy into his vision) but I'm not 100% convinced that people actually give a s*** about evidence :D

edit: I'm not trying to be intentionally disagreeable. I agree with you in the broad strokes. I don't know how I feel about Hefner either. I like his support for female rights but struggle with the thought that he objectified women. I like looking at beautiful women but it would be great if women had better career options that meant they didn't need to sell their bodies - but I fully support their right to do so if they wish.
06:04pm 30/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12907 posts
06:30pm 30/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23781 posts
How will the liberal MSM record his legacy? Sexual liberation vs sexual exploitation.
06:47pm 30/09/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
6 posts
Ideas change with the times but I'm oldschool for morality freedom is important but it comes with responsibility

03:48am 02/10/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
7 posts
I see women selling themselves as disgusting ultimately it's an experience and a lesson when you really think about it they are getting paid sleep around
Relationships are suppose to be about love and a thriving relationship has to work off love without that connection in a relationship you would be a pair of meatbags jumping each other. Flings are a waste of time because it has that meatbags feeling

Hope this had some insight for all of you
04:06am 02/10/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39231 posts
Interesting perspective on Hefner from the NYT: Speaking Ill of Hugh Hefner. Opens with:
Hugh Hefner, gone to his reward at the age of 91, was a pornographer and chauvinist who got rich on masturbation, consumerism and the exploitation of women, aged into a leering grotesque in a captain’s hat, and died a pack rat in a decaying manse where porn blared during his pathetic orgies.


And the Guardian:
Now that he’s dead, the disgusting old sleaze in the smoking jacket is being spoken of as some kind of liberator of women. Kim Kardashian is honoured to have been involved. Righty ho.

I don’t really know which women were liberated by Hefner’s fantasies. I guess if you aspired to be a living Barbie it was as fabulous as it is to be in Donald Trump’s entourage. Had we gone to court, I would like to have heard some of the former playmates and bunnies speak up in court – because over the years they have.
09:09pm 02/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3226 posts
When you look at it you can really ask yourself: Would these women really be posing / living for playboy if they weren't being paid?
12:03am 03/10/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
16 posts
haha kim kardashian said it was liberation what a joke its more like unhinged disgusting behaviour

12:54am 03/10/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39232 posts
When you look at it you can really ask yourself: Would these women really be posing / living for playboy if they weren't being paid?
Maybe? Plenty of people pose nude for all sorts of reasons all the time. Plenty of people have totally bizarre living arrangements that make no sense to me whatsoever. It's important that people have the freedom to make choices of their own no matter how weird they are or how totally bonkers they seem to another observer.
01:21am 03/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3227 posts
Maybe? Plenty of people pose nude for all sorts of reasons all the time. Plenty of people have totally bizarre living arrangements that make no sense to me whatsoever. It's important that people have the freedom to make choices of their own no matter how weird they are or how totally bonkers they seem to another observer.


Too right. Sex work is a job just like anything else we do and carries no special significance whatsoever, and the human body is a service and/or product to be bought and sold for use like all others.

Most importantly consent (specifically involving monetary transactions for sexualised work) is always black and white, and the reality of sex work is that women and girls go into it because they have unlimited freedom to make their own choices in what they do with themselves and their consent in this industry is never/has never been compromised, and they can stop whenever they want to.

oh wait no, i mean, the opposite of that
03:53am 03/10/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21372 posts
did anyone else see the irony here?

https://i.imgur.com/G34jJNz.jpg
08:47am 03/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18458 posts

Hugh was a sexist misogynist who glamorised women as physical objects. Oh wait he was a campaigner for sexual freedoms. It's all ok. heeee


Why not both?
11:07am 03/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18459 posts

Flings are a waste of time because it has that meatbags feeling


YOU feel that flings are meatbags.

Different people have differing capacities to form meaningful relationships with people. How meaningful a relationship is to a person is entirely dependent on that persons perception of the relationship, the attachment bond THEY form. What the other person feels/thinks can never be factually known by another, only perceived through the experiences of the other.

There are PLENTY of people that have very deep and meaningful one-night relationships, or 'flings' as you call them. They carry that experience and connection for many years after. They perceive that fling as something quite deep.

There are people who don't form much of a connection and are essentially masturbating with an object, as they may struggle to form a sense of connection with that other person, or they just may not want to.

Provided both people are OK and consenting with whatever is happening why do you take issue with it?

Perhaps you are projecting your own issues into this situation, we all do it to a degree. Perhaps you lack the capacity to meaningfully form relationships with people in a short time-frame and don't understand how others could possibly do it, thus to you all one-night stands, or 'flings' are pathological sexual deviants who are just getting off with no regard for the partner they are with, a compulsion perhaps.

Human sexuality is pretty complex and varied and fascinating, please don't make the mistake of assuming that everyone perceive and forms relationships in the same way you do.

It's totally OK if YOU don't like flings because you don't get much out of them, however don't assume that others don't/can't because of that.

11:17am 03/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18460 posts


Most importantly consent (specifically involving monetary transactions for sexualised work) is always black and white, and the reality of sex work is that women and girls go into it because they have unlimited freedom to make their own choices in what they do with themselves and their consent in this industry is never/has never been compromised, and they can stop whenever they want to.

oh wait no, i mean, the opposite of that


Why not both?

There are women (and men) who do it freely and happily, who have positive life experiences from it. Women who do it without any pathological issues behind it.
Then there are those forced into the situation, that is very different.
There are those who have pathological issues that might as well be considered being 'forced' into it.

11:20am 03/10/17 Permalink
baz
Victoria
1321 posts
Orgasms are good for your health.

Anyone else draw that conclusion?
11:43pm 03/10/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39234 posts
oh wait no, i mean, the opposite of that
not sure what your sarcasm is intended to portray; what are you trying to say? what I said is mostly a factually true statement; the only subjective/opinion bit is where you think people should be free to make their own choices. The only way I can interpret your sarcasm is to think that you disagree that people should be free to make choices like posing in the nude for free or for money..?
12:24am 04/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3228 posts
I'm saying it's not about freedom at all, it's about a seedy f***hole of an industry plagued with horrendous problems, and I would even go so far as to say sexual consent is different to other types of consent and anything less than pretty unambiguous yes isn't acceptable, and when you pay money for someones body you muddle in those waters of ambiguity because you are putting a price on their human worth and dignity in ways normal jobs don't.

Of course it's about choice and freedom, but so are gun laws and speed signs. USA has changed you trog
02:03am 04/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3229 posts
Why not both?


Because life isn't black and white.

Because society needs to function at the speed of the bottom 1%

I can't do drugs because PAM over here did drugs and killed all her kids. thanks for f*****g it up for the rest of us PAM ya C***

We should be able to speed everywhere we want but JONATHAN over here ran over a family. thanks for f***** speed limits now JONATHAN ya F***WIT

I should be able to f*** any hookers, any time with huge plastic tits, but [fill this space in, have some fun!], thanks X ya Y
02:08am 04/10/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3314 posts
Would PlayBoy, or Victoria's Secret or anything similar for that matter, exist if there had never been a male patriarchy (a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it) that enabled the capitalisation of the male centric concept of a woman's value being rooted in their sexuality?

It seems to me that PlayBoy and Victoria's Secret et al, don't really serve women (despite the various justifications brandied around), they serve men. The whole concept of women being valued on their physical attractiveness is a male driven one, admittedly perhaps derived from biology. Although, was physical attractiveness always a biological requirement? Surely the biology aspect is just the drive to procreate, looks be damned!

Would they exist if there'd been the reverse? A matriarchy or female led system of society / government. Would there perhaps be male versions of Playboy and Victoria's Secret in that scenario? Women also have the capacity to value men only for their sexuality.

Prostitution is the world's oldest profession as they say, but we've always, until recently in the Western world, had a fairly oppressive patriarchy. Would it be different if there'd been more equality earlier on?

I don't know, just posing the questions.
02:39am 04/10/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39235 posts
Because life isn't black and white.
I thought that was Toll's point. That's /why/ both.
04:21am 04/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2798 posts
Although, was physical attractiveness always a biological requirement? Surely the biology aspect is just the drive to procreate, looks be damned!


What if physical attractiveness is a reliable proxy for good health?
07:35am 04/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18465 posts

Because life isn't black and white.


Interestingly, your answers have a tendency to be Black and White.

For instance, you seem to not accept that people can happily choose to put a price on their own body and still be a healthy individual as they clearly understand the boundaries of what they are doing and work with the industry in such a way that supports that.

There are also people who are forced into the situation and employer's who don't support the rights and boundaries of the working individual.

To ignore the first category of people, because the second category exists means you are actively avoiding the healthy alternative.

The overwhelming evidence from thousands of years suggests that this industry will never, ever be stopped, nor should it be.
It's called the 'worlds oldest profession' for a reason.

The social stigma that sex workers are broken, unhappy, immoral, bad people,
exploitative, (or whatever negative stuff you want to throw at it) only serves to keep the industry hidden into the shadows of society where the negative aspects can thrive as people.
If you must maintain a negative attitude towards the industry, then at least look at it from a harm minimisation point of view.

Accepting the industry, bringing it into the open, removing that stigma .. that's how you can help reduce the negative aspects and encourage the positive.






last edited by Tollaz0r! at 11:17:56 04/Oct/17
11:16am 04/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18466 posts

The whole concept of women being valued on their physical attractiveness is a male driven one

Although, was physical attractiveness always a biological requirement?



Do you not think women put value on the physical attractiveness of men? The scientific consensus at the moment is that the perception of physical attractiveness seems to correlate with the overall genetic health of an individual. So yeah, it very likely has always been a biological requirement.



Would there perhaps be male versions of Playboy and Victoria's Secret in that scenario?


There are female targeted alternatives right now.



Men and Women really aren't that much different, the way society says what is and is not acceptable seems to be were most of the perceived differences arise from.


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 11:22:30 04/Oct/17
11:19am 04/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3230 posts
I must disagree strongly with you here Toll, the industry right now is completely f***ed. If you brought this industry into the open you would find innumerable cases and demand for human trafficking, violence, stigma. Even in places where it's regulated properly you'll find the girls really don't get much flexibility, choice or even any real share of the money.

I absolutely refuse to accept the industry in it's current state - it's a complete joke and would be better off being completely abolished and remade with completely new legislation, laws and support for the women and girls involved in it across all circumstances. I'm a big fan of the Swedish/Swiss(?) model where most types of sex work (i.e. the types harder to regulate, outside brothels etc) are illegal to buy but not illegal to sell.

The demand for sex work and the hypersexualisation of women in media and the news, just like addictive video games, drinking and drug culture, junk food and blood sports should not be embraced with toxic norms of what is masculine, it should be tolerated and regulated and people who do it should be supported. 'Coz they need support. 'Coz when they do these things it interferes with the rest of their life.

Hugh Hefner and playboy made a lot of money off of the sexualisation of women. And I'm sure a lot of these women consented to their photos being taken. But they got paid for it. and when you pay for something it ain't really free now is it?

Sex and love should be free. But he made a f***ton of money embracing a culture where it isn't. So I ain't exactly crying for the man
12:53pm 04/10/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3317 posts
Oh yeah, I see what you mean re: looks to healthy mate / good genes.

There are some now Toll, though arguably not in way near the size, scale and level of exploitation, of the female versions. I don't think I've ever heard of any male sex trafficking rings.
12:34am 07/10/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4621 posts
Interesting perspective on Hefner from the NYT: Speaking Ill of Hugh Hefner.

interesting food for thought there, I like how this guy writes even if he comes across somewhat prudish

if we can keep the "sex positivism" (or whatever it is) and do away with the seamy, dressing gown wearing recalcitrant bachelor part then I guess that's progress?
05:28pm 07/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18467 posts

The demand for sex work and the hypersexualisation of women in media and the news, just like addictive video games, drinking and drug culture, junk food and blood sports should not be embraced with toxic norms of what is masculine, it should be tolerated and regulated and people who do it should be supported. 'Coz they need support. 'Coz when they do these things it interferes with the rest of their life.



I have no doubt at all about all the negative aspects you mentioned, none at all.
This is precisely why I think it should be a socially acceptable profession and not have people who are so condescending and judgmental about it forcing it to be hidden away in the background.

You are totally ignoring the people who are doing it through their own choice, because they want to, in a way that is healthy.
You also ignore that men do it too, for women. There is a market for that as well.

Men like having sex.
Women like having sex.

Some men have a hard time finding sexual partners for a variety of reasons, people with disabilities or social anxieties for instance. There are professional people in the sexual industry that cater for these people.

You know what:
Some women have a hard time finding sexual partners for a variety of reasons, people with disabilities or social anxieties for instance. There are professional people in the sexual industry that cater for these people.

What is wrong about that? It seems that in yours eyes all people who work in the sexual industry are unwillingly exploited, or broken somehow.
Can you accept that there are also people who are more than happy to do it as a job, in a way that is both healthy for themselves and their clients?


Sex and love should be free.


Healthy professional sex workers understand that they are not selling love, they are selling a service.

Why should a service be free?
It's OK to sell Sex if both adults are consenting to it, what is your problem with that? Note, exploitation and the other issues you mentioned above, are not consensual, they are coerced.

I'll repeat again, not all sex workers are coerced into working in the industry. There are plenty of healthy, happy sex workers doing it via free choice, they tend to work in the legal brothels that exist (although there are sole operators too).
By ignoring these people, ignoring the healthy aspects of the industry you are forcing the solution to the problem to be out of sight. Embrace this side, help make it socially acceptable and people can use these positive services more and more and the negative ones will be forced out of the market.

Or condemn it all, because 'reasons', and watch as the exploitative side of the industry doesn't get any better.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 18:34:42 07/Oct/17
06:29pm 07/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3232 posts
condemning the current sex industry and especially profiteers like hugh hefner =/= condemning sex workers

It's OK to sell Sex if both adults are consenting to it, what is your problem with that? Note, exploitation and the other issues you mentioned above, are not consensual, they are coerced.


Because sexual consent is a very complex topic. Because paying someone money can very easily be a form of coercion. Because that camp, so to speak, is the one that takes the easy route and focuses on, what, free speech? F*** religion?

I'm not saying sex work isn't a job. I'm saying it's a s*** job.

You are totally ignoring the people who are doing it through their own choice, because they want to, in a way that is healthy. You also ignore that men do it too, for women. There is a market for that as well.


Seriously? In whatever world you think there is a lot of healthy outcomes for modern sex workers, sure. In any case, why embrace something that I shouldn't really care for anyway? You and I both know the financial industry is regulated to hell and back and yet there is still more regulations both necessary and on the horizon. Activists looking for financial reforms don't start with 'I know some great financial advisers do really good work, but...!' They get straight to the point.

It's comparable to asking me to embrace the people who use guns freely and responsibly in America, or embracing the neo-nazis rights to political lobbying and free speech - I'm not talking about the positive side of the industry because I honestly don't care about the stuff that's -clearly- not causing any real harm. In such a poorly regulated industry it's the cultural and social issues that are already prevalent that I take problem with. I shouldn't need to waste time prefacing with 'There are many many great aspects of sex in the sex industry, some people get sex and some people get paid! However.......'

As to your point on what I'm ignoring, I argue it's you who is ignoring things. For instance;

Some women have a hard time finding sexual partners for a variety of reasons, people with disabilities or social anxieties for instance. There are professional people in the sexual industry that cater for these people.


I cannot say you are necessarily wrong, and perhaps you have some experience in this area, but let's think about this statement critically; What actual regulations and ethical codes of practice are there for these 'professionals'? Is there a professional body, or any serious type of training mandatory for these people? Is this type of 'catering' actually helpful in the long term for either party? Is it priced and paid correctly and fairly industry-wide? What watchdog and fair work organisations are in place to protect both parties? Is getting disabled and 'socially anxious' people to straight up pay for sex the best possible/moral solution for them compared to other solutions they could be encouraged to pay for first (a.k.a. psychological interventions, dating resources, etc)?

Not exactly questions with straightforward, well-researched answers nor clear legislation.

Don't paint these people as not-for-profit saints helping depressed people. And they're not really 'catering' are they? Why don't you call it what it is? Why aren't you embracing these peoples vocation? Whores. Sex workers. Escorts. Hookers. Hookers getting paid to f***. What, you think forcing everyone called them 'professional escorts' is going to fix the stigma? If i was to use your own argument against you, literally any negative connotations you have from these statements are your own anti-sex projections, not mine.

In any case, it's likely that a decent amount of sex workers without support or regulation (aka many in current Aus model) will do whatever else their clients want as well, no matter how uncomfortable they are, if the price is right. Supply and demand and all that. Urination, s***, BDSM, public slave play, violent sex, I could go on. But hey no matter how hard they're hit, who carries them around in public with a collar, how many days they're locked in a dungeon, or what marks they get on their body it's definitely not degrading to them at all, because they consented and it's just a job like any other. And it's definitely DEFINITELY not coercion, or anything. Because men like having sex and women like having sex. It's all sex-positive yeah? It's just a high-paid whore earning money and loving life.

In the short term, I would much rather sex positivity comes from places where they don't earn money from you paying for sex, because they will be biased towards, oh I don't know, encouraging you to pay for sex rather than actually being sex positive. I have no doubt these people aarethe experts on sexual health. But it's like general/personal advice in banks - you don't really want personal advice coming from people who A) don't know your personal financial situation and B) earn money directly from your spending habits.

In the long term I would much rather our sex industry regulation gets on the ball, and we even focus on building longer-term and fulfilling sexual relationships, rather than just simple 'sex' health.
09:17pm 07/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2802 posts
Because sexual consent is a very complex topic. Because paying someone money can very easily be a form of coercion


You step through the situation where it can be 'coercion' keeping in mind coercion usually means at gun point. Once you've done that seeing as you like to rip on Toll and everyone else about psychological research, provide some which gives a realistic estimate to how often the coercion scenario is going on.

Escorts. Hookers. Hookers getting paid to f***. What, you think forcing everyone called them 'professional escorts' is going to fix the stigma?


You know its funny. I'm pretty confident you'd support banning of stigmatised words in virtually every other context. But here is a chance for you to show your puritanical zeal and say labels don't matter.

What actual regulations and ethical codes of practice are there for these 'professionals'? Is there a professional body, or any serious type of training mandatory for these people?


Er the sex work act 1994 as well as consumer law and the police? As for an industry body look into the scarlet alliance. Sex work is tightly regulated in all Australian states. I'm happy for you to start pointing to specific gaps in the legislation but that long winded tirade has a lot more sentiment then substance phooks.

But to take of your one examples which has no basis in fact. you talk about human trafficking. the Sex Work Act specifically deals with this topic.
09:41am 08/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3233 posts

coercion usually means at gun point


Coercion. The intimidation of a victim to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will by the use of psychological pressure, physical force, or threats.
Even in research paying your fully consenting and informed participants can f*** up results due to coercive pressures
"evidence suggests that members of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and professionals involved in research oversight are concerned that payment may coerce or unduly influence prospective research participants, thereby compromising the voluntariness of consent"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11874309

provide some which gives a realistic estimate to how often the coercion scenario is going on


Ok.

"Employees performing escort work have particular issues in relation to security and safety from violence"
"Sex industry legislation routinely violates sex workers' basic human, civil and industrial rights."
"In Australian cases, judges have stated it was less 'heinous' to rape a sex worker than it was a 'happily married' or 'chaste' woman.37 Sex workers spoke at the 2011 Sydney and Melbourne Slut Walks about the institutional victim blaming of sex workers in sexual assault cases.38 In 2009, a sex worker reported that during a session a United States marine had'ripped off his condom', pushed her head into a pillow, started suffocating her, and had unprotected sex with her. Despite admitting to using a 'lock-down manoeuvre' to pin her to the bed when she said she wanted to stop, the marine was found 'not guilty' of sexually assaulting the sex worker. Sex workers protested outside the courthouse, condemning the criminal justice system for failing to recognise or take seriously violence committed against sex workers."
http://www.scarletalliance.org.au/library/principles_2014

Women working in prostitution experience more levels of violence against them than women working in other fields.
http://www.reis.cis.es/REIS/PDF/REIS_151_Article_07_ENGLISH1436262194183.pdf

Female, male and transgender sex workers face high levels of violence, stigma, discrimination and other human-rights violations.
http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/sti/sex_worker_implementation/swit_chpt2.pdf

A study of female prostitutes in Vancouver, Canada over the age of 14 who used illicit drugs other than marijuana found that 57% of sex-workers experienced some form of gender-based violence over an 18-month period
http://www.bmj.com/content/339/bmj.b2939

a study of 1,000 female (both cisgender and transgender) sex-workers in Phnom Penh, Cambodia found 93% of women surveyed had been the victim of rape in the past year.
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/BSP/GENDER/PDF/HIVGBVbackgroundreport.pdf

you'd support banning of stigmatised words in virtually every other context


Maybe like, I don't know, a workplace? Like they do in virtually all workplaces? But how can you ban a word in a place where the stigma is around the work itself. strange huh. Almost as if society doesn't like sex work and there are serious problems going on, or something. weeeeeiiiiiiiirrrrrrrd.

happy for you to start pointing to specific gaps in the legislation


"experiences of discrimination were; restrictions on working as a sex worker, health restrictions, use of condoms as evidence in prosecution, bad relations with police, lack of industrial protections, restrictions on movement, discrimination against sex worker associates (boyfriends, friends and family), discriminatory advertising practices (by publishers, newspapers, advertisers and staff at newspapers) and other forms of discrimination such as being refused credit cards and housing"
http://www.scarletalliance.org.au/library/unjust-counterproductive/file_view

"key themes were around the human rights violations against sex workers that are a key concern and remain a major barrier for sex worker in protecting our rights, health and safety at work, impacting on HIV responses. Criminalisation is still pervasive and used actively against sex workers including criminalisation of our serostatus; our sexuality, sex and gender identity; our work, workplaces and our clients. Stigma and discrimination by services, society and in policy and practice continues for sex workers globally. Of great concern is the use of anti-trafficking as a means to further criminalise sex workers by restricting our freedom of movement. Anti-trafficking approaches have been used to promote a victim narrative that does not recognise the autonomy of sex workers and has been used to legitimise 'rescue and rehabilitation' approaches to sex work and shift away from approaches that see sex work as work and seek to progress our labour and migration rights."
http://www.scarletalliance.org.au/library/aids2014report

the Sex Work Act specifically deals with this topic.


Thanks, you solved the problem. Let's close up shop everyone! the legislation is perfect the way it is.
02:34pm 08/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2803 posts
Oh so that would be a no on all fronts then hey Phooks?

Lololo did you know paying people can influence their decisions, or 'coerce' them?

*edit*
Though it would be interesting to see you expand on how you view coercion by payment in respect of submitting yourself to *medical experimentation* as a strong analogy with payment for sex.
IE informed consent are going to be pretty different in those situations.
*/edit*

In Australian cases, judges have stated it was less 'heinous' to rape a sex worker than it was a 'happily married' or 'chaste' woman.37 Sex workers spoke at the 2011 Sydney and Melbourne Slut Walks about the institutional victim blaming of sex workers in sexual assault cases.38 In 2009, a sex worker reported that during a session a United States marine had'ripped off his condom', pushed her head into a pillow, started suffocating her, and had unprotected sex with her. Despite admitting to using a 'lock-down manoeuvre' to pin her to the bed when she said she wanted to stop, the marine was found 'not guilty' of sexually assaulting the sex worker. Sex workers protested outside the courthouse, condemning the criminal justice system for failing to recognise or take seriously violence committed against sex workers.


So the thing about dramatic anecdotes is that they seldom represent the norm.

A study of female prostitutes in Vancouver, Canada over the age of 14 who used illicit drugs other than marijuana found that 57% of sex-workers experienced some form of gender-based violence over an 18-month period


Gee that's not stacking the deck at all, and in no way relevant to whether they are being coerced into their work. I wonder if people other than sex workers who use illegal drugs other than marijuana get caught up in violence at a higher rate than the norm? there isn't a moby d*** sized confounding variable in that research at all.

It was a simple question phooks, define coercion and then give some stat's about how often your definition of coercion takes place. But if you want to define "paying people for sex" as coercion seems to me you can't really be taking the scarlet alliance's core message to heart, which is that many people freely choose to be sex workers and they shouldn't be stigmatised for it..

But please quote literature from the organization I pointed out to you. You know the industry body you said didn't exist.

I love how sex slavery is something you have to go to Cambodia to find but you're saying Australia's laws are totally useless to prevent it.

Of great concern is the use of anti-trafficking as a means to further criminalise sex workers by restricting our freedom of movement.


That's a little interesting now isn't it. It's almost like an attitude like
condemning the current sex industry
probably runs a pretty high risk of overreach.

Here is a fun little task for you when you've actually done the first one. Link it all to Hugh Hefner.
03:59pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10647 posts
So much stupid over the death of a dirty old man who exploited women.
07:02pm 08/10/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7732 posts
If the chicks got paid for their services, is that exploitation or commerce?
08:44pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18468 posts

I'm not saying sex work isn't a job. I'm saying it's a s*** job.


You think it's a s*** job, for you. Other people can and do actually enjoy it and find it to be a really good job.

Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean others can't either.


Activists looking for financial reforms don't start with 'I know some great financial advisers do really good work, but...!' They get straight to the point.


Actually, that is precisely what I think they should do, and many successful campaigns do that. They point to the people in the relevant industry who are doing it in a responsible way, they are the example of how to do it well.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 21:23:09 08/Oct/17
09:21pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Vash
5555 posts
Would a sex worker still do the job if the pay wasn't lucrative?
09:34pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3234 posts
Don't waste your time Vash these guys think sex workers have it all.
09:37pm 08/10/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23786 posts
For instance, you seem to not accept that people can happily choose to put a price on their own body and still be a healthy individual as they clearly understand the boundaries of what they are doing and work with the industry in such a way that supports that.


likewise for professional sports stars
09:39pm 08/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2804 posts
Don't waste your time Vash these guys think sex workers have it all.


Unlike phooks who is such a good feminist he believes adult women can't consent to sex when money is involved.

Would a sex worker still do the job if the pay wasn't lucrative?


Would a fly in fly out miner still do the job if the pay wasn't lucrative?
09:48pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18469 posts

Is getting disabled and 'socially anxious' people to straight up pay for sex the best possible/moral solution for them compared to other solutions they could be encouraged to pay for first (a.k.a. psychological interventions, dating resources, etc)?


What makes you think that the two are mutually exclusive? Why can't a person be receiving other interventions and also engage with a sex professional?

I'm not really big on industry watchdogs, and more and more government. I tend to find government gets in the way a lot of the time, a recent example is the taxi industry. However, I do agree that with the current state of the sexual industry, regulations are probably a good thing for the time being. Good thing it already has regulations in place.

However, having special regulations for working with those who suffer mental illness? I'm not so sure, nothing more than is already in place for such situations. Otherwise you would have to expect every indutsry to have special provisions.

It seems you are caught up in the sexual taboo world, that it is some kind of dirty act that must be regulated if happens outside of a long term relationship?

You point out several studies showing the high rates of abusive backgrounds for people in the sex industry. I agree with you on that, I never didn't agree with you.
What I am saying, by trying to make the problem go away .. it doesn't make it go away. By not bringing it out into the open, where it can be talked about without social stigma, without social negativity of people with preconceived ideas about the types of people that go into the industry .. it won't get much better.

It has to be an open and socially acceptable thing for people to both work in and seek services for, until then it will be ostracized into the back ally's (lol) of the community, where all sorts of horrific s*** can happen.

It is so much easier to get away with f***ed up s***, when no-one is willing to be open about it or talk about it and actually actively go out of their way to tell people how f***ed up people who work in the industry are. That is what you are pretty much doing.


It's pretty much the same as The War On Drugs. Prohibition doesn't work. Only when drugs are decriminalised and moved towards social acceptance, do you see significant advances in that area.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 21:51:23 08/Oct/17
09:49pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18470 posts
Phooks, do you know any sex workers? Anyone who worked in the industry? Have you spoken to anyone who works in them?

Have you at least read various articles written by people who happily work in the industry?
09:57pm 08/10/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21373 posts
The king of being triggered
10:11pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3235 posts
Aight I've had a few beers, llessa go!

many successful campaigns do that. They point to the people in the relevant industry who are doing it in a responsible way, they are the example of how to do it well.


No, they don't. In fact, activists across the globe get f*****g ASSASSINATED specifically because they -don't- pander to (at worst) industry f***wits who fly under the radar. 'duh, you need to pay respects to hugh hefner before you critisize sex industry profiteers@!!$'

I tend to find government gets in the way a lot of the time


Yeah like, speed signs and fire stations and building codes and stuff. Stupid f***** public sector TAXES R EVIL

You point out several studies showing the high rates of abusive backgrounds for people in the sex industry.


No... No I haven't, at all. Try again. Those studies talk about sex industry -outcomes-.

Why can't a person be receiving other interventions and also engage with a sex professional?


Where did I say that? Read the post again - one is more important than the other, and I never said they were mutually exclusive. In any case I would much rather sex positivity comes from places where they don't earn money from you paying for sex, because they will be biased towards, oh I don't know, encouraging you to pay for sex rather than actually being sex positive. I have no doubt these people are *the experts* on sexual health. But it's like general/personal advice in banks - you don't really want personal advice coming from people who A) don't know your personal financial situation and B) earn money directly from your spending habits.

It seems you are caught up in the sexual taboo world, that it is some kind of dirty act that must be regulated if happens outside of a long term relationship?


Nice try. It seems you think it's either camp A) SEX IS GOOD or camp B) SEX IS BAD. Nowhere have I attacked sex workers themselves, nor have I called for the criminalisation of selling sex work (which is the -CURRENT REGULATORY MODEL for a number of aussie states-), nor do I think sex positivity is a bad thing. Read my posts again and show literally one sentence where I have said any of those things.

Either way; my long-term view is that repeated, short term relationships (sexual or not) are bad for most people's overall wellbeing, especially when compared to more fulfilling, longer term relationships. That's not my opinion, that's based on evidence - look it up. And since your comprehension of my posts is lacking I'll stress that I'm NOT saying that one or the other is more/less moral, nor should one be 'banned', nor more/less possible for certain individuals. So if well-being of the average person is considered important this would indicate that more fulfilling long-term romantic relationships are a societal ideal to strive towards. In much the same way someone should be -encouraged- to get real friends rather than pay strangers for 'friend time'.

having special regulations for working with those who suffer mental illness? I'm not so sure, nothing more than is already in place for such situations. Otherwise you would have to expect every indutsry to have special provisions.


Nice job on going the conservative route but here's a fun thing: other industries do have such regulations already. And they're enforced better in some places than others.

Have you at least read various articles written by people who happily work in the industry?


I encourage you to share some
10:58pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3236 posts
If any of you cared to do some actual f*****g research instead of spewing out your opinions and 'lol triggrd' posts, you'd learn that the swedish/euro model has been assessed recently and it actually f**** things up because it criminalises the buying of sex (clients who -buy- sex) in a way that causes even more problems and stigmatisation of sex workers (those who -sell- sex, not criminalised) in an indirect way with the law, which is a valid critisism of one of my points.

but yall too busy cherry-pickin
11:02pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3237 posts
I pay my friends by the hour to hang out with me
11:05pm 08/10/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4624 posts
What actual regulations and ethical codes of practice are there for these 'professionals'?

there are the local ones cited of course, for what they are worth

but regulating the interweb is something quite else, considering the barriers to entry into this industry are not all that great - you can basically set it up anywhere on earth that has a broadband connection, plus fit chicks and jacked dudes with big ding dongs, and you don’t even really need the last two

and there’s no fairtrade system for porn that guarantees the gangsters who run these sites (I assume) aren’t coercing anyone
06:08pm 09/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2805 posts
but yall too busy cherry-pickin


The guy saying hugh hefner is responsible for 'incentivizing' sex slavery is south east asia is suddenly concerned with rhetorical fallacies.

I mean I would go and pick apart your argument, but you're too busy posting material that supports mine to make it worthwhile.

ou'd learn that the swedish/euro model has been assessed recently and it actually f**** things up because it criminalises the buying of sex


Oh who knew institutionalized entrapment would have negative consequences? As though that needed a response.
06:38pm 09/10/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12911 posts
Other people can and do actually enjoy it and find it to be a really good job.



BWAH HA HA HA
BWAH HA HA HA

I think hes watched Pretty Woman one too many times.

Tinder has really tanked the Whore market.

08:03pm 09/10/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7733 posts
baz wins the thread
08:53pm 09/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3248 posts
Paging someone else to debate with on this topic coz I been drinking again and I need SCIENCE BASED DEBATE on current LEGISLATIVE ISSUES. It keeps me happy, ya f*****s

Pp I ain't responding till you supplement one (1) argument with one (1) source. Ya F***. Like, a loveable f*** tho

Ok how about.. Let's talk about oversexualisation. Is it a thing???
07:03pm 12/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3249 posts
Can we 'solve' hypersexualised women in videogames and advertisements by hypersexualising any respective men?!? Like I assume they do* in those Japanes and Korean Vidya?@

*I can't really tell if men get sexualised or not half the time tbh. Perhaps I should blame the late Hugh Hefner for that!!!! Lol
07:04pm 12/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2807 posts
Pp I ain't responding till you supplement one (1) argument with one (1) source. Ya F***. Like, a loveable f*** tho


I did. I directed you to the scarlet alliance and pointed out the relevant legislation. You pointed to cambodia as evidence *australia* has a problem. You provide 1 argument with one source that actually supports it.

For example.

This is evidence for my position not yours.

"key themes were around the human rights violations against sex workers that are a key concern and remain a major barrier for sex worker in protecting our rights, health and safety at work, impacting on HIV responses. Criminalisation is still pervasive and used actively against sex workers including criminalisation of our serostatus; our sexuality, sex and gender identity; our work, workplaces and our clients. Stigma and discrimination by services, society and in policy and practice continues for sex workers globally. Of great concern is the use of anti-trafficking as a means to further criminalise sex workers by restricting our freedom of movement. Anti-trafficking approaches have been used to promote a victim narrative that does not recognise the autonomy of sex workers and has been used to legitimise 'rescue and rehabilitation' approaches to sex work and shift away from approaches that see sex work as work and seek to progress our labour and migration rights."


They are complaining that the legislation is if any thing *over* protective. My empahsis, sounds exactly like your point. The industry is f***ed beyond repair and sex workers need rescuing from psychological harm.

But to cut to your main thesis. Link *any of this* just one bit to hugh hefner. I won't hold my breath.
09:55pm 12/10/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21375 posts
so you get drunk and then look for ways to trigger yourself?
08:38am 13/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3250 posts
"hehe I'm superior to you because I don't care about things" grow some balls pave at least PP puts up a fight
12:00pm 13/10/17 Permalink
anonymousxvi
Brisbane, Queensland
21 posts
Society is definately oversexualised you see it in ads, movies, tv, and then theres the porn industry
02:05pm 13/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2810 posts
I think he may be calling you out on the fact that you constantly over react to a predictable set of issues in a predictable way, which taken together mean you can't actually be doing anything about them in a way that is commensurate with your outrage, and that therefore your vulgar displays of 'caring about things' is evidence of tribalism and nothing more.

or something like that.
04:14pm 13/10/17 Permalink
system
Internet
--
04:14pm 13/10/17 Permalink
AusGamers Forums
Show: per page
1
Post a Reply
You must be logged in to post a reply.