Connect with us

Porn, Equality, And Journalism Just Don’t Mix

Published

on

Last Friday I resigned from The Bilerico Project, as regular readers of this blog know, in response to its publishing, “Hot Mormon missionary boys masturbating.”

To be clear, my resignation was not a protest, not an indictment, just a simple goodbye. A hopefully graceful, albeit specific exit.

As I explained in, “Why I’m Hanging Up My Bilerico Hat For Good,”

“My writing and my activism is my work. My work is to help the LGBTQ community achieve full equality, both under the law and in the hearts and minds of our neighbors, family-members, friends, co-workers, and society in general. And so I view Bilerico and my own blog as my place of work. And, after twenty-five years of working in corporate America, I don’t believe pornography has a place in the workplace.

“I’ve had this conversation, and others, with Bil. I understand his point. And most importantly, Bilerico is his home, and his business. Bilerico is an amazing institution, one that has taught me more than I expected, and one that has contributed a great deal to the LGBTQ community. I know Bil and all the Bilerico contributors will continue to do that fine work, to help open doors for our community, and help move the national conversation forward.”

“I do not see my work and pornography as compatible or even being able to share the same home. And I do not think that that type of content here helps us in our battle to win the hearts and minds of those who might choose to help us.”

And that, as they say, was supposed to be that.

I had asked Bilerico founder Bil Browning to publish my piece on why I was resigning. I wanted to resign and have it be clear that it was a personal choice I was making, not a choice I was asking Bil or his readers to make. All I was saying was that I didn’t want my work published amid pornography, or among content that was there merely to titillate or arouse.

Had “Hot Mormon missionary boys masturbating,” been framed as an examination, why that aspect of queer culture was interesting to some, had a bearing on LGBTQ culture, or served any other intellectual purpose, rather than just, as Bil wrote, “I bring you pictures of hot Mormon missionary boys masturbating. They’re from the porn site Mormonboyz.com, but I’ve deliberately used ones where you can only see their cocks through their magical Mormon underwear…” I would have probably been fine with it. Not thrilled, but fine.

For the first time ever, Bil refused to publish my piece. In his response to my resignation letter, he wrote, “I’m all in favor of making decisions that benefit ourselves and allows us to stand up for our ideals. You did that,” and promised he would pen his own response to the subject to “get the discussion started.”

Last night, Bil published, “Porn vs Prude: Bilerico is sex positive,” in which he wrote, “if there’s one thing I’ll never apologize for, it’s that Bilerico Project is sex positive.”

Making It Personal

I am honestly saddened that Bil chose to make this issue personal, thinly veiling attacks on me under the guise of Bilerico being “sex positive,” (the insinuation being, I am not,) not having “internalized homophobia,” (the insinuation being, I do,) nor being a prude (the insinuation being, I am,) rather than offering a debate on the issue of pornography as content.

He easily could have said, “Contributor David Badash resigned after we published this piece. What do you think? Is this content appropriate for what we want the site to be?” And that, as they say, could have been that.

(If Bilerico were so “sex positive,” it would have equal amounts of “sex positive” content for all different tastes. I do not believe it does.)

Bil chose to take the discussion in an unfortunate and entirely unnecessary direction. Rather than ask his readers what they thought about porn as content, as I did mine, he wrote, “I wouldn’t have it any other way.”

(In 2008, Bil was a bit more open to conversation. But not any more.)

What Do You Think?

I did take the time to ask my readers, on this blog via a poll, and on Twitter. The overwhelming response I received was that pornography on news and opinion sites is just not what you want.

As of this writing, here’s what you had to say:

67% were solidly against it, only 27% were comfortable with it.

But rather than look at the big picture, Bil chose to try to “analyze” a few points of my piece, leaving his readers out of the full discussion.  What Bil is doing is unfortunate, and his readers, as well as the larger LGBTQ community, deserve a better, more honest and open dialogue, especially from a site that claims to be all about honest and open dialogue.

In these pages and his, in my resignation letter, and in communications with others, I have supported Bil and his work. It’s disappointing that he chose to take such a narrow track, but, as I wrote, it’s Bil’s home and place of work, and he can run Bilerico any way he chooses.

Had Bil published my piece, a real discussion on the pros and cons of publishing pornography as content might have been held. Instead, Bil chose to be disingenuous, claiming, “No Internalized Homophobia: Bilerico Is Sex Positive,” writing, “it’s our genitals and what we do with them that sets us apart in most straight/cis people’s minds,” but neglecting to remind his readers that in “Hot Mormon missionary boys masturbating.” he had written, “you can’t be a proper Bilerico unless you’re both political and perverted.”

So, which one is it? “Sex positive” or “perverted?”

I think calling your writers and readers “perverted” speaks far greater to issues of internalized homophobia rather than, “I do not see my work and pornography as compatible or even being able to share the same home” with pornography.

Bil also writes, “I think that David’s premise depends on what your definition of “porn” is.”

Well, porn is porn. If it’s NSFW, it’s porn, or close enough. Like Clinton’s “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” what you call it isn’t what’s important. it is what it is. Why not be honest about it?

Matt Algren, an LGBTQ blogger who writes Asterisk, weighed in in the comments section of Bil’s piece.

I’m glad that you at least acknowledge that you do posts like that to up your hit count and therefore probably your ad revenue. “Sex sells”, though, has never been the sounding call of a respectable news/opinion organization. Using that motto as a defense signals to me that you put your income over your journalistic integrity, and I think that’s unfortunate.

I suppose the most frustrating part of your post here is its dishonesty. When you talk about being “sex positive” and proclaim that you won’t “shun” a segment of the community, you’re implying that someone has suggested you should be “sex negative” and that you should shun some LGBT people.

The problem is that no one has said those things. No one. You’re just being dishonest so you can cover yourself in glory. Why not just say “Yep, sometimes we publish naughty pics from skeezy amateur porn sites of guys in y-fronts, so don’t come here from work” and let that be the end of it? Why did you have to try to insert some false moral battle of which you can be the self-styled champion?

And to make matters worse, when you declare that you don’t have “internalized homophobia” and set this up as “porn vs prude”, you’re implying that the person you’re responding to (in this case, David Badash) does suffer from internalized homophobia and is a prude. That, mon frere, is what they call unprofessional, or in less polite society, “fucked up”.

Of the piece that initiated my resignation, Bil writes,

“Even the post about masturbating Mormon missionaries didn’t show any exposed genitalia – although you could see the shadow of one guy’s cock through his undies and if you blow up one of the other pictures you can see the outline of that guy’s balls through his knickers. The post is marked NSFW with the disclaimer: “I’ve deliberately used ones where you can only see their cocks through their magical Mormon underwear. They’re still NSFW, but if you need more there are tons more graphic preview pictures at the site.

So what do these posts all have in common if the moniker of “porn” isn’t sticking? They’re about sex – and gay sex specifically.”

That’s not a disclaimer, it’s an invitation. Again, why not be honest about it?

(And perhaps someone can tell me what Prince William’s Penis, at one point the #1 post on Bilerico, and one I mentioned as an example of what I felt was inappropriate, has to do with “gay sex specifically?”)

Another LGBTQ blogger wrote me, asking for anonymity, but stating,

“The idea that this is about sex-negativity is simply a strawman.

“The question, to me, is does Bilerico want to be Queerty, or do they want to be a serious forum for LGBT news and analysis?  It’s difficult to be both.

“When I look for real analysis in the Netroots, where do I go?  Digby, Steve Benen, Ezra Klein, and others.  I think we can agree that it would be weird if all of a sudden Ezra decided to post NSFW shit below the fold.  It doesn’t mean Ezra is “sex-negative.”  That’s just not what Ezra does.

“In the LGBT world, Pam Spaulding doesn’t post stuff like that either.  Towleroad links to fun, naughty stuff sometimes, but Andy doesn’t present himself as an analyst, but more as a collector of things lots of LGBT people (and straight people too!) might find interesting.  So because he casts such a wide net it’s appropriate.  The problem is that Bilerico seems to want to have it both ways, to be a place where “serious commentary” can co-exist with Mormon porn, and it’s not “sex-negative” to say that that format doesn’t work.  If Bilerico were large enough to be an LGBT equivalent of FireDogLake, that would work, but they’re not.”

Bilerico is a unique enterprise. It’s not for everyone, as it wasn’t for me. That’s fine. I chose to try to leave honorably and respectfully. It’s unfortunate, as I wrote to Bil after he published, “Porn vs Prude: Bilerico is sex positive,” that he “chose not to display the same level of respect for me, or my work, or, for that matter, [his] readers” that I had offered him.

I was honored that Michael R. Triplett, a board member of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association, wrote in, “Porn, Skin, and Profits: The LGBT Media Dilemma,”

“Badash has taken a principled stand about where he wants his paid and unpaid work to appear. I’d also agree that “porn,” skin-ads and “boys in underwear” posts undermine the overall credibility in terms of news and analysis. OTOH, can bloggers and LGBT media survive without them?”

And that’s the point. The point is that pornography, fighting for equality, and serious, intellectual news and analysis journalism just don’t mix.

Be Who You Are. Just Be Honest About It.

As the anonymous blogger above wrote, Pam Spaulding’s Pam’s House Blend doesn’t post porn. (Nor does The Advocate, both of which I admire greatly.)

Towleroad isn’t an activist site, it’s not an analysis site, it’s a news/entertainment site, just like 365Gay is, and just like Joe.My.God is. I don’t think these three are trying to be the home of serious queer intellectual discussion and debate. That’s fine. They are a few of my favorite sites, which I read daily and respect for the excellent work they do. But Bilerico is trying to be the home of serious queer intellectual discussion and debate. Or claims to be.

If there’s a way to mix porn, journalism, and serious intellectual debate, while fighting intelligently for equality, and maintaining credibility to the rest of the world, I have yet to see it. Nor, quite frankly, do I want to.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Loomer Invokes Hannibal Lecter as Trump Triples Down on Lies About Immigrants Eating Pets

Published

9 hours ago

on

September 12, 2024

By

For almost a year Donald Trump inexplicably has been injecting the fictional character Hannibal Lecter into his re-election rallies. Now, far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer, who has promoted white nationalism and appears to be influencing the ex-president, has introduced the serial killing cannibal into the latest, dangerous Trump controversy.

“In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs,” Trump falsely claimed during Tuesday’s debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, referring to Haitian immigrants. “The people that came in. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there. And this is what’s happening in our country. And it’s a shame.”

Despite multiple fact checks proving Trump (and his running mate, U.S. Senator JD Vance, who has also promoted those pet-eating lies) wrong, the Republican presidential nominee doubled down – even after the debate moderator, ABC News’ David Muir, live on-air debunked his claims.

The City of Springfield, Ohio was forced to evacuate its city hall and an elementary school Thursday morning after a multiple-location bomb threat was received, but that did not stop Trump from promoting his false claims on his Truth Social social media platform hours later.

READ MORE: Trump Faces Increasing Calls to Participate in Second Debate

“Bernie Moreno has a very good chance of winning Ohio against a Radical Left Democrat, Sherrod Brown, with what is happening in Springfield, and other parts of the State,” Trump declared Thursday afternoon, referring to the far-right extremist Republican running to unseat Democratic U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown, who is leading in the polls by low single digits.

Trump then invoked his racist Haitian immigrant rhetoric.

“Ohio is being inundated with Illegal Migrants, mostly from Haiti, who are taking over Towns and Villages at a level and rate never seen before.”

That too is false.

Legal immigrants from Haiti have come to Springfield, and have been a boon to the city’s businesses. Some city officials have complained that the number of immigrants ramped up too quickly, as the local government struggles to provide services due to the increase in population.

On Truth Social, Trump is also posting memes of cats, including one with them holding a sign that says, “Don’t let them eat us, vote for Trump.”

While Laura Loomer denies she is advising Trump, and she has been traveling with him this week, including to the presidential debate on Tuesday and to 9/11 ceremonies on Wednesday despite being a 9/11 truther. Some suggest she appears to have replaced U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) as a Trump favorite. Loomer, according to NPR, has described herself as a “proud Islamophobe” and “pro-white nationalism.”

READ MORE: JD Vance Dismisses Taylor Swift’s Harris Endorsement: Voters Won’t Be Influenced by ‘Disconnected Billionaire’

Semafor reports, “After a debate in which Trump shouted about false viral rumors of pet-eating Haitians in an Ohio town, her potential influence is drawing more scrutiny from both parties.”

Now she too is going all-in on the racist and false pet-eating Haitian claims.

“Haitian immigrants aren’t just eating cats and dogs. They eat HUMANS,” Loomer baselessly claimed Thursday. “Remember their leader? Known as ‘Barbeque’? Only Hannibal Lecter himself would want to bring more of them to the United States!”

“Don’t let the media say that concerns about illegal immigration are ‘conspiracy theories’. These aren’t rumors. It’s a FACT. When you import the third world, you become the third world, and we won’t allow it here in America. Donald Trump will stop our country from further becoming a third world nation. The media is obsessing over the Haitian migrants because even the most liberal voters are horrified over the animal abuse committed by so many of Kamala’s invaders.”

Just days earlier, Trump claimed in a rally that “Dr. Hannibal Lecter” is “a representative of the people who are coming into our country.”

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: Liz Cheney Predicts Many Republicans Will Secretly Vote For Kamala Harris

 

Continue Reading

News

Multiple-Location Bomb Threat Follows Trump and Vance’s False Dog-Eating Immigrants Claims

Published

13 hours ago

on

September 12, 2024

By

Just days after the Republican nominees for president and vice president promoted and doubled-down on false, debunked and racist claims about immigrants in Springfield, Ohio stealing pet cats and dogs and eating them, that town’s city hall and elementary school were forced to evacuate after a bomb threat targeting multiple locations was received Thursday.

“Due to a bomb threat that was issued to multiple facilities throughout Springfield today, City Hall is closed today,” the City of Springfield wrote in a Facebook post, saying it had “received a bomb threat that has prompted an immediate response from local and regional law enforcement. As a precautionary measure, the building has been evacuated, and authorities are currently conducting a thorough investigation. Our primary concern is the safety and well-being of our employees and residents. We are working to address this situation as swiftly as possible.”

The statement adds the bomb threat came via an email at 8:24 AM that was “sent to multiple agencies and media outlets.”

Just one day ago, City Manager Bryan Heck in a video denounced the rhetoric used in the presidential race, while promoting the city’s growth, which has been improved local businesses say, by the influx of immigrants.

READ MORE: Trump Faces Increasing Calls to Participate in Second Debate

“It is disappointing that some of the narratives surrounding our city has been skewed by misinformation circulating on social media and further amplified by political rhetoric in the current highly-charged presidential election cycle, our Springfield community is making notable progress that contributes to its growing appeal among new residents, including immigrants, Heck said. “This development is underpinned by our city’s diverse and robust industrial base that encompasses the technology, automotive, food production and distribution sectors, the growth in our workforce population has supported the expansion of local businesses, contributing to the stabilization of our local economy.”

Donald Trump’s claims during the debate have sparked countless memes and auto-tuned videos mocking the ex-president.

“In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs,” ex-president Donald Trump said at Tuesday night’s debate, a false claim that already had been debunked, including by city officials, as ABC News reports. “The people that came in, they’re eating the cats, they’re eating, they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”

A City of Springfield spokesperson “told ABC News these claims are false, and that there have been ‘no credible reports or specific claims of pets being harmed, injured or abused by individuals in the immigrant community.'”

“Additionally, there have been no verified instances of immigrants engaging in illegal activities such as squatting or littering in front of residents’ homes,” the spokesperson said. “Furthermore, no reports have been made regarding members of the immigrant community deliberately disrupting traffic.”

After being fact-checked in real-time during Tuesday’s debate, Trump doubled-down.

“I’ve seen people on television,” he insisted. “The people on television say, ‘My dog was taken and used for food.’”

Trump’s Republican running mate U.S. Senator JD Vance, who represents Springfield and the entire state of Ohio, also promoted the false claim, and when confronted, also doubled-down.

“In the last several weeks, my office has received many inquiries from actual residents of Springfield who’ve said their neighbors’ pets or local wildlife were abducted by Haitian migrants,” he wrote on X Tuesday, CNN reported. “It’s possible, of course, that all of these rumors will turn out to be false.”

CNN explained, “The unsubstantiated claims appear to be the result of an unwieldy game of telephone that began as a rumor in a local Facebook group before spiraling to reach the highest echelons of conservative media and the Republican Party. They spread widely on X, whose owner, Elon Musk, has embraced the false rumors and posted several memes that promoted them.”

RELATED: No, Haitian Immigrants Aren’t Eating Cats in Ohio

As for the origin of the racist and false dog and cat-eating migrants trope, New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait calls it a “lie,” that “originated from white-supremacist sites online, which relentlessly promote the idea that non-white immigrants are dirty and dangerous. It quickly worked its way from the far right into mainstream conservative channels. Republicans seemed to think the idea gave them a potent meme.”

Chait says Vance is “an important bridge between the GOP and elements of the radical right that have been activated by Trump,” and “played a key role.”

“Before Vance,” NPR reported, “neo-Nazis helped spread the debunked claims.”

“Reports now show that people have had their pets abducted and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country,” Vance had tweeted.

Watch MSNBC’s report on the bomb threats below or at this link.


READ MORE: Tim Walz Mocks Anti-LGBTQ Book Bans During HRC Speech

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Faces Increasing Calls to Participate in Second Debate

Published

15 hours ago

on

September 12, 2024

By

Donald Trump is refusing to commit to a second presidential debate despite a series of polls that found viewers say Vice President Kamala Harris won this week’s debate by a huge margin, but some top Republicans and at least one top Trump benefactor are pushing him to participate in a second round. The Harris campaign immediately called on Trump to do a second debate after Tuesday’s apparent rout.

“I don’t know that I want to do another debate,” Trump told Fox News Wednesday.

“So you don’t know if you want to do another debate – it sounds like you’re a no,” host Steve Doocy responded.

“Well, I’d be less inclined to, because we had a great night. We won the debate,” Trump claimed, contrary to CNN’s flash poll and even top GOP pollster Frank Luntz (video), who predicted Trump’s debate performance will cost him the election.

“We had a terrible a terrible network,” Trump complained. “I think they were terrible. They should be embarrassed. I mean, they kept correcting me, and what I said was largely right, or I hope it was right, but what they said was absolutely wrong.”

READ MORE: JD Vance Dismisses Taylor Swift’s Harris Endorsement: Voters Won’t Be Influenced by ‘Disconnected Billionaire’

How strong was the Vice President’s performance?

“Harris’s margin was bigger than 20 other polls CNN has conducted after [other presidential] debates, dating back to 1984,” The Washington Post reports. “Harris was also deemed the winner of the debate by 31 percent of Trump supporters — similar to the 30 percent of Biden supporters who said Trump won the June 27 debate.”

U.S. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL), a top Trump surrogate facing his own tight re-election race, is urging Trump to go another round, while suggesting he doesn’t have much choice.

“I think it would be an opportunity,” Senator Scott said, The Hill reports. “If I was in Trump’s position, I would.”

U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) also supports Trump debating Harris again.

READ MORE: MAGA World Threatens to Boycott ABC After Trump’s Disastrous Debate Performance

“I believe we missed a lot of opportunities last night,” Senator Tillis told reporters Wednesday.

“It makes a lot more sense to, instead of talking about cats and dogs, talk about 1.5 million got-aways,” he said, referring to immigrants crossing the border. “That’s a lot more frightening to me, and it’s a real threat.”

Billionaire Elon Musk, a top Trump supporter who co-founded a pro-Trump Super PAC and has a “fast-evolving political friendship” with the ex-president, according to The New York Times, also wants Trump to do another debate.

Responding to a post on his social media platform X announcing the Harris campaign wants a second debate, Musk wrote: “Excellent, a second debate would be great.”

But hours after his Fox News telephone interview Wednesday, Trump compared himself to a prizefighter, claimed he had won the debate and asked, “why would I do a Rematch?”

And Wednesday, Trump falsely told reporters the polls show him winning the debate. He added, “when you win, you don’t necessarily have to do it a second time.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.