Off his message again: Trump vows to sue all female accusers

[Strange]

17 minutes ago, amykat said:

 

First of all Strange ...please don't take the things I say personally.  I was making a logical argument based on premises that you put forward (even though you didn't seem to totally realize it) so I just wanted to take that home for you.  You tried to give yourself an out by saying you were being hypocritical but a logical argument doesn't allow for that.  If you read my posts like I write them (with a smile on my face and laughing hopefully you won't feel so bad and I certainly won't put you on my ignore list.)

 

From what you have written to several people today it seems you don't understand what slut-shaming means because you have certainly been participating in it towards this porn actress.  So I am going to post some definitions:

 

An act of making any person feel guilty or inferior for certain sexual behaviors or desires that deviate from traditional or orthodox gender expectations, or that which may be considered to be contrary to natural or religious law.

 

Having premarital, casual, or promiscuous sex, engaging in prostitution, or when being victim blamed for being raped or otherwise sexually assaulted.

 

The term slut-shaming is also used to describe victim blaming for rape and other sexual assault; e.g. by stating that the crime was caused (either in part or in full) by the woman wearing revealing clothing or acting in a sexually provocative manner, before refusing consent to sex, and thereby absolving the perpetrator of guilt.

 

Slut-shaming is defined by many as a process in which women are attacked for their transgression of accepted codes of sexual conduct, i.e., of admonishing them for behavior or desires that are more sexual than society finds acceptable.

 

 

Sorry Amykat, slut-shaming is a made up term used by feminists and liberals to justify their actions when people don't agree with them. I do shit all the time some people don't agree with but I'm not going to coin new catch-phrases to justify it. I don't have to like or agree with anything and being "counted" by feminists and liberal propagandists is a joke. 

 

Im not guilting anyone for their desires or preferences or whatever. Im pointing out a pornstar claiming trump tried to kiss her without permission at a very convienent time that both makes trump look bad, and makes herself and her feminist lawyer look great. I mean the end of the day nothing will come out of it because there is no evidence and Trump won't get a defamation case because there is no evidence to prove she is lying. So the end of the day its a win-win for the pornstar and her feminist lawyer regardless if they are right or wrong. They know it. The lawyer clearly knows it. 

 

I mean I'm not even sure what you guys want to hear? People not allowed to voice opinions that differ? Make it illegal hate speech? Filter everyone so people can go about their lives without having to hear any negativity? 

 

No one in their right mind wants to take away from victims of sexual abuse and rape. The problem is that nowadays people are shouting rape and assault just to screw other people over. They are doing it in the workforce, as vengeance, to spouses, to bosses, its ridiculous. This takes away from actual cases that need to be investigated. 

 

I mean really what are we supposed to do? Consent forms and liability waivers? What if I misjudge a situation with a woman who is being provocative towards me, all the usual messages are clear, I try to go in for a kiss, and they freakout calling me a rapist and ranting about "Its my body and you have no right!!!" Seriously, is this what the world is supposed to come to? 

[55Jay]

There's a specter of self-fulfilling prophecy going on here.  I can't escape the niggling idea that he's a mess of subconscious guilt and self-loathing inside the intentionally obtuse, defiant cocoon he presents.  Knowing he's got a checkered past but having to present a facade of moral respectability he knows he doesn't deserve and that it won't withstand too much scrutiny.  Let's see your tax returns, Donald.  LOL. 

 

I'm still flabbergasted that he pulled Bill Clinton's baggage into this.  Sure, it provided him a line of attack on Hillary but the risks far outweighed the reward.  Along with all the other drip drip context, Billy Bush Bus Tape comes out and Pandora's Box blew up in his face.  He promptly dropped the Bill Clinton mantra, tucked his tail between his legs and said he only wanted to "talk about the issues facing the American people" from now on.

 

At this point, he's become a modern version of The Emperor with No Clothes.  The more he talks, the worse it gets. 

[Chicog]

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, I did read that back in 2012, Clinton did threaten to use the nuclear option on Iran if it launched a nuclear attack against Israel.

 

She did say this in 2008:

 

 

Quote

 

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel)," Clinton said in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."

"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said.

 

 

 

That doesn't sound like a threat, more of a promise.

 

And so it should be to any rogue country that thinks about starting a nuclear war.

 

 

[amykat]

21 hours ago, Strange said:

 

Dumb extremist post

 

 

Watch it all the time. 

 

 

Slut? No. Opposite of a slut. A whore. Whore does it for money. I don't care, I watch porn, but they are hardly classy examples of integrity. 

   Here is another one.  Before this you made a comment about her not being able to take the moral high ground because  "she takes dick for money."  I won't look for more.  That is enough support for my  polite translation.

 

I would think that you can understand that a crime can happen to anyone.  A crack whore can be walking down the street and some random mugger/rapist/murderer happens by and does a crime to her. It has nothing to do with her status as a crack whore. She should be treated the same as any other citizen who has the crime happen to them.

 

Anyway, I would debate your definition of a porn actress as the same as a prostitute.  I believe an actress is taking money for making a film and giving away the rights/sharing the profits of distributing that film and not for the sex act per se.  However, I don't know how you can separate the two parts ...one is the actor, one is the viewer ...one would not exist without the other. Same with prostitution, if you want to make the "evil" part the acceptance of money for sex  ...well it must be equally as evil to pay for sex.   Impossible to have one without the other.  It has just been historically correct to blame/shame the women, for a variety of reasons ...when really, maybe all the blame and shame belongs to men.  I mean, I could write a sensible essay right now arguing that.

 

I assume you have heard about the Madonna-Whore complex but maybe you should read about it, because it ties in with slut-shaming and this topic in general. 

 

It is hard to understand how a man as young as you, somewhat open- minded, living in Thailand so long, can be so judgemental to think things you have stated here today.  I think you should definitely cut yourself off from all porn in protest until you can resolve these issues!!

[stevenl]

18 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

There's a specter of self-fulfilling prophecy going on here.  I can't escape the niggling idea that he's a mess of subconscious guilt and self-loathing inside the intentionally obtuse, defiant cocoon he presents.  Knowing he's got a checkered past but having to present a facade of moral respectability he knows he doesn't deserve and that it won't withstand too much scrutiny.  Let's see your tax returns, Donald.  LOL. 

 

I'm still flabbergasted that he pulled Bill Clinton's baggage into this.  Sure, it provided him a line of attack on Hillary but the risks far outweighed the reward.  Along with all the other drip drip context, Billy Bush Bus Tape comes out and Pandora's Box blew up in his face.  He promptly dropped the Bill Clinton mantra, tucked his tail between his legs and said he only wanted to "talk about the issues facing the American people" from now on.

 

At this point, he's become a modern version of The Emperor with No Clothes.  The more he talks, the worse it gets. 

He did that because he doesn't care about the presidency. This whole circus is just one big advert for his new TV channel. So to him all publicity is good publicity. That's why he keeps pandering to his fanbase, they are his target group.

Edited October 24, 2016 by stevenl

[55Jay]

^ Maybe, sure seems that way at times.

 

Or, it simply is what it appears to be.  That he's just not as smart as he (constantly) says he is and that he's too dumb to listen to smarter people he's hired to help him. 

[Strange]

22 minutes ago, amykat said:

   Here is another one.  Before this you made a comment about her not being able to take the moral high ground because  "she takes dick for money."  I won't look for more.  That is enough support for my  polite translation.

 

I would think that you can understand that a crime can happen to anyone.  A crack whore can be walking down the street and some random mugger/rapist/murderer happens by and does a crime to her. It has nothing to do with her status as a crack whore. She should be treated the same as any other citizen who has the crime happen to them.

 

Anyway, I would debate your definition of a porn actress as the same as a prostitute.  I believe an actress is taking money for making a film and giving away the rights/sharing the profits of distributing that film and not for the sex act per se.  However, I don't know how you can separate the two parts ...one is the actor, one is the viewer ...one would not exist without the other. Same with prostitution, if you want to make the "evil" part the acceptance of money for sex  ...well it must be equally as evil to pay for sex.   Impossible to have one without the other.  It has just been historically correct to blame/shame the women, for a variety of reasons ...when really, maybe all the blame and shame belongs to men.  I mean, I could write a sensible essay right now arguing that.

 

I assume you have heard about the Madonna-Whore complex but maybe you should read about it, because it ties in with slut-shaming and this topic in general. 

 

It is hard to understand how a man as young as you, somewhat open- minded, living in Thailand so long, can be so judgemental to think things you have stated here today.  I think you should definitely cut yourself off from all porn in protest until you can resolve these issues!!

 

Well, I like porn, I like pornstars too. I have no issue with porn, with prostitution, with anyone or their preferences. Where I have a problem is a hooker or pornstar that portrays themselves as a "Working class business woman".... Like hell. Born pretty and screws for money. Spade is a spade no matter how much it hurts. There is no "evil" involved, but a hooker or pornstar that wants to preach about morality is a damn joke. This is my issue. 

 

Im not judgmental at first, but once a certain personality is revealed I'm out. Thats it. Game over.  

[amykat]

54 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

Sorry Amykat, slut-shaming is a made up term used by feminists and liberals to justify their actions when people don't agree with them. I do shit all the time some people don't agree with but I'm not going to coin new catch-phrases to justify it. I don't have to like or agree with anything and being "counted" by feminists and liberal propagandists is a joke.

 

Okay Strange this is a perfect example of why people stay ignorant.  Slut-shaming describes a complex concept of many behaviors that you would be wise to learn about.  Instead you dismiss it as nonsense.  Many MEN of an older generation called you out on it today and described it for you and used that term for your behavior.  It is the same as if we had a black man posting today and you kept calling him "boy" and telling him that his opinions were worth less than the rest of ours because he was black, that he doesn't deserve to be able to vote, and then we came on here and told you about racism.  And you tell us that racism is bullshit made up by liberals and civil rights leaders and blah, blah ...repeat the rest of your post here.

[boomerangutang]

3 hours ago, 55Jay said:

Moreover, Trump viewed Ms. Drake as a foregone conclusion.  When she rejected his alleged advances to have sex with him, he put $10,000 and a ride home on his jet, on the table.  Surely a woman like her, a porn actress, would take the money and get to work.  This one fits Trump's character and personality like a glove.  In Trump's world, everyone and everything has a price.  He enjoys the chase, the process of dealing, exploiting leverage, and reveling in success when his target capitulates.

 

Trump could learn a thing or two from Ms. Drake but he's too much of an a**hole to learn anything from anyone.   In this case, Trump was flat out rejected and made to look like a married, morally bankrupt sleazeball by a lowly, lowly porn movie actress.  Man, that's gotta sting and it's no wonder he's a public relations and lawsuit disaster zone.

 

2 hours ago, Strange said:

The point is, we don't know anything. You are stating guilt from the sidelines. If they are lying, that is defamation and not protected under the 1st amendment. If I was Trump and I didn't do anything then I would sue like a mofo too. Most likely this shit will get drug out and nothing will come of it. Its their word against his without evidence.

 

The women who are coming out aren't starting lawsuits or asking for hush money - though there may be other women who have asked to be paid off.  If so, we won't hear from them, unless Trump doesn't pay as promised.  In sum, it's embarrassing for the women to come out.  They know they'll be attacked and threatened by Trump, and belittled by Trump's fans (as is happening on this thread, with talk of 'whores' and 'sex for money' as if to ascertain the women are sluts for speaking up).  

 

 I hope Trump will sue (though he won't, because he's 95% hot air), because he needs to be counter-sued and cut down to size.  Unfortunately, a court case would be ugly, and would take away Americans' focus on more important things like environmental issues.  Note; it was America's fixation on Bill's few minutes of sex that may have been a reason why, at that time, no gov't officials noticed that 15 Saudis were learning to fly very large planes in Florida, and were not interested in taking off or landing.  In other words, for months, Americans were so focused on a stain on a blue dress, that the didn't notice terrorists planning to attack NY and Wash. DC.  

 

A Trump presidency would be worse.  If you think the mention of Trump's scorched earth mentality is ugly now, if he were to get to the Oval Office, it would be 20 times worse.  Newspapers would be trumpeting splashy stories about him every day.   There would be no time or efforts put towards national and international issues.  Oh ok, perhaps Trump would look up once in awhile and say something like "just bomb the hell out of 'em. Use nukes if you have to."  .....in between intense sessions with his phlanx of high paid lawyers trying to wade through a maze of 5,000 lawsuits (he's got over 4,000 currently, and the number is sure to rise).

[boomerangutang]

If you're not familiar with Fareed Zakaria, he's like a tall glass of clear water. Check out his view of Trump. . . .

 

 

[LannaGuy]

Just now, boomerangutang said:

If you're not familiar with Fareed Zakaria, he's like a tall glass of clear water. Check out his view of Trump. . . .

 

 

 

yea he's a biased Democrat and arrogant with it

[LannaGuy]

39 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 

 

The women who are coming out aren't starting lawsuits or asking for hush money - though there may be other women who have asked to be paid off.  If so, we won't hear from them, unless Trump doesn't pay as promised.  In sum, it's embarrassing for the women to come out.  They know they'll be attacked and threatened by Trump, and belittled by Trump's fans (as is happening on this thread, with talk of 'whores' and 'sex for money' as if to ascertain the women are sluts for speaking up).  

 

 I hope Trump will sue (though he won't, because he's 95% hot air), because he needs to be counter-sued and cut down to size.  Unfortunately, a court case would be ugly, and would take away Americans' focus on more important things like environmental issues.  Note; it was America's fixation on Bill's few minutes of sex that may have been a reason why, at that time, no gov't officials noticed that 15 Saudis were learning to fly very large planes in Florida, and were not interested in taking off or landing.  In other words, for months, Americans were so focused on a stain on a blue dress, that the didn't notice terrorists planning to attack NY and Wash. DC.  

 

A Trump presidency would be worse.  If you think the mention of Trump's scorched earth mentality is ugly now, if he were to get to the Oval Office, it would be 20 times worse.  Newspapers would be trumpeting splashy stories about him every day.   There would be no time or efforts put towards national and international issues.  Oh ok, perhaps Trump would look up once in awhile and say something like "just bomb the hell out of 'em. Use nukes if you have to."  .....in between intense sessions with his phlanx of high paid lawyers trying to wade through a maze of 5,000 lawsuits (he's got over 4,000 currently, and the number is sure to rise).

 

what utter trash you post... try being even slightly objective?  

[Strange]

1 minute ago, LannaGuy said:

 

what utter trash you post... try being even slightly objective?  

 

They are not. 

 

Because we were paying attention to Bill committing adultery and getting caught, we are now at fault for 911... "Probably" 

 

Unbelievable. 

[Strange]

1 hour ago, amykat said:

 

Okay Strange this is a perfect example of why people stay ignorant.  Slut-shaming describes a complex concept of many behaviors that you would be wise to learn about.  Instead you dismiss it as nonsense.  Many MEN of an older generation called you out on it today and described it for you and used that term for your behavior.  It is the same as if we had a black man posting today and you kept calling him "boy" and telling him that his opinions were worth less than the rest of ours because he was black, that he doesn't deserve to be able to vote, and then we came on here and told you about racism.  And you tell us that racism is bullshit made up by liberals and civil rights leaders and blah, blah ...repeat the rest of your post here.

 

I don't care what anyone else says. Man or woman. Nothing you are saying have any relevance to the pornstar claiming trump tried to kiss her. 

 

Now you are doing what everyone likes to do, and bring in Civil Rights, racism, blah blah. 

 

Im out. You win. 

[amykat]

Well that is nice of you to say ...but I will feel like I won if you actually learn something/change your attitude ...I have some time though.

 

[boomerangutang]

Perhaps more than any other person, Trump suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder;

 

 

[Jingthing]

Perhaps more than any other person, Trump suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder;
 
 

Not sure of the exact diagnosis but everyone can see he's a mental case.

[amykat]

1 hour ago, LannaGuy said:

 

yea he's a biased Democrat and arrogant with it

 

You just heard 5 minutes of an argument/opinion from a man known for his intellect and insight in politics and public policy about a subject for which you care deeply?

 

And this is all you have to say??   Because this is all Trump supporters can say these days ...just dismiss everything as bias and bullshit because you really have no arguments. 

[Opl]

The 281 people, places and things Donald Trump has Insulted on Twitter since last june: A complete list

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-trump-twitter-insults.html

 

 

Edited October 24, 2016 by Opl

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

9 hours ago, Strange said:

 

Personally don't give a shit what you believe my morals should be. 

 

I mean what? Nowadays are we supposed to get a waiver or consent form before making a move on a woman that we believe or feel wants it? What if we make a mistake and misjudge a situation and kiss a woman? Will it be "OMG SEXUAL ASSAULT!!!" ? Geez... 

 

No one is slut shaming so get over it. She can do what she wants. But yeah, personally, when she says "Trump kissed me without permission" and has everything to gain and it helps her "Wiki Page" and "Brand" and same as her feminist lawyer who is clearly using it as a propaganda machine, yeah call me a skeptic. 

 

For your benefit, I provide the link to 'Do's and Don't's for guys When Asking a Girl Out' http://www.albionpleiad.com/2014/01/dos-and-donts-for-guys-when-asking-a-girl-out-ce-edits/

 

If you read the article, you will notice that nowhere does it advise the budding suitor to grab the girl's vagina. It may seem obvious to some but clearly there are people around who need such reminders. I guess some forget that in other parts of the world, girls tend not to come with numbers on them for ease of selection.

 

In the same vein, it should be said that assuming that you can inappropriately kiss or touch a sex worker just because that person is a sex worker is also not allowed and is, in fact, assault. A person working as a sex worker does not give up control over their own dignity despite what their customers or viewers may think.

 

Whether skepticism is warranted in this case may be revealed as a result of the inevitable legal processes. Skepticism is healthy. Egotistical male chauvinism is not.

 

On the subject of morality, it is pointless discussing this further until you get what the issue is about. It is not up to me or anyone else to determine morality. Please read Aristotle on Ethics.

[Strange]

56 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

For your benefit, I provide the link to 'Do's and Don't's for guys When Asking a Girl Out' http://www.albionpleiad.com/2014/01/dos-and-donts-for-guys-when-asking-a-girl-out-ce-edits/

 

If you read the article, you will notice that nowhere does it advise the budding suitor to grab the girl's vagina. It may seem obvious to some but clearly there are people around who need such reminders. I guess some forget that in other parts of the world, girls tend not to come with numbers on them for ease of selection.

 

In the same vein, it should be said that assuming that you can inappropriately kiss or touch a sex worker just because that person is a sex worker is also not allowed and is, in fact, assault. A person working as a sex worker does not give up control over their own dignity despite what their customers or viewers may think.

 

Whether skepticism is warranted in this case may be revealed as a result of the inevitable legal processes. Skepticism is healthy. Egotistical male chauvinism is not.

 

On the subject of morality, it is pointless discussing this further until you get what the issue is about. It is not up to me or anyone else to determine morality. Please read Aristotle on Ethics.

 

 

I don't need your dumb do's & dont's guide. 

 

Never did I say inappropriately kiss or touch anyone regardless of what their chosen "profession" may be. So silly that you are incapable of realizing this. 

 

You are right, this is pointless. 

 

Welcome to my ignore list. 

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

28 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

 

I don't need your dumb do's & dont's guide. 

 

Never did I say inappropriately kiss or touch anyone regardless of what their chosen "profession" may be. So silly that you are incapable of realizing this. 

 

You are right, this is pointless. 

 

Welcome to my ignore list. 

 

I will take your concession in the spirit in which it is intended.

[Xircal]

On 10/23/2016 at 5:44 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

He's obviously warning any more thinking of falsely accusing him not to do so.

 

The GOP can't stop any qualified person from standing as a candidate, and he won the primaries. End of story.

 

Clinton is on record as threatening to use the nuclear option, so she isn't any safer. She hates Putin and Trump doesn't, plus she wants to set up no fly zones and that could cause WW3 if the US shot down a Russian plane.

 

He's still a nutter. Richard Branson described him as having a vindictive streak when Trump said he would spend the rest of his life destroying five people who didn't help him when he was faced with bankruptcy once: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-branson-warns-donald-trump-presidency-us-election-recalls-bizarre-encounter-businessmen-a7374996.html

 

That kind of demeanor is inappropriate for a candidate running for the country's highest office.

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Thakkar said:

12 hours ago, Chicog said:

10 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

10 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, I did read that back in 2012, Clinton did threaten to use the nuclear option on Iran if it launched a nuclear attack against Israel.

Well, I did read that back in 2012, Clinton did threaten to use the nuclear option on Iran if it launched a nuclear attack against Israel.

 

 

 

No answer?

So we can assume that was a fabrication then.

So you're saying it's no big deal.

Coincidentally,  that's what goes through the ladies' minds after Trump drops his pants!

 

<rim shot>

 

WOW, TV software is having a bad day.

I'm trying to quote ilostmypassword

 

Anyway, you did Chicog's research for him, and yes she did threaten to use nukes.

Edited October 24, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

37 minutes ago, Xircal said:

 

 

 

That kind of demeanor is inappropriate for a candidate running for the country's highest office.

quote edited for brevity.

 

Given that Bush apparently had the right sort of demeanor to be elected twice, even though he was responsible for the destruction of the middle East and the death of thousands, I'd prefer someone without the right sort of demeanor.

[ilostmypassword]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

quote edited for brevity.

 

Given that Bush apparently had the right sort of demeanor to be elected twice, even though he was responsible for the destruction of the middle East and the death of thousands, I'd prefer someone without the right sort of demeanor.

If A then B

Therefore if Not A then Not B.

Really?

 

[boomerangutang]

10 hours ago, Opl said:

The 281 people, places and things Donald Trump has Insulted on Twitter since last june: A complete list

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-trump-twitter-insults.html

 

Opl, thanks for posting that link.  We've all known what a crying baby Trump is, but to see it delineated in that list is amazing.  If there was a Nobel Prize for Belittling, Trump would win it.   He pretends he would be a "jobs president" but the way he trashes thousands of people and entities, he would create mass unemployment.  He would force the closure of nearly every major news outlet (print and media) through executive mandate or crippling lawsuits.  .....and that's just a tiny fraction of how dangerous he would be for America.

[boomerangutang]

14 hours ago, Strange said:

 

Well, I like porn, I like pornstars too. I have no issue with porn, with prostitution, with anyone or their preferences. Where I have a problem is a hooker or pornstar that portrays themselves as a "Working class business woman".... Like hell. Born pretty and screws for money. Spade is a spade no matter how much it hurts. There is no "evil" involved, but a hooker or pornstar that wants to preach about morality is a damn joke. This is my issue. 

Im not judgmental at first, but once a certain personality is revealed I'm out. Thats it. Game over.  

 

You're wrong on every point.  The woman who was propositioned by Trump is not preaching about morality.  It's plain that some people look down their noses at people who work in the porn industry.  Is just the pretty young women performers who deserve your spite, or how about the male performers, or the camera people, or the executives/promoters/distributors?  Some people work in slaughter houses.  Some people work for Monsanto, making poisons which harm others (whole communities sited alongside banana plantations in Latin America are barren, for example).  

 

Trump is a despicable person, for many more reasons than threatening to sue people he's sexually assaulted. I am soooooo relieved he's going to lose in 2 weeks.  I just wish he would dry up and blow away, instead of continuing to try to hog the headlines, after he loses, with all his ugly shit.   He can't help it.  It's the nature of a stink bomb to emit stink.

 

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Not sure of the exact diagnosis but everyone can see he's a mental case.

Some mentally deranged people just sit in corners of rooms, or dark places in alleys, not actively disturbing people.  Trump is different.  He takes his mental derangement and broadcasts it scatologically - to anger, embarrass, and endanger as many people as possible.

[attrayant]

American Bar Association report on Trump's litigation history finds he's a "Libel Bully".

 

 

*Rim shot*

 

Edited October 25, 2016 by attrayant
typo

[ilostmypassword]

On 10/24/2016 at 6:45 PM, Strange said:

 

Well, I like porn, I like pornstars too. I have no issue with porn, with prostitution, with anyone or their preferences. Where I have a problem is a hooker or pornstar that portrays themselves as a "Working class business woman".... Like hell. Born pretty and screws for money. Spade is a spade no matter how much it hurts. There is no "evil" involved, but a hooker or pornstar that wants to preach about morality is a damn joke. This is my issue. 

 

Im not judgmental at first, but once a certain personality is revealed I'm out. Thats it. Game over.  

So, let me get this straight. The activity is not evil but it disqualifies a prostitute from being moral?