Antiporn ministry NCOSE just came out against CA #SB357, a groundbreaking bill that repeals a vicious and racially discriminatory 'anti-loitering' law — long been used to harass women and trans people of color, regardless of if they're selling sex. endsexualexploitation.org/articles/ca-mu…
It's essentially property protection law. It allows police to arrest you for looking a certain way or in a certain place. It's a way for them to arrest you even if you haven't actually seen you breaking the law. A "walking while trans" law. eqca.org/sb357-senate-p…
NCOSE's rational? It's good to arrest people of color and trans people for being outside because white men are trying to exploit them!
To justify this "support" of sex workers and people of color, who does NCOSE turn to? Oh, LAPD Vice! Turns out that it's difficult to 'save' sex workers unless you arrest them first! #SB357 would make that too difficult!
This is in direct opposition to NCOSE's alleged support of the (flawed) Nordic/Equality model, which theoretically focuses prosecution on buyers NOT sellers. But #SB357 is a bill that takes away penalties for selling!
NCOSE gives away the game. It's always been a lie.
NCOSE: We promise we're not targeting sex workers!
Also NCOSE: We hate to harass sex workers, and give them criminal records that impact future employment, but it turns out we have to! How else are we going to get to those evil pimps and traffickers!
#SB357 is scheduled for a vote tomorrow. It has been campaigned for by sex workers, trans people and communities of color. But the day before, NCOSE swoops in and tries to kill it. Disgusting. leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billText…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I know a lot of you feel hopeless right now, but I watching this unfold, I want to contextualize a few things about the battle ahead.
#1 Exodus Cry and NCOSE are scrambling: 95% of coverage about OnlyFans supports SWers. They didn't expect this, and now want to shift blame. 1/
They didn't expect so much of the coverage to paint them as bad guys, or to talk about their religious campaign, or how it's hurting sex workers. They're nervous. 2/
This is markedly different than the Pornhub coverage in the fall, which repeated the Kristof misinformation about widespread illegal content. This time, with a few notable exceptions, the voices of Exodus Cry and NCOSE are excluded from the conversation. 3/
Hey adult creators! Good news, the loss of OnlyFans is not — I repeat NOT — a tragedy. You can thank NCOSE's Public Policy Analyst @PansySWatson for saving you from your $130/month exploitation.
Last I checked, a pimp profited by taking away the earning of sex workers. If there’s a pimp lobby, it’s NCOSE doubling their revenue last year by campaigning to cut off sex worker income.
Except, there is no clear difference when it comes to masturbation, dildos, all sorts of sexually explicit content that doesn't involve another person.
Just spent my Saturday morning going through the suit against Mindgeek (what fun!)
Went through all 33 Jane Does, and in almost every account, Pornhub removed the revenge or CSAM content as soon as they were made aware. They didn't wait for verification, they took it down.
When they didn't remove It immediately, it was because the person didn't have a link, or there was a model release. In one case, they even took down a video after the person lied and said she was a minor at the time of filming.
This is in such stark contrast to the rest of the complaint, which — without citing any evidence — says that Pornhub absolutely ignores reports and actively uploads illegal content on its own.
But when they actually have to show their cards, it's a bluff.
Fox News is advocating for a new Hays Code, in which the only acceptable way to discuss of sexuality is to condemn it. Mere acknowledgement is now molestation. Positivity is propaganda.
Perhaps they'd like it to be illegal, like Putin's Russia.
Today Mindgeek invoked Section 230 protections in an Alabama @ncose lawsuit seeking to hold it liable for videos uploaded by third-parties onto its site. law360.com/articles/14011…
Here’s one without a login. The original complaint does not suggest any delay on the part of Mindgeek once they were informed of the content. Just that they should have known. A similar case was filed against Reddit. al.com/news/birmingha…
The question is not "Should this content have been allowed on the internet?" It absolutely shouldn't. It's whether or not Pornhub or Reddit or Facebook (in the TX case) should be held responsible for something a user posts on the site. According to the lawsuit ...