My initial, somewhat incoherent take: capitalism is increasingly leaving the white dude behind (and the prescription drug abuse/increased suicide rate has an effect on the collective self-image even if a dude isn’t materially affected himself by circumstance) in terms of neoliberal ideology marketing (“white guys are terrorizing women out of consumption of popular media, fighting inequality is seeing Ghostbusters 2016 twice or more”).

Findom changes this perceived degradation into something in his control and a way to support equality without the danger of any systemic upheaval. He just buys out the wishlist of Goddess_Whoever1990. Ideological uncertainty is replaced with a purpose (e.g., non-stop working and abstaining from all other things). Goddess worship replaces religion if you squint. Moreover, emphasis lies on the subject ‘earning’ a reward if he’s a good enough slave (sexual release linked to meritocracy). The lady controls most aspects of the interaction, but still distributes clips via various platforms if she wants to make a name (individual illusion of control, while the system is still in place). Findom is liberalism pur sang, it sells power and redemption as consumer products.

I checked your link, and the article blames online non-porn media, i.e. Kim Kardashian selfies, more than porn. Thanks for playing.

“Inasmuch as media is an ideological reflection of the social forces which produces it, media depicting sex work will promulgate liberal gender egalitarianism for exactly what it is—an ideology which allows for equality only to the extent that civil equality reifies an efficient trade in labor-power as a commodity, in the abstract.” “

What exactly is “egalitarian” about women dealing with even more sexual violence from men enacting the sociopathic shit that’s getting normalized in Internet porn?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/11549954/Teen-girls-Suicide-kills-more-young-women-than-anything.-Heres-why.html

It’s the anti-porn feminists who have repeatedly used “objectification” to mean reducing women in porn imagery to one-dimensional, less than fully human objects, whereas men, they argue, are depicted in the same imagery as three-dimensional fully human subjects. Using that operational definition, however, it is easy to show that men are equally or more objectified in porn in the same sense of being reduced. On first glance, it appeared you were adopting Dworkin’s take on objectification. Perhaps you could clarify if that is the case, or were you simply using a more benign, innocuous interpretation of objectification as a way of assigning roles to players in a fantasy scenario, the way one assigns subject and object to a sentence one is parsing.

You are wrong about Bernie Sanders. While he advocates measures right now that are similar to ones prevalent in social democracies, he has not abandoned his desire to go further and replace capitalism altogether. Whereas social democrats’ endgame is a more humane capitalism; democratic socialists don’t trust capitalism and want it replaced, but nonviolently and with free elections, for instance. Sanders volunteered on an Israeli kibbutz in the 1960s and supports worker-owned and worker-run enterprises. This is not an abstract concept for sex workers, as the Lusty Lady business provided a sterling example of how to do socialism right.

Sanders relentless class analysis – his accusations against Wall Street and the One Percent – makes him an Orthodox Marxist. That puts him firmly within the radical socialist tradition.

the fact that the parts of a man which are commonly visible in porn are the parts of one’s own body which are easily visible to one’s self indicates that the man in hetero porn is intended to represent the subject (i.e., be a surrogate for the viewers’ consumption for the woman’s sexual labor). that the man is not the object of erotic desire in hetero porn is also indicated by his receiving less payment for the role in the scene and that men will be the primary consumers of this video.

bernie sanders is a social democrat who supports a northern european style bourgeois liberal democracy (e.g., with a strengthened social safety net) and as such his ideas fall outside of radical socialist tradition and firmly within liberal tradition

“(Pornography) ushers in the subsequent triumph of the rational, commanding power of capital over labor—and its fetish of the commodity form.” So why are a plurality of its fans supporting Bernie Sanders, who, as a democratic socialist, wishes to abolish this power of capital over labor?