News:

To the "allies," if you aren't complicit in my crimes then you are complicit in theirs.

Main Menu

The Porn Princess Rant, Re-Written

Started by The Good Reverend Roger, September 17, 2012, 04:15:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on September 25, 2012, 03:21:16 AM
I'm sort of stunned that someone is actually equating sex work (and yes, I include pornography in that; you're being payed, to have sex with someone, whether or not it is on camera is irrelevant) with translation services. It's pure idiocy.

It's the first world, come to tell you how rough things can be on a guy, you know? 
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Anna Mae Bollocks

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 21, 2012, 05:46:31 PM
Quote from: Pixie on September 21, 2012, 02:51:37 PM
Quote from: Luna on September 21, 2012, 01:45:01 PM
Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 21, 2012, 08:13:48 AM
They scare me.

If they scare NIGEL, that's my cue to not bother.

if Nigel goes to somewhere and says it is scary, or horribly squicky, I agree with Luna.. NOT GOING THERE!

Thanks guys.

It's the kind of place where the squick/creep/stalker factor is WAY WAY HIGHER than average. Regardless of what my profile actually said I was looking for, I got a lot lot lot of messages from men who seemed to think that they could verbally abuse/intimidate me into being sub, and a LOT of messages from men implying that they knew how to find me offsite. CREEP FACTOR RED ALERT. I think that kind of site just attracts the hell out of fucked up and/or abusive men who are looking for women they can intimidate and treat like objects. The women who are "owned" by another man on the site seem to be treated better, from what I gather, than single unattached women... which is a whole other level of squick factor.

Ew. Sounds like prison stories: "Big Moe won't let those guys get ya..."  :x
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

Anna Mae Bollocks

Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on September 25, 2012, 03:21:16 AM
I'm sort of stunned that someone is actually equating sex work (and yes, I include pornography in that; you're being payed, to have sex with someone, whether or not it is on camera is irrelevant) with translation services. It's pure idiocy.

Idiocy? This thread just took a hard right into Derpville.
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

Cain

It sure is a good thing everyone who has ever been in porn is also qualified to join the US military, where they would have a greater chance of being raped than being killed by enemy fire in a certain combat operation zone..

Dildo Argentino

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on September 24, 2012, 11:03:15 PM
Rule no1: human beings have an utterly retarded attitude toward fucking. It's ingrained, probably hardwired into our DNA by now, from millenia of being retarded about fucking and passing the whole retarded thing onto their progeny.

I disagree. While I can see how sex can be a difficult area to handle for any critter with self-awareness and structured, detailed memory of previous history, on the whole it seems that many cultures have handled it well. The current dominant culture (the western one, or the global-technological one, I don't mind what we call it) seems to have a particularly bad time handling it, on the whole. But hardwired into DNA? I don't think so.

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on September 24, 2012, 11:03:15 PM
Rule no2: (similar to Godwins law) As a conversation (on the interwebs or IRL) about fucking continues, the probability of it becoming retarded approaches 1

I agree that this is the rule, but only in the sense of a heuristic. I have seen a handful of counterexamples.

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on September 24, 2012, 11:03:15 PM
The retarded attitude is why the sex industry, any attempt at a sex industry is all full of abuse and shit and venom and shredded lives. Any argument about how this shouldn't be the case is pretty much moot. Give it up.

I'll have to, and soon, by the looks of it. But for now, I think you are right again, but I see the situation as less hopeless than you do (gross, largely totally deranged and shitful and venomous, let me repeat that again: but what has been called "unicorn cases" here seem more like a significant - and, thanks to the interwebs, growing - minority to my mind, though I take the point that the gross majority has also been growing explosively).

Quote from: Ayotollah of Assehollah on September 24, 2012, 11:08:08 PM
Quote from: VERBL on September 24, 2012, 08:16:22 PM
I dunno. Whenever I think about all of the awful, abusive things I've seen almost every fucking time I looked for porn I can enjoy, and the sheer ration of awful-to-nice that I've experienced on every single site, I can definitely say I don't think musicians and other non-sexual performers have it nearly as bad. Absolutely fucking awful seems to be the norm in mainstream porn.

This is true. But, the central issue is that this may be a problem with human sexuality, and not porn.

This. Is. A. Large. Part. Of. What. I. Have. Been. Trying. To. Say. Also.

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 12:39:31 AM
Quote from: holist on September 24, 2012, 08:02:36 PM
Yes, but on the other hand it is not fundamentally different (in that way, I mean) to acting or dancing or the circus or making music (the performing arts) as forms of earning money: all of those, if they are any good, involve tremendous hormonal cascades in the performer as well.

Yes, it is. Please do some research on this so that you can understand how laughable your claim that performing arts trigger the same endocrine reaction as sex. They share some of the same endocrine reactions (and so does pooping, FFS), but they are not the same.

Nigel, please, how does "not fundamentally different" get twisted into "the same endocrine reactions"???

Of course it is different, but it is similar in the sense that performing art (done well) is putting yourself on the line, risking everything, tight-rope walking without a safety net, something very intimate and direct. The entire gamut of human emotion can be and I suppose should be involved. I think that interpreting a claim that "there are some similarities between the performing arts and sex-work" or "between work done purely for money" as saying that a Ukranian sex-slave in a London brothel has it better than a freelance translator in Hungary is not fair. It was not what I was saying.

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 12:59:20 AM
Prostitution has a definition. Here it is:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prostitution

QuoteDefinition of PROSTITUTION
1
: the act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money
2
: the state of being prostituted : debasement

Prostitution has several definitions. Here's another one (from here: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prostitute):

prostitute
1. One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts.
2. One who sells one's abilities, talent, or name for an unworthy purpose.

Now I realise that those two things are different, I have stated what I think the differences are. But I don't think it's an accident that those two meanings share the same word.

Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on September 25, 2012, 03:21:16 AM
I'm sort of stunned that someone is actually equating sex work (and yes, I include pornography in that; you're being payed, to have sex with someone, whether or not it is on camera is irrelevant) with translation services. It's pure idiocy.

Not equating at all. Noting similarities. Sorry.









Not too keen on rigor, myself - reminds me of mortis

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: holist on September 25, 2012, 06:43:51 AM
Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 12:39:31 AM
Quote from: holist on September 24, 2012, 08:02:36 PM
Yes, but on the other hand it is not fundamentally different (in that way, I mean) to acting or dancing or the circus or making music (the performing arts) as forms of earning money: all of those, if they are any good, involve tremendous hormonal cascades in the performer as well.

Yes, it is. Please do some research on this so that you can understand how laughable your claim that performing arts trigger the same endocrine reaction as sex. They share some of the same endocrine reactions (and so does pooping, FFS), but they are not the same.

Nigel, please, how does "not fundamentally different" get twisted into "the same endocrine reactions"???

Of course it is different, but it is similar in the sense that performing art (done well) is putting yourself on the line, risking everything, tight-rope walking without a safety net, something very intimate and direct. The entire gamut of human emotion can be and I suppose should be involved. I think that interpreting a claim that "there are some similarities between the performing arts and sex-work" or "between work done purely for money" as saying that a Ukranian sex-slave in a London brothel has it better than a freelance translator in Hungary is not fair. It was not what I was saying.

Holist, because you said "hormonal cascade" which is the same thing as "endocrine reaction". Maybe if that's not what you meant, you shouldn't have said it.

Quote

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 12:59:20 AM
Prostitution has a definition. Here it is:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prostitution

QuoteDefinition of PROSTITUTION
1
: the act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money
2
: the state of being prostituted : debasement

Prostitution has several definitions. Here's another one (from here: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prostitute):

prostitute
1. One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts.
2. One who sells one's abilities, talent, or name for an unworthy purpose.

Now I realise that those two things are different, I have stated what I think the differences are. But I don't think it's an accident that those two meanings share the same word.

For a moment disregarding the difference in credibility between the source of the definition I quoted and the source of the definition you quoted, perhaps you are familiar with the difference between "literal" and "figurative" speech.

Quote

Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on September 25, 2012, 03:21:16 AM
I'm sort of stunned that someone is actually equating sex work (and yes, I include pornography in that; you're being payed, to have sex with someone, whether or not it is on camera is irrelevant) with translation services. It's pure idiocy.

Not equating at all. Noting similarities. Sorry.

This seems like a good time to mention "false equivalency" again.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Dildo Argentino

#276
Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 07:36:57 AM
Holist, because you said "hormonal cascade" which is the same thing as "endocrine reaction". Maybe if that's not what you meant, you shouldn't have said it.

But endocrine reactions are varied? With a number of hormones and much of the brain involved in emotional experience and regulation? The similarity is that performing arts also go deep, and having that "'deep" exploited (it routinely is in the movie and music industries, though of course not with the same terrifying frequency and not to the same extent as it is in the sex industry) is evil.

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 07:36:57 AM
For a moment disregarding the difference in credibility between the source of the definition I quoted and the source of the definition you quoted, perhaps you are familiar with the difference between "literal" and "figurative" speech.

I think the figurative meaning is very likely to be there in several more reputable dictionaries as well. And yes, I am aware of the literal/figurative distinction, but there is a reason a particular figurative meaning gets attached to a certain literal one. In this instance, I think it is the "selling one's time and abilities for an unworthy cause" that allows the transition to be made. It is equally applicable to both things. And, I think, while by no means all of it, it is a significant, large part of the problem with the sex industry - and hence not sex-specific.

Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on September 25, 2012, 03:21:16 AM
I'm sort of stunned that someone is actually equating sex work (and yes, I include pornography in that; you're being payed, to have sex with someone, whether or not it is on camera is irrelevant) with translation services. It's pure idiocy.

To which I said:
Not equating at all. Noting similarities. Sorry.

And Nigel responded:
This seems like a good time to mention "false equivalency" again.

To which I say:

Again, I am not claiming equivalence at all. I am claiming that the similarities (between wage-slavery of any sort and wage-slavery in the sex industry) should not be overlooked, because they are important (while the differences are also important, but have already been discussed a great deal).
Not too keen on rigor, myself - reminds me of mortis

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 12:59:20 AM
Quote from: holist on September 24, 2012, 10:23:44 PM
Quote from: Luna on September 24, 2012, 10:18:05 PM
You do realize that every time you refer to your job as "prostitution" or "FLP," your credibility circles the bowl another time, right?

No. Does it? I mean, I described the similarities I see, I also made it very clear that I don't see them as identical, far from it... so why? The essence of prostitution, for me (and I am very willing to use a different word for this, only I haven't found one) is doing something purely because someone will pay for it. Not because I enjoy it, not because it interests me, not because I think I may learn from it, not because I am doing it as a favour for someone else... purely, and simply, because someone will give me money for it and I need money to survive.

What would you call that?

There are similarities between every job, but that doesn't justify playing fast and loose with the definition of "prostitution". That's sort of up there with playing fast and loose with the definition of "rape", which is another thing that people seem to like to do.

Jobs that are not prostitution may be exploitative. That does not make them "prostitution". They may be degrading. That does not make them "prostitution". Arguing that the fact that something has things in common with something else actually makes it a subset of the other thing is fallacious thinking; it's false equivalency. It's like saying that since washing dishes involves getting wet, and ocean biology involves getting wet, washing dishes is a type of ocean biology.

Prostitution has a definition. Here it is:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prostitution

QuoteDefinition of PROSTITUTION
1
: the act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money
2
: the state of being prostituted : debasement

Holist, did you read this post?
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Dildo Argentino

Quote from: A Very Hairy Monkey In An Ill-Fitting Tunic on September 25, 2012, 08:18:56 AM
Holist, did you read this post?

Yes, I did, several times. I'm not clear on what you think I am not getting. My point is not that the similarities make non-sex wage slavery into "prostitution" in the literal sense. My point is that there is a wider meaning of prostitution (what you call the figurative meaning). That is certainly applicable to sex work (though it definitely does not tell the whole story, let me repeat that again), and it is also applicable to a great deal of other work (though by no means all, which is why Luna's suggestion of "job" or "work" as a name for doing something purely because someone will pay for it doesn't work for me). And I am saying that it would be worth figuring out how and to what extent that state of affairs (people doing something purely and exclusively because someone will pay them for it) is responsible for the icky feelings I actually share about the sex-industry. I'm sure it is not the entire explanation. I am also sure that it does figure in the explanation.
Not too keen on rigor, myself - reminds me of mortis

Verbal Mike

Quote from: holist on September 25, 2012, 06:43:51 AM
Quote from: Ayotollah of Assehollah on September 24, 2012, 11:08:08 PM
Quote from: VERBL on September 24, 2012, 08:16:22 PM
I dunno. Whenever I think about all of the awful, abusive things I've seen almost every fucking time I looked for porn I can enjoy, and the sheer ration of awful-to-nice that I've experienced on every single site, I can definitely say I don't think musicians and other non-sexual performers have it nearly as bad. Absolutely fucking awful seems to be the norm in mainstream porn.

This is true. But, the central issue is that this may be a problem with human sexuality, and not porn.

This. Is. A. Large. Part. Of. What. I. Have. Been. Trying. To. Say. Also.
Yeah, okay. Obviously, porn wouldn't be so fucked up if the demand for fucked-up porn weren't there. OBVIOUSLY.
But what I've been concerned with, and what the thread as a whole seems concerned with, is first and foremost the factual reality of people making porn, i.e. how porn impacts people involved in making it. This then raises ethical questions on the one hand, but also raises questions of causation on the other hand, something that hasn't been the focus of this thread and doesn't seem as urgent a topic. IMHO, it matters a whole lot more that porn abuses the people that make it, than why, and the latter topic shouldn't obscure the former.

What I see you arguing, on the whole, is that actually, porn isn't that different than other industries, except that we're all caught up about sex so we notice the abuse in porn more. I'm pretty sure you're factually wrong on both counts (the abuse itself and the perception here.)
(I know you've stated you see that porn is worse, but I see you arguing otherwise at the same time. Being inconsistent is not the end of the world, I'm just explaining why I'm still on about this.)
Unless stated otherwise, feel free to copy or reproduce any text I post anywhere and any way you like. I will never throw a hissy-fit over it, promise.

Dildo Argentino

#280
Quote from: VERBL on September 25, 2012, 08:54:33 AM
What I see you arguing, on the whole, is that actually, porn isn't that different than other industries, except that we're all caught up about sex so we notice the abuse in porn more. I'm pretty sure you're factually wrong on both counts (the abuse itself and the perception here.)
(I know you've stated you see that porn is worse, but I see you arguing otherwise at the same time. Being inconsistent is not the end of the world, I'm just explaining why I'm still on about this.)

I feel that I am being wilfully misinterpreted. I'm not wrong on those counts because I am not making those claims, despite the fact that you see me as making them. At this point I can only reiterate. When I say this:

"My point is not that the similarities make non-sex wage slavery into "prostitution" in the literal sense. My point is that there is a wider meaning of prostitution (what you call the figurative meaning). That is certainly applicable to sex work (though it definitely does not tell the whole story, let me repeat that again), and it is also applicable to a great deal of other work (though by no means all, which is why Luna's suggestion of "job" or "work" as a name for doing something purely because someone will pay for it doesn't work for me). And I am saying that it would be worth figuring out how and to what extent that state of affairs (people doing something purely and exclusively because someone will pay them for it) is responsible for the icky feelings I actually share about the sex-industry. I'm sure it is not the entire explanation. I am also sure that it does figure in the explanation."

I mean it. Without a hidden agenda, without belittling the terrible plight of poor young women being caught up in the worse part (and yes, probably definitely the majority part) of the sex industry. Without secretly thinking that they deserve it. And I object to being cast in that light.
Not too keen on rigor, myself - reminds me of mortis

Verbal Mike

Okay, I guess I just don't see the sense of redefining "prostitution" to cover essentially what is covered by "wage labor", since some highly impressive minds have already done a pretty good job of illustrating how awful the latter is (at least as far back as Marx), all while the former adds on a couple special layers of awful that should be differentiated from the normal kind of awful.

And I'd wager that in any culture on earth, there's a basic difference between sex and other stuff, which you can notice with the next thought experiment: would you feel very weird about doing X for a friend in need, assuming you have the time and energy to do it and neither dearly love nor strongly dislike said friend? Substitute X with sex to their liking on the one hand, or any other activity (translation, writing, lifting furniture, etc.)  on the other.
While cultural hang-ups regarding sex probably make the difference bigger than it has to be, I'm willing to bet there's a difference, universally, in every human culture that ever existed.

Gotta go now, catch ya later.
Unless stated otherwise, feel free to copy or reproduce any text I post anywhere and any way you like. I will never throw a hissy-fit over it, promise.

Ayotollah of Ass

Quote from: Fidel Castro on September 25, 2012, 02:11:01 AM
Quote from: Ayotollah of Assehollah on September 24, 2012, 11:59:18 PM
Quote from: Fidel Castro on September 24, 2012, 11:38:45 PM
Quote from: Ayotollah of Assehollah on September 24, 2012, 11:08:08 PM
It's a choice. There may be a whole host of reasons to make it, but this notion that people have no other options is a bullshit copout.
I am interested to know what expertise you are speaking from.

Are you seriously suggesting that people have no other option than porn? Really? U.S. military? Temp work? Minimum wage employment of choice, e.g., grocery stores, fast food, etc.? Since we're going to be cute, let me add in being homeless and going to prison. Porn may be people's best option, given their preferences, but it ain't the only one.

Sorry, I was talking about prostitution. There are two conversations going on, it seems.

Yes, and the fact that people are choosing to explore, in-depth, whether there aren't relevant differences between translation services and porn (there are, obviously) rather than laying out a clear and concise argument about what qualities make porn exploitative to the point that there is moral obligation on the part of the consumer/viewer to not support it, speaks volumes.

Quote from: Cain on September 25, 2012, 06:32:36 AM
It sure is a good thing everyone who has ever been in porn is also qualified to join the US military, where they would have a greater chance of being raped than being killed by enemy fire in a certain combat operation zone..

I wouldn't have thought to do this, but since herpy-derpy comparisons and broad sweeping generalities are the order of the day, how does porn rank in exploitation relative to the other employment options for the "typical" person in porn? Let's leave aside the fact of people choosing porn for themselves and pretend that we are in charge of their lives for a moment (since we are assuming that in many of the arguments in this thread, why not continue the trend here, right?).

Is porn less exploitative than the U.S. military? Perhaps of the 300,000 women that have served in combat since 2001, the 150+ women that have died, the 700+ wounded, the untold numbers sexually assaulted, and those that have their sexuality warped by being in environments where men outnumbered them 10 to 1 would have had a better life in porn. Maybe we should be advocating for better porn conditions and perhaps even for better porn recruitment?

Even though this argument is patently absurd for a number of reasons, it brings up an important question about how porn stacks up, exploitation-wise, relative to other common options. Presumably, people working in porn know that there are dish-washing jobs, dependency situations where you can get taken out or help paying bills in exchange for sex, etc. and they chose porn. What do they do, if we imagine your porn is limited to X Discordian approved levels of exploitation, when these jobs don't exist? Dish-washing? If so, why don't they choose dish-washing now? Could it be they see porn as a better option? And when we think about that for a moment, doesn't a seem that a lot of this discussion is basically a soft form of paternalism. Hey kid, you're not smart enough to know what's best for you. Let *me* do your thinking for you. Are you folks comfortable with that?

P3nT4gR4m

Quote from: Ayotollah of Assehollah on September 25, 2012, 11:17:23 AM
Presumably, people working in porn know that there are dish-washing jobs, dependency situations where you can get taken out or help paying bills in exchange for sex, etc. and they chose porn. What do they do, if we imagine your porn is limited to X Discordian approved levels of exploitation, when these jobs don't exist? Dish-washing? If so, why don't they choose dish-washing now? Could it be they see porn as a better option? And when we think about that for a moment, doesn't a seem that a lot of this discussion is basically a soft form of paternalism. Hey kid, you're not smart enough to know what's best for you. Let *me* do your thinking for you. Are you folks comfortable with that?

Sex, even sex between two married, heterosexuals, is fucked up and perverted and evil and badwrong. Porn and/or prostitution is the ultimate expression of this kind of wrongness. It's like badwrong2

It stands to reason that only fucked up, perverted, evil and badwrong people will seek work in this industry of vice and horror. People like that don't wash dishes for a living. People like that eat children and take drugs.

I'm up to my arse in Brexit Numpties, but I want more.  Target-rich environments are the new sexy.
Not actually a meat product.
Ass-Kicking & Foot-Stomping Ancient Master of SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK
Awful and Bent Behemothic Results of Last Night's Painful Squat.
High Altitude Haggis-Filled Sex Bucket From Beyond Time and Space.
Internet Monkey Person of Filthy and Immoral Pygmy-Porn Wart Contagion
Octomom Auxillary Heat Exchanger Repairman
walking the fine line line between genius and batshit fucking crazy

"computation is a pattern in the spacetime arrangement of particles, and it's not the particles but the pattern that really matters! Matter doesn't matter." -- Max Tegmark

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: holist on September 25, 2012, 09:20:17 AM
Quote from: VERBL on September 25, 2012, 08:54:33 AM
What I see you arguing, on the whole, is that actually, porn isn't that different than other industries, except that we're all caught up about sex so we notice the abuse in porn more. I'm pretty sure you're factually wrong on both counts (the abuse itself and the perception here.)
(I know you've stated you see that porn is worse, but I see you arguing otherwise at the same time. Being inconsistent is not the end of the world, I'm just explaining why I'm still on about this.)

I feel that I am being wilfully misinterpreted. I'm not wrong on those counts because I am not making those claims, despite the fact that you see me as making them. At this point I can only reiterate. When I say this:

"My point is not that the similarities make non-sex wage slavery into "prostitution" in the literal sense. My point is that there is a wider meaning of prostitution (what you call the figurative meaning). That is certainly applicable to sex work (though it definitely does not tell the whole story, let me repeat that again), and it is also applicable to a great deal of other work (though by no means all, which is why Luna's suggestion of "job" or "work" as a name for doing something purely because someone will pay for it doesn't work for me). And I am saying that it would be worth figuring out how and to what extent that state of affairs (people doing something purely and exclusively because someone will pay them for it) is responsible for the icky feelings I actually share about the sex-industry. I'm sure it is not the entire explanation. I am also sure that it does figure in the explanation."

I mean it. Without a hidden agenda, without belittling the terrible plight of poor young women being caught up in the worse part (and yes, probably definitely the majority part) of the sex industry. Without secretly thinking that they deserve it. And I object to being cast in that light.
Babboonery, ITT.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.