Eulogy for Substack

As the whoremongers circle

This is not a trigger warning, not at all, because they don’t work. However, it’s a decency warning. I use many sexual terms and discuss some pretty explicit themes in this piece. If that’s not to your taste, I understand, please do not read on.

This started as a Note.

I really just wanted to say “Substack is not a porn site, and indecent and explicit content shouldn’t be available here.”

This is a completely uncontroversial, widely held and standard view.

But having many years experience of the habits of mendacious men and their simpering sycophants, and having witnessed the flurry of fallacy ridden attacks by porn soaked gynophobes and the performatively ignorant which generally follow such simple, uncontentious statements, I am now in the habit of preemptively rebuffing disingenuous attacks.

This rather takes the wind out of their misogynistic sails, but has also turned a note into a post and a post into something resembling a treatise.

Oh well, we soldier on. Perhaps you’ll find it entertaining, nevertheless.

Happy New Year.

I’m still an opionated gobshite.

A Gathering of Gynophobes

Recently, I’ve seen a lot of noise in Notes about an increase in explicit content on Substack, accompanied by the usual itchy responses from slobbering, testerical simpletons and their dickpandering cheerleaders, seeking to minimise this grubby nosedive.

One woman dared to post a note pointing out that she’d rather not see scabrous schlongs in her timeline, and was confronted by a screeching cry bully shrieking about his right to be an exhibitionist who enjoys flashing his pitiful penis at unwilling females.

And that, my friends, is the sort of limp dicked squibshite you are chumming around with if you choose to defend porn on Substack.

And so, the problem with discussing this issue is the immediate testeria it will evoke in some men and their cockfawning handmaidens.

The mere suggestion that they could simply do without prostitutes on any part of the internet enrages the porn soaked addicts amongst us to the point of gibbering gynophobia.

Adults have a right to look for porn, on porn sites, which should be (and generally are not) highly regulated and carefully monitored.

I have indulged in watching porn, from time to time, though less and less as it became more and more difficult to find normal, healthy sexual encounters between two apparently consenting individuals who look as though they both might be enjoying themselves.

One click on most modern porn sites and suddenly you’re dodging and weaving a shit shower of heavily promoted grotesqueries.

Don’t believe me? I just typed in “Big Breasted woman having real sex enjoying herself with a man” and the first three TrafficHub options were “Young man with a 70 year old Grandmother giving him a blow job, Empty your balls on an AI cumslut, and Big fat pussy Stepmom having first time squirting and anal sex” - with videos and images attached, natch.

And still, there’s a mouthy contingent who push the pretence that not having access to drugged up women being assaulted by low life pondscum and all the freaks that an unnatural brain can devise on a 24/7 basis is somehow an attack on human rights, or equally laughably, free speech.

If you’re one of those who engages in the fantasy that free speech means everyone must have access to prostitutes and porn, you’re already aware that this is a lie.

If your modus operandi is to pretend that turning whoremongers away from particular sites is in any way censorship, you’re also lying. Porn is pushed relentlessly in so many spheres it’s in no danger of being suppressed and all privately run sites have the right to exercise and maintain their own boundaries.

And, if you’re a rational, intelligent thinker, you don’t of course consider pornography free speech because it often involves rape, paedophilia, exploitation, violence and degradation.

Furthermore, obscenity - such as flashing your tits or cock at the mall - is regulated by obscenity laws, whereas anyone in any country which allows free speech can say or type “I like tits and cocks” in any town square, on or offline, and face no criminal penalties

We’re not going to reinvent the wheel here. You know as well as I do that porn and prostitution are not free speech, and if the law of your land claims otherwise, the law is wrong. Reality never changes, though laws sometimes do. And none of us are in a court of law here, so stop pretending this is a legal debate.

In other words, if your plan is to derail by screeching about free speech, the question is already asked and answered, so move it along.

But all that aside - why do skeezy men and their jabbering jades become snivelling snowflakes at the mere notion that anyone online has the right to be free from prostitution/porn?

Well, three reasons. They’re entitled, they’re often misogynists - and most importantly they are, of course, addicts.

Addiction is as addiction does

Like any addict, porn addicts will do and claim anything to defend access to their drug, including the pretence that a relentless and widespread stream of wretched and tormented freaks being peddled, pushed and procured is a normal part of the human sexual experience.

While it’s certainly true that there have always been deviants - see Caligula - and porn - see the Kama Sutra - our relationship to both has changed fundamentally because of one simple thing. The internet.

The internet has warped several generations, is continuing to deform human discourse and relationships, and has demonstrably negatively affected the mental and sexual health of millions.

I’ve written about that more fully here:

So before even beginning to dicuss the substance of Substack, I instead feel obliged to clarify some facts and guard against ill intentioned porn ridden malcontents who blossom like herpes wherever a woman dares to say “No” to porn.

You Must be Fun at Parties

Why don’t I also save us some of the more tedious rejoinders I’ve seen women receive from petulant flesh-peddlers who find the notion of sites free from perversity so terrifying they rear up, spitting entitled invectives.

Let us, therefore, assume you’ve already attempted to shut me down with these well worn misogynistic tropes and I’ve already sent you off to blockdom with your ears ringing, shall we?

• Panderer: I’m fine with the site being chock full of purveyors of prostitution, and I’d far rather party with whoremongers than with you - Thank you for taking the time to share your wit and wisdom, vanquisher of normality, defender of whoredom, and feel free to leave quietly, as you have nothing of substance to add.

• Panderer: What a sad, empty life you must lead trying to police other people, you’re a repulsive, ancient, vanilla, dry twatted, saggy titted, prudish hag who hates sex and fun - What eloquence. I am utterly convinced by your testerical ad hominems that in no way indicate you are an unhinged and dangerous misogynist. Trot along now.

• Panderer: You’re just jealous. Ah, yes. Thank you for that well worn contribution. No woman anywhere has ever been disgusted by or refused to support any other woman’s repugnant choices without being in some way jealous of her. Clearly, I am simply envious of the daring deviant edgelords of the sex trade. As I am overwhelmed by your pith and substance, I’ll ask you to shove off now like a good screeching simpleton.

• And if none of that avails, you might try the “bigot/phobe/fascist/feminazi/insert slur maneouvre.

I’m sorry, sir, but I’m from the “witches they couldn’t burn” line.

Your wheedling imprecations have little effect on me.

Behold - I offer you a thesis

Yes, I’m banging on a bit aren’t I?

And so it is with regret that, before we reach the simple meat of the post, it’s necessary to have a wee chat about some words and phrases favoured by those whose chubby twitches when they fantasise about burning opinionated women at the stake.

Here are a few words and phrases oft issued in an attempt to distract, derail and muddy the waters, while demeaning normal people.

I’m bringing back normal

In fact, let’s start with “normal”.

There’s been a concerted effort by a mouthy minority to convince everyone that normal is just the setting on a wash cycle.

But, in fact, normal just means standard, typical, not unusual.

If you’re going to pretend you can’t recognise standard, typical and not unusual you may as well look for the exit now because I’ve little time for disingenous clackwankers.

The normal shall inherit the earth

It’s fine to be abnormal, in your own house, or where others have given explicit consent, and most of us have something abnormal tucked away in the attic (oh, dear, if you only knew).

It becomes a problem when people insist on trying to normalise their own particular abnormal fetish, desire or deviance and thrust it into the public square.

For example, normal people don’t flash their tits and arses, pudenda and cocks in public.

So, our first word is Normal - standard, typical, not unusual.

Words Cast Spells - that’s why it’s called spelling*

Normal - standard, typical, not unusual.

Sex Positive - What on earth do you mean, I hear you say? Surely everyone feels positive about consensual sex? Indeed, yes. The phrase Sex Positive, however, is used by fetishists and kink panderers quite deliberately.

You see, if they can position themselves as sex positive then any opposition to their fetishistic fantasies must be, by definition, sex negative.

Sex Positive is used by procurers, prostitutes, paedophiles and other deviants in an effort to silence, shame, berate, belittle and embarrass normal people and to advertise their proclivities to others like them, while trying to maintain a veneer of plausible deniability.

That sort of chicanery has positively the opposite effect on me.

Deviant

A deviant is a person whose behavior or beliefs differ significantly from societal norms. See - normal.

Poly

Whether polyamory, polycule or poly anything else, in sexual terms it simply means people who have rejected standard, normal sexual relationships and generally spend a fair amount of time trying to convince others that their lives are wonderful and everyone should try it. The purveyors of polydom cannot, or choose not to, maintain monogamous relationships and are always on the lookout for new initiates to the Temple of Swingers - a term they loathe because it conveys a certain grimy 1970s car keys in a bowl vibe from which they’d rather distance themselves.

The Church of Polyists are only irritating because they tend to bang on about it to people who simply aren’t interested their lifestyle choice.

It’s a rather banal and trite kink, not new, or particularly special, and as kinks go less damaging than some. But each generation of polyists imagines they’ve reinvented the wheel and expend much energy striving to normalise and spread the good word.

Poly whatevers are fine and few of us care - provided they don’t try to proselytise about it and just leave normal people in peace.

Vanilla

This is a term used by degenerates and fools with suicidal empathy in an attempt to shame normal people who have boundaries. If someone says you are “vanilla” they want you to believe that your healthy, normal sex life is in some way lesser to and duller than their own world of fetishes and fantasies. “Vanilla” is used as a tool of shaming and coercion to try to normalise and glorify abnormal behaviour, and it’s a handy red flag.

If someone calls you vanilla you know you can safely block them.

Judge - see also Judgement and Don’t Judge Me

I judge people all the time. So do you. It’s part of our human skill set, we use our judgement to protect ourselves. We learned long ago in our evolutionary journey to see the tail twitch, to hear the hiss and respond appropriately. Using judgement in dangerous situations is how our ancestors were able to pass down their DNA to us.

Only those intent on bad behaviour  are obsessed with not being judged. The demand to be non-judgemental is part of the grooming process. If they can get you to agree to not judge them and sell that as an ethical stance rather than a safeguarding issue, you’ll tolerate ever-escalating horrors from them for a longer time frame.

Judging does not include the necessity of gossiping about or harming others, except in self defence. But it absolutely comes with the right to walk away and distance yourself from those you find wanting.

That includes me, of course, if you find my brand of no nonsense rationality too upsetting and offensive, don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Do judge. It’s your right and your most basic protection.

Karen

A Karen is any woman, but preferably white and no longer young, who has opinions with which you disagree. The trend of using Karen as a slur is, happily. on the wane, but it was a gift for those who had been seeking for a new way to shout women down and was weaponised against those pesky women who dared to say No. Karen was a particular treat for far left men and their cheerleaders, who finally had a way to acceptably beat those fucking bitches into verbal submission, without losing any progressive brownie points.

Sex Worker - this is the term used by whoremongers, the porn-soaked and prostitutes in place of more accurate terms and has unfortunately also been embraced by some of the more exhibitionistic progressives from the luxury classes.

“In certain social circles, praising “sex workers” has become fashionable. How has prostitution — an outdated, slavery-like industry — been made to look so modern?…”

“Sex worker” is not a neutral term and was invented by those who wish to vigorously jam the highly monetised and profitable sex industry down all our gullets. It’s an attempt to neutralise and normalise the concept of renting out orifices and body parts into which to deposit semen and other bodily fluids.

Prostitution is not, of course, a job - and thank goodness for that.

See addendum for further details.

And so, with some of the more relevant definitions out of the way, let’s crack on.

Invitations to the Party

Recently, I’ve seen a lot of noise in Notes about an increase in explicit content on Substack, along with rather itchy replies from several men and a couple of dickpandering cheerleaders trying desperately to minimise and normalise this grubby nosedive.

We have the entire remainder of the internet for exhibitionistic flashers and pitiful pornographers, and I’m not remotely interested in seeing any of that here.

That’s why, as soon as I caught my first glimpse of a sordid Substack saddo, I immediately blocked and then filtered explicit content.

For the most part, this works. My timeline is, as it should be, filled with writers and readers.

Unfortunately, I still see the Notes from others bewailing the fact that venal vermin are stalking these halls, and that’s led me down a few unfortunate rabbit holes.

If I want to see tits, arses and cocks I'll search for that directly via whatever server I’m using, and likely incognito to avoid too much algorithm overload.

As I stated earlier, adults have a right to search out adult entertainment on adult entertainment sites.

But porn doesn’t belong on Substack. And Substack is not (yet) a porn site.

As with any behaviour in which adults publicly engage, what we post publicly on a site like Substack must be something that everyone can agree to, and nothing that could get you arrested at the local pub.

Who says so? I do. And so does normality.

I would never, even in my occasionally wild youth, have willingly visited any nightclub where people were shagging on the sticky carpet, or where men flashed their sad little wieners without being immediately expelled by a gigantic, knuckle dragging bouncer.

Guess what, I was having a ton of pretty amazing sex back then too.

• Prostitution and pornography for the most part do not reflect healthy, normal sex.

• Boundaries are normal. We don’t give blow jobs in a shopping mall.

• If you want a strip club, or a swingers bar, go to one.

• If you want a porn site, go to one.

• Substack is not (yet) a porn site.

And

Substack

Substack Writers

would do very well to remember that once upon a time Only Fans was actually a creators site too.

I can still recall some creators trying to push back on its increasingly slimy reputation. “It's not just a porn site” they wheedled and pleaded, until the noise of degenerate desperation drowned them out.

Perhaps Substack is quietly hoping to strike it rich with a pornographic payday. By turning a blind eye to the slow seep of degeneration currently downgrading user experience, they align better with the multitude of seedy sites already catering to grease and sleaze.

Perhaps their fondest dream is to become an OnlyFans clone.

That would be unfortunate, but ultimately it’s their choice if they want Substack to become just another grotty little porn site.

But if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas, and that might not matter to you, but it does to me.

Dickpanderers of the world unite - you have nothing to lose but your dignity and self respect

The reality is that whoremongers and their grubby acolytes will leech on to any audience they can. If the sad day comes that Substack becomes known for being a sleaze dump and the argument has to be made that Substack is not just a porn site, I'll already be gone.

If you allow prostitutes and pornographers to peddle their flesh here, eventually their wretched wares will engulf everything else. Past a certain point, any site which encourages prostitution is, in fact, a site for prostitutes.

A Eulogy for Substack

Porn changes everything about a site, and not for the better, unless you’re a flesh peddlar of course.

Because prostitutes and whoremongers are not the norm, when you invite them to your party they become the focus, and stick out like a - well, I’ll leave you to finish that sentence.

A policeman once told me that “grubs always find one another”. If you have 200 people at a party and only two are low life sleazebags, somehow they will sniff one another out and gravitate towards each other.

Invite whoremongers to your party and more whoremongers will quickly follow.

One broken website

As with the broken windows theory - which I have anecdotally found to be resoundingly true - inviting a couple of prostitutes and whoremongers into your midst means more will shortly follow.

Soon, rather than hosting a party with a couple of prostitutes with the majority trying to politely ignore them, the deviants will be partying hearty.

Never one for self awareness or consideration for others, whoremongers and their acolytes will demand more and more attention for their sleaze, and shortly you will look around and suddenly you’re the odd one out at a party for flesh peddlars.

I’ve known a few druggies and skanks in my time. I never met one who didn’t want everyone else to join them in the gutter.

Invite one prostitute, pornographer or whoremonger and you open the door to the rest.

And once they hit critical mass, you may as well write the eulogy for Substack.

Care Factor Zero

May I conclude by stating that I simply do not possess the vocabulary to elucidate effectively on the reality that my care and concern for the opinion of porn addled scabweasels and their performatively progressive fuckmuppet minions is effectively zero.

I understand that you, personally, may believe that encouraging the syphilitic seep of fetishistic exhibitionism to all corners of the internet is a worthy and noble cause.

I disagree.

And while we’re on the subject, if you’re going to pretend that you really believe that most drugged up hookers are in it for the larfs, and that the wretched sex trade (which sells a lot but rarely actual sex) actually helps anyone feel eMpOwErEd when they’re taking it up the arse to pay the electric bill, the planet you live on is not in my solar system and we’ve nothing more to say to one another on this subject.

See addendum.

Disgust is a fundamental to safety

Disgust is a fundamental human emotion with a crucial evolutionary purpose. The instinctive response of disgust helps us to avoid potential threats and dangerous environments.

Disgust and aversion are normal and natural, and groomers fear that natural response above all.

So yes, if you’re posting anything explicit to Substack, or trying to defend the practice, I will certainly avoid you, block you and I will indeed judge your STD ridden self.

Go fly your red flags somewhere else.

Lie Down with Dogs, Get up With Fleas

In short, Substack is not a porn site, nor should it aim to allow pornographers, purveyors and prostitutes to seep into the core of the site.

It seems the creators don’t care, which is unfortunate.

I hold out hope for the site, however, because at the moment Substack has a higher number of actual creatives and reasonably intelligent people than your average social media site. Perhaps they’ll do as I do, and keep blocking and ignoring the shitgibbons, and if the degenerates don’t gain enough traction, we’ll be fine.

This is my contribution to the issue, and there is really nothing more I can do.

I do not believe in disabling comments and allow relevant commentary on my pieces.

Note, I said relevant. I insist that people who wish to argue respond to the words I have used and the points I have raised - not those they would prefer that I had used, or have imagined for themselves.

I make no bones about Silencing the Shitlarks and never tolerate disingenous trolls of any stripe.

For some writers, allowing cymbal clashing clackwankers free reign is also simply about clicks and engagement. But not all engagement is useful or even marketable.

Pandering to trolls is at best irritating and pointless, and at worst harmful. By refusing to silence those throwing an ill behaved tantrum in your comment section, you do your readers and the site a disservice.

It’s your home and everyone else is your guest. Allowing your guests to whine, bicker, and spew disingenous abuse into the air is unacceptable. You owe it to your guests to be aware of the atmosphere and escort the drunken fool who just pissed on the carpet to the exit.

Complacently allowing trolls to flood your comment section drags you all into the gutter mind of the trollish and often decreases engagement, as many will stay silent for fear of being targeted by blustering bloviates.

It lowers the perceived value of your piece and makes the site a less enjoyable place to frequent.

It’s your duty to shut down trolls, once you realise they are trolling.

For more on this:

In short, don’t piss on my parade and tell me it’s raining. It’s my house, my rules and I don’t suffer fools gladly, or at all.

So, now that we’ve sorted all that out, on to the next quest.

How to persuade the Australian Government to let women carry pepper spray.

Oh, what a world. What a world.

***

*Attributed to Don Trey

***

Addendum:

As we all know, prostitution is not work. Sometimes you will hear that false claim made, however, and so here’s a quick Prostitution is not a job/work/profession 101:

Prostitution is not a job

The term sex worker relies on the lie that prostitution is a job.

But prostitution is not, of course, a job, fortunately for many of us.

Pro-prostitution arguments are occasionally made by a privileged minority of prostitutes, although of course, the majority of prostituted women are well aware of how horrifying prostitution is.

But let’s for a moment ignore the reality that the majority of prostitutes are in danger, abused, harmed, and desperate to escape and pretend that we’re discussing the act of becoming that nearly mythical unicorn, the happy hooker.

Fortunately For Job Seekers Prostitution Still Isn’t Work

It’s still incredibly good news that prostitution isn’t work, at least for every unemployed person in Australia.

In order to be eligible for JobSeeker allowance Services Australia obliges the unemployed to apply for all jobs they could conceivably carry out to meet their “mutual obligations” in a job plan.

Job plans include a requirement to prove which jobs and how many you have applied for each fortnight.

As we all know, in the sex trade nobody is spared. There’s a fetish for every niche.

Anybody of any age, disability, mental health or physical fitness level could find a role. From the woman recovering from breast cancer, to the woman breastfeeding her baby, to the grandma who only has a few years till retirement, to the barely legal teen with PTSD, to the person who uses a wheelchair — each and every one of them would be an acceptable candidate to at least apply to become a prostitute.

One can only imagine the interview process.

So I am truly, genuinely grateful that prostitution isn’t work for the sake of any unemployed friends, family members or loved ones.

And if you’ve ever been a job seeker — you should be too.

The Oldest Lie

Prostitution is not by any means the oldest profession — another myth pimped by the pro-prostitution lobby.

“The most ancient profession” was a phrase offered without evidence in an article published in 1888 by Rudyard Kipling.

Progressives tend to despise Rudyard Kipling for his racism, but they never seem too troubled by his occasional forays into women hating, and they do love that quote.

However, it’s bollocks.

• The word profession generally comes with the necessity of qualifications. The only qualification required for prostitution is to be breathing and desperate for money - and for some Johns, breathing would be optional too.

• As we have already established it’s not a job, or work and thank goodness for that.

The oldest job would probably be parent , healer, or midwife.

Yet more reasons - though no more are needed - why prostitution cannot be considered work

(As noted by Samantha Berg in her linked article)

• Sometimes people try to compare prostitution to cleaning toilets. But toilet cleaners don’t face rape, beatings, murder, sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies as a standard part of their cleaning contract. I bet if you’ve ever cleaned a toilet you can figure out the difference between that and having sex.

• People sometimes try to compare prostitution to coal mining or other hazardous jobs. But we try hard to reduce the harms caused to workers in hazardous jobs by the use of safety equipment, whilst harms inflicted on prostituted people are expected and intentional.

• No safety equipment can be used in prostitution, no PPE, no WHS processes or procedures can ever be established or followed, because prostitution is innately dangerous and harming women is not only not discouraged, it is regularly considered a goal for prostitute abusers.

• Sometimes prostitution is compared to fast-food work. But Maccas employees don’t need help to escape from pimps, they can just hand in their notice and go to the next job where they won’t be raped and assaulted to pay their electric bill.

• Sometimes people try to claim it’s a service job. But the age, race or sex of service employees isn’t relevant. You don’t care who your cashier, window cleaner or car detailer is, they’re just there to offer you their services. Whereas prostitute abusers will only accept sexual services from very specific people, for example a man who wants to abuse a young woman won’t allow an old woman or a young man to take her place.

• Occasionally people try to compare prostitution to boxing, since the aim of boxing is to cause harm. However, boxing offers equal opportunity harm. If prostituted women could force Johns to do the same thing they’re being forced to do while calling the Johns filthy names there might be some basis for comparison.

• Prostituted people don’t have and cannot have unions. Pimps and pornographers call themselves sex workers too because they are employed in the sex industry and they spend their time lobbying for deregulation and zero protections for prostitutes.

It can therefore be concluded that the conditions required for standard prostitution are considered unacceptable in real jobs.

So, now we’ve established that prostitution is not work:

Why Do Pimps and Johns Want Us to Believe Prostitution Is Work?

“ The discourse surrounding prostitution has changed in that we’ve tried to sanitise the industry. “A job like any other” makes prostituted women into service providers.”

Making money out of human abuse is the only point of the sex industry. If they can change the narrative and control the discourse they can hide the horrifying truth, minimise concerns over prostituted women and make more money.

It’s just that simple.

In summation - you may and will do as you please, but I will continue to use the correct and factual term - prostitution.