To think any man who participates in Bonnie Blue’s stunts should be publicly identifiable?

[ThisVividFinch]

I’m talking about things like the “1000 men in 12 hours” she declared - if a man chooses to take part in something like that, I think he should have to show his face and name. Transparency, right?

You want to line up for it? Fine. But own it. Be publicly accountable for the behaviour you’re willing to engage in.

I wouldn’t want anyone in my life or circle - friend, partner, colleague, who saw that and thought “yeah, I’m in.” So crack on if that’s your vibe but women should at least have access to the list.

AIBU?

Interesting and balanced article in the Times today;

https://www.thetimes.com/life-style/sex-relationships/article/bonnie-blue-interview-1000-men-normalisation-porn-dd6rcq8gq

I am sorry your husband uses prostitutes. Truly. That must be a terrible burden.

Oh wait, are you that woman who was on here a few weeks ago, going mad because her husband uses prostitutes and somebody had published a picture of his face going in to a brothel? Or do you just sympathise with her?

I assume, always, and most sincerely, that anybody who is opposed to men who abuse prostitutes showing their faces are either a) men who abuse prostitutes or b) women who tolerate this from their husbands. I am absolutely serious, and this is not a troll of any kind. So if you start shrieking at me because I point out that these men are unutterable scum, the lowest filth imaginable, I am going to assume that is your reason for doing so.

I do feel pity for the b) group, but won't allow you to pretend those sort of men are normal or should be protected, even though I do pity your position.

We know it was all filmed, there's never been any secret about that and some of the men have publicly discussed the experience.

Faces or just the fucky bits?

Fucky…..or yucky? Any man who has been there, is absolutely yucky.

The OP said faces. I said faces. Did anybody say they wanted to see these grotesque men's diseased penises?

I don't want to see any part of them. Or any part of her really.

I can understand the urge to want to be able to identify people who do things you find harmful or wrong, but it isn't practical on any level.

I'll be honest and say I smoke weed. There is a legal establishment near me where one can go and purchase and smoke weed Amsterdam style. There are people around here who were very much against this place existing because they believe cannabis is terrible for society. They'd love to be able to identify the people who use this establishment publicly so their jobs could be potentially be at risk for using cannabis as the laws around it are sort of grey and unclear. Or so people alienate and avoid them.

A lot of people might argue that weed isn't as morally corrupt as whatever Bonnie Blue and the men involved have going on, but that's just a subjective point of view. Some people will genuinely believe that both things are as awful as each other and everyone involved should be held accountable in public.

It is a slippery slope if we encourage that to happen to people participating in legal activities.

So yeah, you are 100 percent correct that it would be great if these grotesquely depraved perverted men could be identified, every woman who comes in contact with them absolutely has a moral and ethical right to know these men are diseased filth.

But, again if she actually made that part of the criteria she'd be stuck with junkies, alcoholics and criminals because even the degraded perverts who take part in the prostitute's line ups know that the majority of people would shun them if they knew who they were. They walk among us, unfortunately.

Yes whenever people say “consenting adults, doing nothing wrong, mind your own business” I think - well that’s not right is it? If they’re doing nothing wrong and it’s all good naughty fun why the anonymity?

perhaps because it’s grim, and the dirty bastards know it?

I agree that they should not be anonymous.

The second group of women who in some way tolerate this I can only think of one reason that is understandable, that is if they don't want sex and it avoids being pestered by their husband (or worse) for it. Though better that they had the courage to leave such a man.

I think it is just because nobody sensible would agree with publicly outing people doing something totally legal to shame and harass them.

Why are you calling prostitution "sex work"?

Publicly accountable ? Much as I believe the whole thing to be abhorrent I do think people are free to do as they please so long as it isn’t criminal.

All of you saying the penises involved are "diseased" – you do know how they became that way, don't you?

Because sex workers want us to? Remember these people aren't evil and bad. We should respect their wishes. Prostitute is a derogatory term used to insult.

Lol the reality is that there is likely STD TESTING and these guys arguably have the least sex as they are lining up for 40secs of action. They are likely very low risk.

Prostitute is a derogatory term used to insult

No it isn't. It describes what they are and what they do. Prostitution is degrading.

Yes it is. Thats why sex workers (ex and otherwise) prefer you call them sex workers. Ignoring their preference shows that you see them as criminals and perpetrators, not victims which is as misogynistic as it is sad.

Because she’s advertising her services and trying to drum up as much publicity as possible, as others have said.

i though soliciting was illegal in the UK. Is she not even charging them for this? 🤢

She wouldn't be able to make her ridiculous claims if she were anonymous - she's trying to make herself famous. The men are just her accessories.

Because she chose to make herself not anonymous.

Interestingly ChatGPT suggests that the people who might want this likely want to ensure the men around them arent involved. I don't have that fear. The men I know wouldn't get out of bed for 40secs of sex.