Buck Angel and Julie Bindel event

[Mollyollydolly]

Did anyone attend this event because I'd like to understand what it was about. I've plenty of time for Bindel and I admire her work over the years.
She's posted pictures of herself hugging Buck Angel at an event.
I was after more information because I really struggle with this, not because Buck is trans but because she's a pornographer.
What am I missing?

Are we seriously monitoring women for 'unsuitable' friendships?
<Backs away>

It would be hypocritical to be anti-pornography and make a porn video with Buck Angel.

It is not hypocritical to be able to have a good relationship with someone you have significant differences of opinion with.

It's actually normal and healthy.

There are people I like who I vehemently disagree with on things. But human beings are complicated, they aren't a single data point in the universe, a single person has a whole spectrum of light to darkness in their hearts, a whole vast array of good and bad things they have done, and of course those things are also in the eye of the beholder, where they might fall on those spectrums...

How is it hypocrisy to hang out with or work with someone that you don't agree on everything with??
How the hell do you get through life being so strict

Buck Angel made money off of encouraging young trans-identified women into prostituting themselves on camera. I can accept her past performing in porn especially as she doesn't anymore. But the betrayal of young trans-identified people who look up to her just to make money is unforgiveable. Not to mention still producing and selling sex toys that encourage young women to dissociate from their sexed body. She is nothing but a hypocrite.

This is true and Bindel can be friends with who she likes.
On the subject of Buck though, they don't see themselves as having escaped the sex industry. They are very pro industry. There are also numerous abuse allegations against Buck.
I'm someone who has escaped the sex industry (pimped out by violent boyfriend when younger) and it's very hard for us survivors to see supposedly sex industry abolitionist feminists costing up to pimps and pornographers and various abusers. It makes trust of those who are supposedly our allies very hard.

Buck isn't a victim of the sex industry. They still defend porn, profit from their porn and they pimped out other women.

Should buck angel be cancelled?

It's hypocrisy because Buck was a pornographer who pimped out other much younger women. They're an abuser who still promotes and profits from the industry. So when radfems like Bindel who are supposedly sex industry abolitionists cosy up to abusers it does look a lot like hypocrisy. I'm a survivor of sex industry abuse and it is very triggering to see someone who is supposedly one of our biggest allies cuddling pornographers. I don't see why Buck gets a pass for pimping just because they have a vagina.
You wouldn't call it purity politics if feminists or survivors complained about Bindel cuddling a male pimp, I'm sure.

What does 'cancelling' have to do with what I'm saying? Would you be ok with Bindel cuddling a man who pimped out young women? Wouldn't that seem like hypocrisy after all her work on the sex industry?
I'm a sex industry survivor, and for us, this is quite distressing to see from someone who is supposedly our biggest advocate.
Bindel rightly considers sex industry abuse rape. Yet here she is cuddling someone who by her own ideals and opinions is a rapist. The fact some feminists don't have a problem with this but would obviously be appalled if she was cuddling eg. Andrew Tate suggests to me that they still see women in the sex trade as second class citizens. Our abuse isn't taken seriously.

But Buck Angel pimped out other much younger women and profited from their abuse. I'm sure feminists would be appalled if Bindel was cuddling Andrew Tate. I don't understand how this isn't the same.

But it's not about different views. Buck is a pimp. An abuser of women. So yes, it's weird for a radfem who speaks out vehemently against pimping and the sex trade to just ignore this because 'friends.' It makes survivors of abusive pimps really wary of feminists who call themselves our allies and advocates/supporters but then hang around with pimps. Would you be ok with her hanging around with Andrew Tate?

Oh FFS, grow up!! No one is saying ‘buck angel’ should be cancelled. Yes, bindel can be friends with whom ever she wants. Yes, we all agree that purity spirals are problematic. But there will be many women (me included!!) who are uncomfortable with that photo for various reasons.

You imply that angel has given up pornography because she has come to realise that it’s incredibly damaging and harmful to women and children. She may not be acting in the movies but she is still an avid and fierce defender and promoter of pornography. She still has her videos on porn sites, including pornhub which has shown the rape of trafficked women and girls, the rape of teenagers and women and girls being recorded in toilets and changing rooms. She claims this is a human right 🙄 🙄 🙄!

And as for angel’s general comment that porn is between two consenting adults proves to me that she is thick as mince.

There is a survivor of the sex industry on this thread telling you why she is uncomfortable with that photo and you have completely dismissed her. Have a word with yourself!!

When you say "raped and pimped out" what exactly are you saying? Do you have a specific claim apart from being in an industry you think is immoral?

Because while I think pornography is socially damaging, can easily be abusive, and should be illegal, I am also able to understand that some other people think that it isn't inherently bad, and that it is possible for adults to choose to participate, just like they are allowed to participate in other sexual activity I think is personally damaging. Or even that restricting adult autonomy in sex is a slippery slope .

Not just, I understand that people have different views, I understand their logic. And thoughts around sexual autonomy. I can easily see that someone who felt that s porn was fine for themselves would think it was also fine for others.

So not, I am not inclined, on the face of it, to call BA an abuser and pimp, any more that Is call people in other legal industries I question the morality of criminals.

She been calling out the crap that's been going on in the name of 'trans', she also says she's just presenting as a male she's not actually male. She's been a victim of all sorts of attacks by the 'true trans' brigade.

The term 'true trans'* *defines genuine transsexuals as those with gender dysphoria who seek full medical transition & not the TQI+ etc TRAs prevalent today where it's all about gender identity. Buck Angel is one of those old school transexuals that the GRC was created for.

Julie’s a steaming great hypocrite.

Have you read what other women on here think? Have you now read what a survivor of sexual abuse has said on this thread?

I know lots of people with all different opinions, and we get on fine generally.

The term 'true trans' was in apostrophe's because it denotes the unhinged nutters who consider themselves the gateway keepers to all that is 'true trans'. BA has lost revenue to them on YouTube because of the amount of complaints they've piled-on because she's being calling out all the people who now identify as 'true trans'.
The fact is there is no such thing as 'true trans', either anyone can claim it or no one can, it's bonkers to say they're such a thing a 'true trans'.

You don't understand the industry and how it works. I do. Or the high rates of women in it who are being coerced. Survivors do. There is no way Angel only worked with happy, fully consenting autonomous adults, purely on a statistical basis. Add in that these were much younger women who were trans identified and clearly vulnerable, being as stats show trans identified girls are more likely to be both autistic and abused.
A pimp is someone who profits from selling other people's sexual consent. So Angel is a pimp.
You might not believe this about the industry or believe survivors of it but Bindel does, or claims to. So for her to be friends with someone who profits from what she herself terms sexual abuse is obviously massively hypocritical. She's built half of her career on sex trade abolition. So clearly it's hypocrisy.

The fact that pimping survivors feel like this - it's far from just me, I was literally in an online group of us talking about this just this morning which is how I knew about this thread - should show you that for us it isn't about purity politics or cancelling. It's about Bindel claiming she gives a shit, but actually it's ok when it's her mates abusing us.

Il ask you again, so I'm clear on your stance as a 'feminist.' Would you be chill about her being besties with Andrew Tate? Harvey Weinstein? Neil Gaiman? A domestic abuser? Someone who had allegedly committed grooming gang offences?

Very disappointed with JB

What does this mean? Everyone has read the thread, not everyone on the thread has the same opinion. Most if not all are women.

Even if everyone did have the same opinion, that doesn't mean any individual is obligated to agree.

How the porn industry works might not be as mysterious as you think.

I think your view reflects your experiences, and that is also true for BA. You actually have no idea whether the people involved were coerced or abused, you can't extrapolate from what is usual to what is true in a specific, and very limited, situation.

There are people, particularly women, who have attempted to do "ethical porn," without people being pressured, without drugs involved, etc. Is it really ethical? Well that is probably going to depend a lot on what kind of sexual activity you think is generally ethical, but the point is there are people who both think porn is ok but the economic model is the problem.

Personally, if it matters, I think self-destructive sex is pretty common in the circles BA was involved in, including the sex that had nothing to do with making money, and I think self-destructive sex is unethical. - which is not to say that I think it should be illegal for people to do it.

I also think that people who are involved in self-destructive sex as a hobby have a hard time seeing the differernce between that and doing the same things for money. Does Buck Angel fall into that category - it's certainly my impression that Buck thinks so. And while that might be self-delusional I don't think it's a con.

Here is the funny thing about questioning my feminism on this issue - I run into trouble with feminists typically for my view that a lot of "hobby" sex is self-destructive, and that it's therefore unethical in the sense of being self harm or being complicit in others self harm; they typically see it as a repudiation of women's sexual autonomy and as not being sex positive enough., rather than because I think pornography is exploitative and also damaging in itself to creators and consumers. That is, feminists usually think I go too far rather than not far enough. So I am not sure you accusations that i am not being adequately feminist really land, although tbh I don't really care about that label one way or another.

Where to draw the line, legally, around pornography, isn't always straightforward, either in terms of how to balance it against personal autonomy or where we draw the line on what constitutes pornography, though again, that is a question where I'd include more under that umbrella than many others do.

You say you had a lot of respect for JB and her work around pornography. She, presumably, knows what it really involves - do you really think then that she has somehow lost her marbles and is being friendly with a monstrous person?

People are complicated. They can be blind in one area, most have struggles, all are limited by their own experiences, it can be hard for all of us to be honest with ourselves at all times. One of the things that's struck me about Buck Angel over the years is a willingness to question those things, right down to, did I really need to transition. No one gets it right all the time, even on important stuff. Harvey Weinstein and people like him notwithstanding.

At no point did I say it was mysterious. Implying I can't see past my experiences is condescending and trying to imply I'm being irrational. My experiences matter here precisely because they are the norm. I've worked researched studied and quietly campaigned and consulted on this issue, with other survivors, for years now. So when I tell you how the industry works, I know very well what I'm talking about. And while I can't give you hard evidence for this, I've spoken to survivors who know Angel. They are a pimp.

I didn't need a long explanation of your views on sex and porn. I'm not interested. Neither do I see what your spiel on self destructive sex has to do with anything. It's irrelevant and Angels personal sex life is irrelevant; I'm talking about their career as a pornographer profiting off the sexual consent of young vulnerable women. I asked you a specific question about Bindel which you won't answer. Perhaps because there's no way to answer it that doesn't show her obvious hypocrisy.

I didn't say I respect JB I made factual statements about her work and public opinions. I didn't say she had lost her marbles or Angel was monstrous. Again, you're trying to paint me as taking an emotional tone that I'm clearly not. It's quite creepy behaviour, honestly.

Julie is a public figure. Who earns her living campaigning on certain issues and advocating for certain groups. When you do that, and then cuddle up to someone who does harm to said groups, you're going to look like a hypocrite. It's really that simple.

But because Angel is conveniently useful for gender criticals, gender criticals will ignore everything else about them. Were Angel a TRA, the same ppl supporting them would be rushing to condemn them for being a pornographer, not making tortured arguments as to why it's okay really.

I'm not interested in discussing this further. You're not making any coherent argument or actually responding to my own, so I'm not wasting any more of my time.

What I remarked on was the stupid comment by a PP about how do I function in my life with people I disagree with , HTH