I tend to agree with this. To me many (but not all) people labelling themselves as (left wing) feminists are quite neo-conservatives, trying to control people's sexuality, telling what kind of consensual sexuality is bad and what is not approved.

For instance, pornography in general. Porn has one and only one purpose: to arouse the viewer. Yet many feminists feel that either pornography should be outlawed because it is supposedly demeaning to women in general and gives young boys wrong ideas about sexuality, or at least it should be changed to be more "feminist".

I personally feel it is mostly the other way around: people are not "taught" by porn videos what will arouse them, but people will simply seek stuff that arouses them. Some like big titties, someone likes gay porn, someone likes petite women, someone likes rubber and leather etc. I am pretty sure that e.g. I will not learn to get aroused by gay porn by simply watching it, and vice versa, a gay will not become hetero by watching hetero porn.

I personally find the idea of "changing porn" pretty meaningless because everyone is free to do any kind of porn they want, as long as it is consensual. There is no need to try to change existing porn, make your own if you feel the need and think there are other people wanting to watch it.

Another one is prostitution. Many feminists feel it should be abolished completely (e.g. the Swedish way, making it illegal to pay for sex ie. making the customers criminals), but there seems to be some variance as some feminist still seem to feel as long as a woman (or man) does it on their own will, anyone should be allowed to sell sex services, and that the real problem is the stigma related to prostitution, not the prostitution in itself.

The anti-prostitution feminists seem quite annoyed by there being other feminists that don't share their view on prostitution.

I thought that was evident he is joking...

One can't be sure lately, with goggers going crazy everywhere.
Also, what does post 21 even mean?

You got me there, even I couldn't really decipher it. Something about something something.

That particular message was too vague, like "people who oppose this..", oppose what? Gay men drawing vaginas, or something else? And then bridging that somehow to games?

Yes.

Amusing indeed. I knew that Australia has strict censorship on earth but calling book as dangerous good is ridiculous. I hate censorship so much. Good i don`t live in Australia. Vagina can be dangerous, if owner doesn´t give you permission to enter.

Thousands of vaginas flying in and out of Australia, but they care about their representations...

I didn't see this post earlier so I'll elaborate; that one was not sarcastic. I meant that those who oppose this kind of censorship should look at how ''clean'' we are in the games industry and how many people want to keep it that way.

Well, ostensibly everyone had their eyes closed for that.

So just a metaphorical look, not a literal one.

Even with closed eyes we touched it with our lips... and other body parts...

At least it nice to see that at least the one Customs officer was willing to be flexible. If I'm reading this correctly, I take it "Dangerous Goods" in Australia includes pornography and that is why this book was classified as such?

What's bizarre is I try to look it up and "Dangerous Goods" seems to link to their GHS "hazardous chemicals" section. Hard to believe a book of art is a hazardous chemical now, isn't it?

Them Australian porn sites must be extremely hazardous to people's health then. Fapping causes blindness, yo! ;)

"Baby, I'd just like to look at you. With my mouth."

Judging by the first few drawings, I have to wonder if children's drawings are also considered "dangerous goods" in Australia.


[emphasis added]

And how do you know what everyone did?

Interestingly, my friend and I are having a disagreement about whether or not the people at her work are dressed "indecently" (her words) for their work Christmas function.

Whilst I appreciate that workplaces have dress codes that must be followed, I also think that dress codes are inevitably relaxed on Christmas work party day.

I think its ironic that it is the government's view on "indecency" that may well prevent her little book from getting into the country and yet here she is complaining about other people's indecency. Typically right wingers, amirite? ;)