Slightly OT: The new SESTA/FOSTA bill already impacting sites

18 comments

• Papi_Chulo

  •

  6 years ago

  It's "we're tough on crime" low-hanging fruit - the proverbial "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" - P4P needs to be legalized but seems no one is willing/able to take on that fight
• Papi_Chulo

  •

  6 years ago

  I would not be surprised if they also go after strip clubs with this human trafficking hysteria - Salem Witch Trials 21st-century style
• AnonymousJim

  •

  6 years ago

  Red meat for the evangelical base, unfortunately. Elections have consequences. For the most part, we should be fine here. We're not pimping dancers. We're reviewing legal clubs. Plus, it's all a work of fiction. Might be a good idea to be a little extra vague going forward, though.
• BurlingtonHoFactory

  •

  6 years ago

  @AnonymousJim, It's not just the "evangelical base." Every single Senator voted Yes except for Rand Paul and Ron Wyden. This means that all the liberal Democrats voted Yes (except for Wyden). Conservatives have their reasons for opposing sex work (breakdown of the family, Christian values, obscenity, out-of-wedlock births, women getting too financially independent, etc.) and liberals also have their reasons for opposing sex work (Rape-Culture, objectification of women, distrust of capitalism, men having too much fun, etc.). Trust me, on this issue it isn't just one side, it's both sides. Some gridlock and partisan bickering would have been a good thing: it could have saved the sex industry.
• nemesisk7

  •

  6 years ago

  Time to consider moving to Mexico or Germany ( FKK ) !!!!!!
• twentyfive

  •

  6 years ago

  @BHF- Did you know that >Trust Me < is Yiddish for fuck you ?
• jackslash

  •

  6 years ago

  BurlingtonHoFactory is right. Both liberals and conservatives will support this type of legislation. And TUSCL could be affected. The "work of fiction" defense won't fly in court.
• realDougster

  •

  6 years ago

  How about SA?
• Darkblue999

  •

  6 years ago

  No dance4 advertises on [view link] it could be affected.
• realDougster

  •

  6 years ago

  The law is apparently written very broadly, so that websites can be held criminally liable for user-generated content that "promotes or facilitates" prostitution - for TUSCL that could be users posting reviews about getting extras, or threads on OTC.
• Huntsman

  •

  6 years ago

  Lopaw mentioned TER removing all USA ads. TER is based out of the Netherlands and I’ve not seen them seem take steps to this extent before. Neither money nor sex are going away but it will be interesting to see how this changes the biz.
• Papi_Chulo

  •

  6 years ago

  I've never been one to wanna sensor what's said on TUSCL/reviews, but under the current climate discretion may be the wiser option
• Papi_Chulo

  •

  6 years ago

  It sucks that mongers have to be in the shadows like dissidents hiding from the old East German police
• flagooner

  •

  6 years ago

  I know he doesn't like to interfere, but maybe @founder can provide some guidance if there is certain content that he prefers doesn't get posted.
• founder

  •

  6 years ago

  I don't see much difference between this site and yelp. [view link] There are no classified ads, No one here is trafficking other people. If the govt wants to shut us down, I am sure they can. It doesn't take much. As for now, enjoy life.
• flagooner

  •

  6 years ago

  Awesome, thanks for chiming in.
• ButterMan

  •

  6 years ago

  Wow so maybe we should get off our asses and get the stripper numbers before its too late. Although I can't actually see them messing with strip clubs and hopefully not sites like this. But juice is gonna miss SA!
• joeblow44

  •

  6 years ago

  Stripper numbers will be fine. But if you have an escort you want to see, you better write that number down before her ads are taken down.