elfs: (Default)
In order to protect public morals, the State has a valid exercise in police power when discouraging prurient interests in autonomous sex and the pursuit of sexual gratification unrelated to procreation, combating the commercial sale of sex, and protecting minors. Any alleged right associated with obscene devices is not deeply rooted in our Nation's traditions.

There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship. There is no right to promote dildos, vibrators, and other obscene devices.
That quote comes from a brief filed before the Fifth Circuit Court on behalf of the state of Texas. The case is known as Reliable Consultants, Inc. v. Earle (2008). Now, the good news is that the Fifth Circuit took these words and applied the existing case law, and struck down all laws banning the sales of dildos, masturbation sleeves, and sex machines. Since the Supreme Court had already ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that gay people had a right to intimate conduct with each other in the privacy of their own homes, so to did the court rule that individuals had every right to "autonomous" sex. So everyone worried about "owning too many sex toys can get you arrested," you can all stop now.

Oh, by the way, do you know wrote that legal brief? GOP presidential hopeful Ted Cruz.

Just as every one of Scalia's ominous warnings about the framework of how we understand gays and lesbians has come true, how every ruling that furthered their dignity made Scalia more and more angry, Ted Cruz will now go down in history as the man who made-- and lost-- the argument about whether or not sexbots should be legal.
elfs: (Default)
An acquaintance of mine commented over the media, while wringing its collective hands over Zootopia and the furry community:
One interesting thing I also noticed when media does decide to talk about furry porn: the gay stuff doesn't exist.
I had a very similar reaction to an (otherwise pretty good) Marie Claire article about porn, Porn is today's Sex-Ed, in which the author wrote, "Porn sanitizes sex. Nobody has hair. You never see lube, even though they go through gallons on set."

I wondered what porn she was talking about. Almost all of the porn I watch has gallons of lube in every scene. Most of the people have hair. And then I realized: I don't watch mainstream heterosexual porn. I watch kink porn. I watch amateur porn. I watch gay porn. In all of that porn, lube is critical. Sports bottles loaded with j-Lube; paper picnic bowls of Crisco. Even the much-vaunted for-lesbians, by-lesbians Crashpad series has megafrackloads of lube.

But for most people, the gay stuff doesn't exist. The amateur stuff doesn't exist. The most "realistic" porn, in the sense that ordinary people do their (extra-)ordinary kinky things, and don't edit out the details, on camera, is basically the porn that has no marketing budget.

I think that's sad for the obvious reason that, unlike other kinds of movies, we do have sex, and when we watch porn it's often for the kind of sex we want to have but, for some reason or other, we just aren't. And I don't think we want lube-free, laughter-free, sanitized sex.

I could be wrong. The coming twin forces of Presence and Sexbots will probably prove me wrong. I think I'll stick to people.

Profile

elfs: (Default)
Elf Sternberg

February 2026

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
151617181920 21
22232425262728

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 11th, 2026 07:27 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios