(Extremely NSFW) The movement to annul the marriage of Riley Reid
In 2021, Riley Reid married Pasha Petkuns. All I know about her beyond this is that she was a highly successful porn actress. Preferring men exclusively, and generally being disinclined to watch porn most of the time, I haven’t seen any of her oveure.
In 2024, 128,000 living souls joined Dr. Clown World (who holds a doctor of philosophy- perhaps Honoris causa?) to protest her now 3-year-old marriage despite, all, I’m sure, having jerked off to her. Yet it wasn’t envy at the happy groom that impelled them, nor anger at losing her.
The stars threw down their spears. The trees crossed their branches in battle. A father is turned against his son. The resistance is born in fury like the cracking of a bloody egg. This cannot be. The rules forbid it. That FUCKING whore who MADE ME jerk my peepee can’t marry A HOT GUY. Raise your hand if you’ve been personally victimized by the pretty lady on the screen. It was not you who jerked yourself off, nor was it the director, Pornhub, or the male actors (definitely don’t think too hard about the male actors, focus on not contemplating how large their arms and chests are, how safe you’d feel with them lying on top of you, concentrate your whole mind on excluding these ideas). IT WAS HER!
Around the world, brave men stood. If enough voices are raised in negation, this cannot be. Surely Twitter could annul her marraige. 128,000 men liked the post saying in effect that because she had touched many men’s special sausages, she was therefore not entitled to be married- especially to a HOT GUY. (Now it is important to say here that, of course, they don’t think he’s hot. They’re just making the observation that, from a certain conventional point of view, he might be described as attractive, for example, and for the sake of argument- because of his rock-hard tawny gold abs).
And yet, after all of it, She won. She beat you. She’s married. Get really mad about it. Hold a riot in your heart. Pound the floor. Pound the walls of your skull and ribcage. Shatter the sky with your trumpets of wrath. Shout to heaven like Job, urging for God to answer for this treachery, only to hear "Lol, LMAO even" from the storm. The WHORE married a HIGH VALUE MALE.
Did you really think human life so small? Is that what you wanted, for your heart to shrink to a rasin focused on “natural consequences” which are nothing but your hungry hateful longings? You accuse her of rebelling against nature, yet you want to sit on its throne in judgment over the world? Would you live comfortably under your own justice consistently applied? When you wander in a desert will enough compassion come from your own spring to water you? You accuse other men of being incontinent to their own lusts, but you are incontinent to both your own lusts and disgusts.
Brother, before you seek to remove the spoof from Reid’s eye, why do you not remove it from your own?
If she sinned, you paid her to sin. She wanted money, and you wanted sexy images and sounds to touch your chipolata too. That’s worse bud. If the fair judgment against her is that she doesn’t deserve love, then the fair judgment against you is death. Or we can split the difference and go with castration, it’d be much the same to you anyway. My instinct will always be to think the most pathetic creature in the world is the one who thinks he is better than what he has demanded others give him.
But you know what? I get it. There was a soyjack I saw once, it depicted one of the ugly soyjacks sitting behind a screen, negatively commenting on the attractiveness of various models- face too big, shoulders too broad that sort of thing- while from his skin oozed puss. This soyjack has both a direct relation and an esoteric relation to this current case. The direct relation is that these guys are on average extremely ugly. The esoetric relation is this:
If the world is a huge collection of images to you, to be scrolled through, seeking out your pleasure you might forget that YOU ARE IN THE WORLD. You might forget that you are participating in all it is that you see, and think you are an abstract viewer. The sexual morality you pound the table about- you might forget it applies to you and think that it’s just a category of things other people have to do to make your penis hard a way you don’t feel squicky about. You become a hypocrite of a particular sort- a hypocrite who is a hypocrite because they have forgotten that they are a person making choices and not just a spectator- call it spectacular hypocrisy, pun intended. Just like the Soyjack I mentioned forgets that he is ugly, forgets he even has his own body in his race to pornographic judgment, so to the Riley Reid hater forget their own active and moral existence in the pursuit of a way of seeing- a flawed way of seeing which, at its maxima, turns the whole world into nothing but content for them to rate. A parade aimed with varying degrees of success at pushing blood down the dorsal artery of their penis all for narcissists who have forgotten not just the personhood of others, but the real existence of themselves as moral beings. Put another way, when morality is reduced to the crudest form of aesthetic response, morality stops being, first and foremost, about governing your own behavior.
[Perhaps we should remind them by a Moorean proof- here is one hand, here is other. Surely they must recognize at least the right hand?]
This is the mystery of it all, isn’t it? You cannot regard another person as an object, without reducing yourself to less than a person, because if you regard a human as less than human, you deny what matters most about yourself- your humanity. In one way or another, you will grow poorer, whether you start with misogyny, racism, contempt of the poor, or even equal opportunity mean-spiritedness, you are denying the value of what lies at the core of you, humanity.
I hope Riley Reid is happy. I note that even if this marriage does not last more than a few years, as her haters hope, she will have had a brief flame of something that so many of those stewing at her will never have. All jokes aside, I want her haters to have that too, but these experiences are generally gated behind the recognition that both you and others are moral agents, and a sense of the possibility of things beyond coveting and nauseously rejecting images.
The world is so big. Big enough for you to be in it, and not just watch it. Big enough for you to be something, not just feel something.
I am quite poor, spend many hours a week on this blog, and make it available for free. Your paid subscription and help getting the word out would be greatly appreciated.
Good read (and very funny). If anyone finds themselves having strong opinions about the marital status of a porn star, they should spend less time on the internet
I talked with an ex-evangelical once, who made a pretty good case for taking this kind of sexual moralizing as stemming from the doctrine that one is saved actually not through works, nor through faith, but through _the public performance of faith_.
Once you understand this idea, many things slot into place. It really doesn't matter what you do in private, as long as you believe yourself to be repentant for your sins, and each day renew your commitment to the faith. Perhaps, if you're a Catholic, you even confess your sins regularly and receive forgiveness. (Never mind that the Catholic Church actually says works are important -- in this regard, right-wing Catholics are just as much practicing the "cafeteria" style as liberation theology leftists.) If publicly questioned, you're allowed to discredit your critic -- as, for instance, the ex-family of Daniel Lavery has sought to do, by saying that as a trans person he has no standing to criticize his father (John Ortberg) for abusing young women and facilitating Daniel's brother's similar abuses.
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2023/03/29/menlo-church-leadership-acknowledges-abuse-going-back-decades/
https://thewartburgwatch.com/2024/05/17/all-that-glitters-is-not-gold-revelations-about-john-ortbergs-alleged-abuse-while-at-willow-creek-church/
Or see the practices of the Amish, in demanding that victims of abuse forgive their abusers, if the abusers perform a request for forgiveness correctly:
https://itvs.org/films/keep-quiet-and-forgive/
As long as the perpetrator _professes_ loyalty to the principles of the tribe, and encourages others to "do right" as the tribe defines it, he (and it is almost always he) _is forgiven_. If the victim says, "Fuck that, he shouldn't be forgiven, I don't forgive him!" then it's the victim who will be condemned and ostracized. Facing that kind of social sanction, most victims fold, and also profess to forgive.
From the perspective of a liberal individualist / humanist, this is of course monstrous, but it is internally consistent, and one can even see how it is _adaptive_, in the course of social evolution. The kind of society that runs like this is quite good at self-replication, because it is _profession_ of the values that _spreads_ the values. Actually _adhering to the values_ is almost beside the point. Hence you can have Victorian England where everyone professes to be incredibly morally upright, and then at night the Victorian Gentlemen all go slum it in the demimonde. Hence you have Southern Gentlemen who think nothing of raping the help. Hence you have modern Evangelical pastors who sexually abuse children and then say that those children were acting as instruments of the Devil. And hence you have these pathetic men blaring their madonna-whore complexes on the internet -- they profess to value the madonna, and hence cannot be held culpable for participating (financially) in the sins of the whore.