Sorry, just because there is money out there, it doesn’t mean you automatically qualify for it. There is a line. There are like, priorities. And just because you are afflicted with overentitlement, it doesn’t mean that you can “get some.”

Feel Better Now? Oh, Sorry…

Look, if you want to argue that in general its wasteful to channel money into training relatively well-to-do multimedia workers when programs for the truly poor are underfunded, go right ahead. But I have I haven’t seen you argue against the Cal ETP in general, just its use for funding a few Kink.com employees. And that strikes me pretty selective outrage on your part.

Instead, you’re simply making a classic “there are people with real problems over in Africa” red herring argument. The argument is a red herring because funds denied to Kink.com employees are not going to end up in Health and Human Services coffers anytime soon that’s not how they were earmarked.

Now here’s something to think about: According to SF’s Human Services Agency, there are about 1400 families with kids between the ages of 1-3 that are at risk for being vectored into foster care. You’d think that if we decided to put some money into a pilot program for something like, say, bond investment accounts for each of these kids that mature upon secondary school graduation, that would be worth a hell of a lot more to our community than giving you a subsidy simply because you think your pseudo-artistic method of inciting masturbation is special.

Please Grow Up.

I’ve never found him to be anything other than a complete and utter tool. And his values often seem more aligned with the city of Modesto than the city of San Francisco.

The way I see it, EVERYONE can benefit from job training. Porn generates a lot of money for California — as does agriculture, movies, tourism, biotech, etc — so we have a vested interest in keeping the industry strong, and the workers competitive. Doesn’t matter whether it’s pornographers, farmers, florists, or realtors — a strong workforce equals a strong state.

Blog of Pro-Porn Activism: The Kink.com Wars, Round II

You know Abel, from where I’m sitting the kind of pinched, judgmental, smug tone you’re exhibiting here in spades is a symptom of craniorectal inversion, but I guess that’s a matter of perspective.

As for the issue at hand, its clear to me, anyway, that the technical staff at Kink.com are perfectly legit multimedia employees, and if employers are going to charged a special payroll tax to fund training programs for their employees, and Kink.com has to pay those same taxes, I see no good reason why its employees shouldn’t be able to benefit just because they work for a porn company. That does not amount to “taxpayers subsidizing porn”. The program is in fact funding training in skills that are transferable, which is what it is intended to do.

Either the ETP program is corporate welfare and needs to be eliminated across the board (you could just as well ask why funding should go to, say, KRON), or they have no business in turning away qualified workers just because the folks in charge happen to have their undies in a bunch over the kind of media those workers produce.

Government subsidies serve to keep afloat business and labor sectors that are manifestly threatened or where there is a significant public policy priority in keeping it alive. The notion that porn belongs in that category is manifestly ridiculous. People will always want to jerk off and porn will always be profitable. There is no need to subsidize any sector of such an industry. Yes, some subsidies are misdirected, and some – like the agro subsidies started by the Nixon administration – go on too long and have unexpected negative consequences. And banks, like them or not, are an important part of the economy. Comparing the economic worth of a porn videographer to a bank is simply delusional. Being a “sexual outlaw” does not make you special, it makes you a grandiose fool for doing things out in the open that others enjoy privately and don’t make a big deal about. If your identity is based wholly on how you get off then you may be afflicted with craniorectal impaction, so be careful.

And, really, calling on a newspaper to deliver responsible journalism is “acting like a brat”? You’re right that Smith is entitled to his opinion. But in a newspaper, even an alt-weekly, opinions should be labeled as “Commentaries.” His article was pawned off as news, not commentary. If he’s going to label his article as news, he owes a journalistic duty to make it fair, balanced and accurate. Calling him out on his failure to uphold his duty is not childish at all. Your comment, however, is.