Skip to content


Why Female Douchebags Think They’re Awesome (Vomit and Poop)

"Damn baby, you're so unique and fun!"

Every so often in your journey along the path of getting some booty, you’ll encounter a true mystery of nature. This mystery is embodied by an insanely attractive woman who, for one reason or another, has a personality that is as pleasant as anal sex with a jagged rock (during which you’re receiving, naturally). Given the strict rules of male retardation while courting women, this chick doesn’t realize that she is a monumentally boring and rude bitch.

I’m not talking about goal-driven, Type A women that will slit your throat over a minor misunderstanding at the office. Those broads are the Gordon Geckos of the vagina-having gender and the murderously efficient spirit of free market culture is to blame for their cuntastically unpleasant traits. In other words, dudes are like that, too. Nor are these women intellectually superior females who could, presumably, club you to death with their SAT scores. The idea of an attractive-yet-rude female isn’t a cop out for insecure sexists, although the subject’s personality may have been cultivated by such assholes.

Pictured: National standard for female douchebaggery.

No, these chicks are just as socially awkward as a sheltered WoW enthusiast. Except the broad isn’t sheltered at all; most of the time, these women are found crawling on all fours in the bar’s bathroom and, more often than not, reek of fresh vomit. They pound more shots than you do, have a propensity to guzzle leftover beer puddles in ashtrays, and are as loud as the fattest, drunkest football fan you know. In short, they’re assholes. But they’re assholes who every guy in the bar really wants to bang and, therefore, every guy makes an effort to flatter these chicks.

This is why girls who possess little-to-no admirable traits (other than their knockers) come to believe they’re super witty, funny, creative, and intelligent. When they vomit blood after their fifteenth shot of lighter fluid, the clamoring mass of swinging dicks who crowd such women jockey for position so they can tell these asshole chicks how awesome they are. For example:

Guy: “You just puked on my shoes!”

Asshole Chick: *Vomit*

Guy: “You’re so awesome!”

I refuse to label these women, who are generally promiscuous, skanks, smuts, or any other derogatory shit reserved for women who like to get laid. (Fuck double standards.) However, men have an extraordinarily stunning ability to sniff out sexually active women, especially sexually active women who get retardedly drunk. An equally hot female will receive less male attention if she isn’t a moron or, most importantly, about to puke her guts out. Consequently, after all of this attention rooted only in the male crowd’s desire to take off the asshole chick’s pants, the asshole chick will wake up the next morning and say to herself: “Wow, I guess I’m one of those girls who has a lot of guy friends.”

Her "guy friends".

Of course she’ll say that. Although this is unfortunate because the asshole broad might be lying to herself; not all moronic and borderline-alcoholic females are stupid enough to believe that the “guy friends” she’s so proud of aren’t just trying to get in her pants. Also, the asshole chick probably understands that other females don’t like her. These asshole women then fall into the dangerous habit of blaming others for their own unpleasantness; perhaps the assholes will chalk up their lack of true friends to the jealousy of others, because they have such hot asses while all the other girls in high school were “ugly whores” who were super jealous of attractive women. From then on, asshole chicks will value the judgment of men over other females, totally forgetting that the men who are “such good friends” are usually trying to hide their boners whenever the asshole broads are in the room or drinking stale beer from a mop bucket.

Asshole chicks are the fairer sex’s equivalent of the old fashioned male douchebag. The arrogant male, however, is a slight disadvantage in comparison. By our nature, men seek to spread their seed while women seek to find a worthy…um, seed implanter. Men are sellers, women are (sometimes very choosy) buyers. The most attractive male will have a much harder time getting laid when compared to the most attractive female. Therefore, when the most attractive female happens to be an ignorant, rude, and blitheringly idiotic bitch who appears to be a an easy lay, the males will flock to her while a similarly rude douchebag usually gets punched in the face.

Don’t confuse asshole girls with chicks who, usually to males who are easily intimidated sexually, might seem like asshole chicks. Girls who like to party aren’t asshole chicks. Neither are attractive women, sexually open women, or women who dig sports. Furthermore, lots of awesome women have  male friends. But if you walk into a bar or a party and an exceptionally attractive female promptly vomits on your shirt (possibly while pooping herself a little), you just might have an asshole chick on your hands. Keep away, friend. Very far away.

And for the love of god, stop complimenting her.

Posted in Propaganda.

“What if your kid did porn?”

If you, dear readers, are like us (super duperly pro-porn and free love), then you’ve no doubt encountered a prude or prissy pants anti-porn numbskull who, after attacking your views every which way, attempts to stomp your argument to dust with that old deal-breaker: “Well, would you want your kid involved in pornography?”

Of course not, jackass, because child pornography is a form of sexual abuse. However, if this asshole is talking about our full grown adult children who, hopefully, have that unnatural ability to think critically and for themselves, then our answer might surprise you.

First of all porn, despite any mainstream acceptance the industry has found as of late, is still frowned upon by the majority. It’s a form of counterculture entertainment, much like folk and hippie music in the Sixties or grunge and gangster rap in the Nineties. No, porn actors rarely dress like Abbie Hoffman, nor do they scream about how sad the world is or say “Fuck the police,” although they often fuck other porn stars costumed as such. Porn is, simply, entertainment that the conservative mainstream isn’t accustomed to and therefore the mainstream finds it shocking. Basically, if your parents sent you to performing arts school, they’d be a trifle perturbed if you emerged as Flava Flav. (Actually, so would we. That guy’s an asshole.)

Contact Lib Porn if you wish to donate money toward helping the mentally challenged.

Aside from porn’s counterculture status, it’s also brow-beaten by the majority because it’s an extremely physical form of entertainment. Pro wrestlers face a similar perspective. Although most pornographic material doesn’t portray sexpots getting whacked in the head with various ringside objects and, honestly, the acting in porn is much better than the brain dead monologues spouted by The Undertaker, both industries make their cash with simulated physical acts. The majority laugh off pro wrestling as a fake sport or vilify it because they fear the simulated violence will inspire their children to have casket matches in the basement. Or wear fruity little tights, at the very least.

All of us are someone’s child (except for me, as I was created by a mixture of turtle DNA and a cannister of green ooze).

Pictured: Chip Witley (Me)

As children, we’re influenced by everything our parents do. Their prejudices, their quirks, and their habits rub off on us in a usually non-sexual way (except for Mitch…don’t ask why or he’ll start sobbing again). Our parents generally want us to climb at least one rung higher on the socioeconomic ladder than they did, so if your dad’s a forklift driver, he’ll probably be happy if you went to college and became an office manager. If your dad’s an investment banker, he’ll probably want you to become a senator. If your father’s a senator, he’ll probably want you to become the director of the CIA and sell RPGs to right-wing Chilean rebels. Parents don’t like their children to take, at least in their eyes, a step down on that socioeconomic ladder.

Your mom and dad don’t want you to be a ditch digger, even if you really love digging ditches. There’s nothing wrong with digging ditches, especially if you join a bloated International Ditch Diggers Union Local 274 and bash a few scabs in the skull (Hoffa would have wanted it that way). Hell, as long as you’re not hurting anyone, we believe that doing what you want with your life is totally awesome. Your parents, not to mention a variety of social standards created by television ads, guidance counselors, and Leave It To Beaver reruns, might not appreciate your dream job or anything else that might lead you to contentment. Some occupations are viewed as demeaning, especially when you consider the perceived status of that occupation. So your investment banker parents probably won’t like it if you say, “To hell with business school, I want to be a roofer.”

And this brings us back to that question: “Would you want your kid involved in pornography?” Our answer is this: Our kids should do something that helps them find contentment in their lives. Contentment, that forgotten cousin of happiness, is a severely underrated part of life. We often confuse (or substitute) contentment with financial success or social status. Fuck that shit. An honest and truly caring parent won’t force their child into an occupation or way of life that makes them miserable. An occupation in the porn industry, still much reviled despite any bit of mainstream acceptance, is no different from any other job once you strip away the puritanical and bullshitified standards that the higher-ups use to dictate our lives. Some might say that porn demeans people and, consequently, would demean our children. Well that’s their perspective, the same type of view that leads parents to frown upon their child’s job as a ditch digger.

If we really care for our kids, we’ll respect their views and standards they have for their own lives. Forcing one’s beliefs and prejudices on one’s children isn’t parenthood. It’s brainwashing. Or possibly a way to make robots.

Brainwashed robots.


Posted in Propaganda.

Celebrities AREN’T Smarter Than You

Everybody loves celebrities, even us bug-eyed, gun-toting survivalists at Lib Porn. How can you not? They go on television and run around doing cool shit. Although you won’t catch us jacking off to TMZ (unless they repost those naked Vanessa Hudgens pictures) while wondering what kind of coffee that chick in that crappy movie drinks, we enjoy watching prettier people than ourselves getting into wacky situations, shootouts, or wacky situations that end in shootouts. But when celebrities have to tell us how to vote and what to believe in, well, they get fucking annoying.

Remember the retarded kid from Gilbert Grape? Well he recently posted a blog on The Huffington Post in which he explains how Ghost Dog, that broad from The Day After Tomorrow, and the Incredible Hulk are taking part in a campaign to get citizens to email their senators about climate change legislation. Oh, Cornel West is in there too, although Mr. West happens to be an academic who knows what he’s talking about, so nobody’s going to pay attention to him.

Pictured: Someone who shouldn't be influencing your views. Also, too stupid to get out of the bathtub.

It would be awesome if more citizens took an active role in what their elected leaders vote on. Such action would be a display of real democracy and, honestly, we at Lib Porn are super tired of Tea Party types proclaiming that climate change is a hoax and melting ice caps are a direct result of underwater communists (and homosexuals) using super water proof blow-dryers. Those people (the Tea Party idiots, not the underwater homo commies) are influenced by pundits, like Hannity, who go on television in front of millions of viewers to say “Science is bullshit” when they lack the necessary knowledge and education to make such a judgment. So, you might ask, what’s the problem with Gilbert Grape’s retarded little brother saying, “Climate change is real?” Fuck man, the chick from The Day After Tomorrow was in that ad, and if anyone knows about the dangers of global warming, it’s her. Because, ya know, she was there when the fucking blizzard blew up America.

Pictured: Climate Change...

...and the man who kicked it's fucking ass.

The problem is the retarded Grape brother and the chick who got her leg cut by an underwater taxicab (not to mention Ghost Dog and the Hulk) aren’t qualified to speak on the subject either. Normally that isn’t a problem. I, for example, complain about everything imaginable on Lib Porn and the only education I have is a three-semester stint at a community college (oh, Liberal Arts degree, how you’ve alluded me). My uncle usually gets drunk on Saturday and tells me how the Jews are running everything…and thank Yahweh that they are, or else movies would reach incomprehensible levels of suckiness which, surprisingly, they haven’t reached already. Now crazy Uncle Witley isn’t qualified to tell anyone about who’s running the world, especially when it comes to Jews, because Uncle Witley still thinks Al Pacino is one of the chosen people.

"I try to get out, but they pull me back...er, I mean, mazel tov.'"

Then again, my crazy Uncle Witley’s opinions don’t reach millions of people…and even if they did, viewers would know that you shouldn’t listen to crazy jackasses who don’t have a clue as to what logical, critical thinking actually is.

Then again...

Being on television doesn’t mean that you know what you’re talking about. Hell, celebrities don’t know anything aside from what information is fed to them; when they actually spout their own opinions, they’re usually cringe-worthy. And this doesn’t apply only to traditional celebrities. Your favorite news pundit is, more than likely, just a celebrity. Pundits don’t report objective findings. They’re views are entirely subjective. They aren’t journalists, they aren’t scholars, they’re barely half-baked crackpot conspiracy theorists who read a lot of Internet 9/11 Truth websites. Olbermann, Hannity, Matthews, and Beck are ugly male versions of Paris Hilton; they’re popular just because they go on television and do retarded shit, usually slightly more retarded than Gilbert Grape’s brother (except when he didn’t get out of the bathtub after Gilbert pimp-smacked him).

Celebrities on soapboxes for leftist issues serve only to fuel the right wing backlash. Nobody gets their news from smart people anymore. Liberals like to watch liberal celebrities make smug jokes about Kansas on Bill Maher’s show, conservatives like to watch conservative celebrities make thinly-veiled proclamations of secession and treason on Fox News, and everyone sits back on their couch in a self-satisfied stupor and goes either to a Tea Party rally or a PETA protest. Meanwhile, our totally super awesome country gets really fucking dumb.

If you’re a conservative who wants to get informed by intelligent conservatives, go here: Cato Institute.

If you’re a liberal who wants to get informed by intelligent liberals, read this: Democracy Matters by Cornel West.

And if you think Al Pacino is a Jew, you should talk to this guy:

Uncle Witley

Posted in Propaganda.

Faggots With Guns!? (“Shriek!”)

Dear readers, we at Lib Porn would like to pose this question to you: How often do male soldiers and female soldiers fuck in the battlefield or barracks? Probably not often, as we rarely see any such cases on the news (Although sexual abuse within the military should be addressed, we’re talking about consensual sex here). Yet our armed services allow men and women to serve together. Given the non-booty-having state of the American military, it’s nothing less than prejudice and bigotry that keep homosexuals from serving openly in the service.

Don't worry, rednecks: These hunky soldiers are from Brazil. But they could still kick your ass.

During his State of the Union, Obama said he was going to attempt to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, that ass backward and retarded Democrat-spawned ninny law that every Democrat’s favorite president, Bill “Watch Me Gut The Poor and Working-Class Even Further” Clinton, loved so much. Sure, it allowed gays to serve in the military…kind of. If they wanted in, they had to pretend they weren’t gay. (Mind you, if a gay soldier let anyone, even their family, know they were knocking boots with the same sex, that person could out them to the military and the homosexual would be kicked out. It’s happened. A lot.)

Given that sex in the military among men and women isn’t a problem, it’s doubtful that gay sex would be a problem. In a lot of ways, servicemen are in the same situation as prison inmates in the sense that it’s really tough to get laid by the opposite sex. Otherwise heterosexual prisoners get around this obstacle by fucking other prisoners in the ass. Heterosexual soldiers don’t engage in such activity, or at least not that often, as far as we know. If a lack of booty doesn’t force them to become meat packers or chase hot female soldier tail, why do so many politicians and military leaders think homosexuals would be any different?

Because they think all gays look like this. Although Freddy Mercury could kick their asses as well. Or at least make a supersonic man out of you. Whichever comes first.

Why, it’s because they’re homophobic morons, dear reader. It’s easy to see why, and we at Lib Porn don’t mean this as an insult: The military is based on alpha male culture. And it damn well better be, because I feel much more comfortable when I know that the brave men and women who are charged with protecting my sorry ass are trained, and driven, to be the baddest motherfuckers on the planet. Unfortunately, a side effect of so much alpha male posturing seems to be homophobia. In the end, nobody wants to look like a faggot.

Yet, just by the law of averages, there are homosexuals in our country that could totally kick your ass. If you’re an opponent of gays serving openly in the military, you might want to think about that, because that’s one less bad motherfucker that’ll be trained to shoot up wild Chinese communist footsoldiers when World War III breaks out. Personally, I don’t care if the GI is a cocksucker or not; as long as he or she is a responsible, respectable person capable of killing people who would like to blow me up, I’m totally going to hide behind them like the sniveling bitch ass that I am.

At its core, the argument against homosexuals in the military is dubious and prejudiced. The argument, no matter how you break it down, states that soldiers who are openly homosexual will somehow be different than heterosexual soldiers. Yes, we’re aware of the argument that gay soldiers will make hetero soldiers uncomfortable, but ya know what? We’re sure that racist white soldiers were awfully uncomfortable serving alongside of the first integrated black soldiers.

There are those who believe that gays are homosexual by choice. They’ll say, “It’s not really prejudice to be against gays serving openly in the military because they choose to be gay.” For argument’s sake, let’s assume that gay people are homosexual by choice and their sexual preference makes heterosexual soldiers uncomfortable. Well, let’s not forget that it wasn’t that long ago that religious prejudice was more out in the open (and still is, considering the opinions on Islam held by many very, very, very ignorant Americans). Weren’t there Protestant soldiers who didn’t feel comfortable in the barracks with a Catholic? Weren’t there Catholics uncomfortable serving with Jews? No matter what religion you identify with, you practice out of choice. It would be wrong to expel Islamic soldiers from the American military and, similarly, it’s wrong to expel and exclude openly gay individuals from serving their country. Imagine the uproar across Middle America if a fundamentalist Christian was kicked out of his unit for making his fellow soldiers uncomfortable.

"I'm terrified of any dick that isn't my own! Shriek!"

The military has been facing difficulties in recruitment. Young people don’t seem too keen on dropping democracy bombs on crappy countries these days. I, for one, think those recruiters and generals should stop fucking whining about a drop in recruitment rates when they deny openly gay men and women the chance to serve their country.

Submachine gun skills are more important than where you put your dick...unless you put your dick in the submachine gun.

Posted in Propaganda.

Casual Sex Can Be Awesome (If You’re Not A Bastard)

Sexist stereotyping is a two way street. Consider one night stands, those often vilified sexual encounters that provide one with a whole new perspective on the uses of public bathrooms, and how the prudes among us disapprove of them. Men who engage in one night stands are viewed as sex bandits taking advantage of otherwise puritanical girls who certainly never jam illegal powders up their nose whilst partying at the bar. Women who search for random booty are, insanely, assumed to be skanks with no dignity, who willfully fall victim to the prevalent sexist culture. (Let’s not forget about homosexuals, who, according to mainstream thought, have sloppy 20-person orgies and dry-hump animals in deviant sex-pervert-terrorist-AIDS clubs in San Francisco.) This is really gay, mainly because in all this disapproving madness, one great truth is lost: Casual sex can be totally super awesome.

Well, it can be. Please don’t assume we’re applauding or condoning a “sex without consequences” approach. We’re not. Everyone is aware of STDs and the inherent risks of casual sex, so we’re not going to waste our time on that subject. Instead, let’s talk about how that casual, random sex might be totally awesome for you, but not so totally awesome for the other person(s) involved. For example, fucking in a public bathroom can be fun. However, fooling an emotionally needy person into putting their hand down your pants is a tactic practiced only by the douchebaggiest people. Promising a fragile person that the two of you will have a serious and committed relationship after you lube each other up and reenact the Kama Sutra page-by-page when you have no intention of doing so is an action that, we at Liberating Porn believe, should be balanced out on the karmic spectrum with you, the douchebag, finding yourself in a bathtub in one of the more adventurous neighborhoods in Brazil with one of your kidneys missing.

Little bastard has no idea what's coming to him.

Most of the time, one can spot an emotionally fragile person. We strongly suggest that you don’t engage in casual sex with this person. Not only do you risk stomping on that person’s already trampled psyche, but you also risk your own well being. You might bang an emotionally fragile person by accident; as I’ve spent a lot of time doing drugs and drinking liquor to excess, I can personally attest to this. From time to time, you might wonder how your genitals, for lack of a better phrase, found themselves inside of that Enya fan who bursts into tears every ten minutes and considers any sexual contact to be a spiritual connection that binds the two of you together in some wacky New Age union. Should you explain to this person, post-coitus, that you don’t want any spiritual connections and you’re probably not going to add them as a friend on Facebook, expect to have a few stressful incidents later on. I’m not going to say that you’ll end up as the basis of a Lifetime movie, but…

Before engaging in casual sex with anyone, you should lay down the ground rules. If you’re a commitment-phobic type, let your fuck-buddy know that. Don’t be an ass and lead anyone on. Being blunt is good thing in this situation, which is odd, because when trying to get laid, being blunt is usually considered a bad thing. For instance, when you want to fuck someone, strolling up to said someone and saying, “Hey there, I wanna knock boots,” isn’t such a good idea. We at Liberating Porn find this extremely odd and chalk it up to general human retardation. But when banging a random person, the best way to insulate yourself from any douchebaggery or possible late night visits from obsessed maniacs is to simply state, “This doesn’t mean that we’re a couple.”

Never casually bang anyone whispering to a flower.

Yet this won’t always work. Some people are inclined to believe that sexual contact does indeed create a lifelong bond. Hell, we guess it does. When you see someone on the street that, three months ago, donned a furry suit and whipped you with a power cord, that encounter is sure to unearth some emotions (possibly emotions that lead you to burning your clothes while crying uncontrollably in the bathroom). But the extent of this bond and what it means is up to you and the person(s) involved in the sexual encounter. If the other person misreads your intentions (even after you explain yourself), you should still refrain from any douchebaggery. Don’t be a dick; let your admirer down easy. Continue to explain that you don’t want a serious relationship and, if possible, try to stay on friendly terms. And for the love of God, should you find yourself drunk and horny in the middle of the night, don’t attempt a booty call with this person because that will lead him or her to believe that you really do want a serious relationship. We all find ourselves in this situation at one point or another and, honestly, the writers at Lifetime have to get their ideas somewhere.

Forget the prudes and idiots who equate sexual activity, especially casual sexual activity, with the destruction of the world’s moral fiber. Those types will always believe that casual sex will lead to droves of deviants marauding across small town America with bare genitalia and Planned Parenthood coupons while planning to hurl flaming baby corpses at wholesome mega churches before morphing into a giant porn monster that may or may not have been created by stem cells.

Ignore these people. Casual sex, if conducted with respect and honesty, can truly be the shit. Just remember that while you may see a bone session in the more shadowy areas of your local bar as a fun-filled encounter with few strings attached, your lover-for-the-moment may see the situation differently. It’s your responsibility to state your intentions.

Posted in Propaganda.

Prude Parents Murder Dictionary Editors

Porn?

Well okay, nobody got murdered, but in Menifee, California a parent was horrified to discover that their child’s copy of the Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary included the definition of the term “oral sex”. Said parent complained to the school, presumably while clutching a crucifix or locking their child in a chastity belt, and the weak-kneed school officials promptly banned the dictionary.

Some parents in Menifee have echoed that horror. Nobody wants their kids looking up naughty terms in the dictionary, even though kids are more likely to look up those terms on the Internet, and the Internet, despite the existence of Dictionary.com, is much better at providing visual aides as opposed to written definitions. And we all remember our school days, when there was at least one child, generally the first kid to smoke a cigarette in the bathroom or the first to get suspended for jumping on his/her desk and yelling “Masterbernation!”, who had carnal knowledge beyond his/her years. Back in my day, that kid was usually the one whose parents sprung for illegal cable and delved jubilantly into the wonders of the nudie channel. (Ah, how transfixed I was on the wonders of softcore porn as a child.)

However, those poor kids in Menifee probably won’t grow to be chronic masterbernaterz or sexual deviants even if the dictionary with the dirty words isn’t banned. Kids around the world are entranced by sex, bad words, and the age old question, “So did my mom really fuck a stork?” Every kid, with the possible exception of the impossibly mind-warped offspring of Christian and Islamic fundamentalist parents, gets super excited (not to mention interested) by the myriad wonders of sex. It’s pretty natural. We are, after all, hardwired to fuck. It’s nature, bitches. Most kids don’t turn out to be sexual deviants, regardless of what type of pornographic smut they find in the dictionary. They do, however, learn to imitate their parents.

What’s worse? A child who figures out what a blowjob is, or a child who learns that when you disagree with a view, an opinion, or – God help us – a motherfucking dictionary, you ban the supposed offensive material? Last time I checked, Menifee, California was located in the US. I don’t know how they do shit in Islamabad, but here, we’re not supposed to ban books. Our kids are going to inherit an extremely wacky America one day; an America that has already seen its civil liberties and Constitution pissed on repeatedly by the Patriot Act, during which our leaders (and let’s not kid ourselves, our citizens, too) decided that it’s cool to forget about some essential freedoms because a few bearded douchebags might try to crash another plane into something. Our kids have to learn that free speech matters, as does their ability to tolerate views (or in this case, freedom of…um, definitions of stuff) that they don’t like. The answer is tolerance, not a goddamn motherfucking book banning.

Sure, the “Blowjob In The Dictionary” controversy might be a more fertile breeding ground for debates on when a kid should learn about sex. But a fundamental idea of the American experiment is that of free speech and freedom of expression. Teaching even one child that book banning, and the subsequent censorship, is an acceptable course of action is rabidly anti-American and should be condemned by anyone who actually gives a rat’s ass about this country.

Then again, maybe the book banners wear American flag lapel pins. Everybody knows that flag lapel pins mean you’re a war hero, or something.

Except for Rambo...but he eventually joined the Taliban so nobody cares.

Posted in Propaganda.

Rich Old White Guys Love Black History Month

February is a wholly depressing month. It’s cold, bleak, and Valentine’s Day reminds you of how much you’re not getting laid. Although the coming of February thankfully rids us of drunken, sweaty football fans full of cheap beer and hot wings, this horrid month is dominated by racial pandering so awful that, if I was a black man, I’d probably punch a white guy in the face.

Then again, if I was Kimbo Slice, I'd punch EVERYBODY in the face.

Black History Month reminds us that black people are totally important to the American narrative, but not so important that their role in US history can be woven into our history books without special treatment. We get to hear about Martin Luther King and old ladies causing various ruckuses on public transportation systems, but in kissing Afro-American ass throughout the month, the white power structure allows itself to give even more reach-arounds to slave owning capitalists that, despite having a lot of good ideas about freedom and whatnot, really seemed to enjoy killing Indians, whipping blacks, and laughing at Irish people. Although the Irish may have deserved it.

Motherfuckers.

There’s a hidden chunk of American history that we rarely read about. And that’s understandable, because your average history teacher won’t tell you about it. The role of the oppressed, the working-class, and the poor is largely ignored by the white power structure because if everyone learned about how their great-grandfathers were clunked on the head while trying to unionize, well, there might not be a white power structure. Voices of revolution and dissent throughout history are silenced, especially the dissenting voices of black America. Black History Month is a tool of the white power structure that helps keep these revolutionary ideas about race, equality, and social status on the back burner. Or, more accurately, in the basement right next to the Native American genocide and the Ludlow Massacre.

By pandering to the racial sensitivities of totally pissed off black people for one shitty month (couldn’t they at least pick May or June to trivialize black history?), our leaders and owners get to ignore not only the true impact of black American history, but the history of the angry Americans who, in the words of America’s greatest philosopher, were fucked by a red, white, and blue dick.

After all, a great symptom of a politically sick society is the ownership class’s love of pitting the have-nots against each other. For instance, the white working-class gets really angry about Affirmative Action, which benefits blacks, among others. With that, we have a division among the have-nots, even though blue collar whites have more in common with blue collar blacks than they do with the money-out-the-asshole conservative jerkoffs who vilify almost any attempt at progressive change. Might this hostile outlook change if working-class white people learned that black citizens were also fucked in the ass when America’s manufacturing sector suddenly vanished? Or if they learned that the Attica Prison Riots saw whites, Latinos, and blacks come together to demand half-decent living conditions?

“Shut up commie!” says the rich guy who can buy and sell our sorry asses.

Of course, we at Lib Porn don’t advocate a big, pink, fluffy liberal ideal of hug-a-black-man. That type of thinking is condescending and, at its core, detrimental to racial equality as a whole. However, imagine the current instability and financial WTFs of the poor and working-class and how all of that could change we realized we have a lot more in common with each other than we do with most of our (divisive, greedy, and retarded) political leaders. We peons could vote our way into racial and economic equality that America promises. You know, all that life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness stuff we’re always hearing about, except without the institutional racism and economic stratification (both of which usually end with you being out of a job or, if you’re lucky, watching the history of your people get limited to the cruddiest month of the year).

Pictured: February

No, black history isn’t a detriment to race relations. The history of black Americans, plus all the other people in America who have been silenced or ignored, should be jammed into our mainstream history books. However, Black History Month is bullshit. How can a certain segment of history be on par with the others if we limit it, or spend a month highlighting it while we ignore it the rest of the year? This is just another symptom of the Great American Race Problem. If you don’t think so, walk into a blue-collar bar in Philly and ask the first white guy you see about how he feels about Black History Month. He’s likely to dismiss it, possibly with a few unkind words, even though the plight of blacks mirrors the plight of that white guy’s great-grandpop, who was one of those old-timers that were clunked on the head at a union rally back in 1920.

At the very least, we should move Black History Month to the springtime. February fucking sucks. It almost sucks as much as our elite sucking up to black America while stabbing them in the back.

God bless Google Images.

Posted in Propaganda.

Evidence That Porn Is Good For You

Watching Ms. Olson in action might be good for you. No, seriously.

Finally, psychologists are on our side. After years of telling us that Lib Porn’s numerous threats against Chinese sovereignty were symptoms of crippling depression and rage issues, we can finally say, “Yo psychology, good lookin’ bro.” More specifically, to psychologizers Gert Martin Hald and Neil M. Malamuth, you’ve done the world a solid by showing evidence that porn is good for us.

Now, this is the moment where some of our more hostile readers forget that there are several more paragraphs of Lib Porn awesomeness included in this article and head to the comment box to tell us how we’re sexist, retarded, and probably masturbating right now. (Actually, only two of those assumptions are correct; tune in tomorrow to find out which!) Angry anti-porn feminists will spout angry anti-porn propaganda, during which they’ll equate fucking on camera with rape and “prove” that no woman anywhere wants a big dong in her box. Prudish religious types will take a less intellectually curious route and state that watching porn will inevitably lead to viewers burning in hell (right next to Jerry “Three Chins” Falwell…zing!).

However, Hald and Malamuth, the aforementioned psychologizers, conducted a study with a few hundred average Danish people and, after insulting them time and again for Denmark essentially being an extension of Germany’s penis, found that the subjects who watched pornography had happier and healthier outlooks on sex, the opposite gender, and life in general. Mind you, we’re not talking about sissy porn, ie that weak tea nudity on basic cable or boring “erotica” art shows. Hald and Malamuth focused on hardcore porn.

An uninformed prude or anti-porn douchebag (or even sane people, as both Mitch and I pondered this as well) might contend that the study was biased. And guess what? It was. Just not the way you would think. Neil M. Malamuth has for years argued against pornography and proposed that porn was in indeed harmful. Despite the findings of this study, Malamuth hasn’t changed his opinions on porn; he still thinks that it’s naughty garbage, although he admits that it’s naughty garbage that can give a person a healthier outlook on life.

This shouldn’t be surprising. Sex is a good thing, and porn is just sex wrapped up for your entertainment. A main argument against pornography is that it shows an unrealistic portrayal of sexual activity. Well no shit. Porn is, at its core, just entertainment. Few of us would pay to watch normal people have sex because that would be tremendously boring. To say that porn’s unrealistic portrayal of sex is damaging to viewers is a dubious argument. For example, Die Hard is about a cop. But anyone with half a brain knows that no police officers do what Bruce Willis does. Does this unrealistic portrayal of law enforcement cause any damage?

Oh. Well, maybe...

Anyone who has attempted some of the more adventurous positions presented in pornography will quickly understand that adult entertainment isn’t as awesome in real life. That’s because most sex positions in porn are set up so the viewer gets the best angle. These positions make for an awesome viewing experience, but in real life, you’ll end up with a broken hip and a fractured penis. Those awesome fucking positions are the porn equivalent of Bruce Willis jumping off of exploding buildings while dangling from a fire hose. Sure, it looks cool, but I doubt many cops would try it.

Then again...

So please, anti-porn nuts, give the porn-viewing audience some credit; we know that porn is a form of entertainment. And now we have evidence that our favorite form of entertainment just might be good for us.

Posted in Propaganda, Vaguely Porn Biz Related.

Liberal Censorship Vs Conservative Censorship

Devout Christians don't approve of this photo. This is the main reason we're not devout Christians.

“A conservative may tell you that you shouldn’t make fun of cripples. A liberal will tell you, ‘You can’t make fun of cripples’.” — P.J. O’Rourke (paraphrased)

After reading over that quote from Mr. O’Rourke, who happens to be one of three funny conservatives on the planet, I found myself wishing that conservatives still adhered to that idea. They don’t, not anymore. Mind you, I’m not a conservative; I guess I’m a liberal, albeit a liberal who hates other liberals. Political correctness makes us sick. It’s backward, un-American censorship that pussifies our country with nancy-pants, passive-aggressive, thinly-veiled totalitarian speech control that, we at Lib Porn believe, contradicts the most badass Amendment in the Constitution.

Liberal censorship comes in the form of multicultural wishful thinking that totally pretends that Americans don’t harbor racism and, consequently, nobody can make a joke about minorities unless, of course, the insulter is a minority himself, which is pretty retarded. Furthermore, politically correct liberal censorship won’t do a damn thing to cure top-priority racial problems, like institutional racism and economic inequality. Because, really, if minorities were as prosperous as white people, racism would be a non-issue. Nobody would care, especially minorities, at least not the rich ones. And as everyone knows, the only people who really matter in America are rich people. Yes, we also think that racism in speech is totally stupid, but a white guy who makes a disgusting and stupid joke about a black man shouldn’t lose his job (and vice versa) if no real harm is done. Also, remember that sometimes good people can make mistakes, especially when they’re trying to be funny, or in Mel Gibson’s case, totally plastered.

As annoying as liberal political correctness is, it has been absolutely beaten out by conservative censorship. The FCC, Morality In Media, and Focus On The Family try their very hardest to make sure nobody makes fart jokes that include Jesus or sneeze in the general direction of a nearby American flag. Normally, we at Lib Porn wouldn’t care so much, but we are very fond of big boobs, and the conservative wackjobs are once again attacking boobs with unrelenting annoyingness.

"Why do Catholics hate us so much?" asked the boobs.

Morality In Media, a douchebaggy organization that tries to promote, uh, morality in media, tries to pretend that it isn’t a religious group. Except that it is, because it was founded by a Catholic priest by the name of Morton A. Hill who took it upon himself to inject…um…more morality into our media. I guess that would be okay, except that the morality Hill wanted to inject was a Catholic morality, and Catholics, at least the most prominent Catholic loudmouths, hate it when they see big sets of knockers (or gay people, or strippers, or anything interesting) on television.

MIM recently got really, really mad because GoDaddy.com, a large website hosting company, has paid to have their “indecent” commercial aired during the Super Bowl.

Because, ya know, there are never any hot boob shots during the Super Bowl...

The ads feature no nudity, only hot girls dancing around a little bit because most guys who want their own website rarely see attractive women anywhere else. MIM President-slash-head douchebag Robert Peters has accused GoDaddy of trying to advertise “Lesbian strip performances”, which is wholly untrue, for if GoDaddy had such an ad, I would not have posted this article, as I would have been busy watching said commercial over and over again.

Now, the main difference between liberal PC censorship and its conservative equivalent is that the liberals kind of have a point. Destructive, racist language is bad. Any idiot knows that, even if we have a Constitutional right to say whatever we please as long as it doesn’t incite violence toward others (as in how a leader of a rabid mob may face charges if he fires up the mob to go lynch some poor bastard, even if he takes no direct part in the violence). Also, racist language is a symptom of a greater racist problem, namely America’s love of kicking minorities around for no good reason. While we at Lib Porn disagree with many tenants of political correctness as a whole, we understand where they’re coming from and at least their intentions are admirable. Not so with conservatives.

Conservative censorship, which is fueled by Judeo-Christian morality, doesn’t worry so much about racism, which is bad. Instead they go after titties, which are good. Any PG-rated “racy” content on the airwaves must be purged, in their opinion, because it damages society as a whole. Except that there’s no proof for this, and those who are offended by the content are pissed off for the same reasons that Imams force Muslim women into those stifling burkas; in other words, they’re fucking religious prudes. We wouldn’t mind that, either, except that they assume the rest of us share the same sensitivities.

Sure, the sensitivities of all people should be respected, just not the arbitrary sensitivities. A black woman who is offended by the shit Don Imus said has, in our opinion, a more legitimate beef. After all, black women are consistently insulted in American media, and those insults are a symptom of the plight of black women in America. Christians, however, are mad because they don’t like tits, a view which they accepted. No black woman, nor any other minority, had a hand in what sort of life they would have when they were born; a black woman was born black, and thus born a victim of racial injustice in America. Christians choose to be Christians. Their sensitivities are arbitrary because if they loosened up, got laid, and watched more porn, they wouldn’t get so pissy about sexy commercials.

Posted in Propaganda.

Safety Nazis and the Smoking Internet Baby

No matter how you look at it, a baby smoking is really funny.

It’s official. The International Safety Nazis (ISN) of the world have declared that you can no longer have any sort of fun with your very own baby. Recently, the ISNs were super pissed that a teenage British mother posted pictures of her toddler with (gasp!) an unlit cigarette in his mouth. The ISN who saw the photo immediately called the British police, who sprinted to the mother’s house with their funny British cop ‘helmets’ and nightsticks. Unfortunately for the ISNs, the mother was not, apparently, kicking her child in the face upon the police’s arrival and the authorities saw no reason to believe the child was in any danger.

This is all incredibly gay. It’s gay that someone called the police on the mother, it’s gay that semi-professional news outlets are reporting the story, which, in a weird way, makes Liberating Porn gay for posting about what we will now call the Newport Baby. As unrelentingly gay as this all is, it’s even gayer than for some reason we can no longer dress up, decorate, or pose our children in the funniest manner possible.

Actually, this one might be a bad idea.

Babies are, by nature, pretty dumb. They don’t know anything and especially don’t understand how stupid we can make them look. As full grown human beings, it’s our evolutionary right as superior organisms to make jackasses out of our offspring, at least until they’re old enough to creep money out of our wallets, poison our beers, or get pregnant. For instance, I was a fat child. My father would often call me “bitch tits” and although there were no social networking sites in 1989, he would have doubtlessly dressed me as a girl then posted the pictures for the world to see (as I sobbed tears of baby horror onto my flubby bitch tits) had there been a Facebook at the time. And you know what? I would have turned out fine, or at the very least, no more fucked up than I am now. My point is, babies are too stupid to know when we’re really making fun of them. And fuck them if they can’t take a joke.

And, may I point out, the goddamn cigarette wasn’t even lit. Newport Baby is not a chain smoker. (By the way, if Newport Baby becomes a chain smoker, his mother should be punished for giving him a Newport 100 brand cigarette; 100s are a waste of time because, as a smoker myself, I’ve found that 100s taste like diluted crap with more fiberglass than tobacco, and if you’re going to give yourself lung cancer, you might as well do it with a decent cigarette.)

Contrary to popular belief, a single cigarette will not give you full body cancer. Although we’re told to believe that tobacco products will assume sentience then rise up and enslave humanity in a cloud of smoke, one cigarette won’t kill you. Getting addicted to nicotine isn’t even that easy; to do so, you have to make a concerted effort to plow through sickening lung-fulls of smoke that, in the beginning of your journey into addiction, will make you lightheaded and nauseous. Furthermore, an unlit cigarette won’t do a damn thing to you or, as fate would have it, your toddler. In fact, a toddler who waddles around preschool with an unlit Newport dangling from his stupid baby lips will grow up just as healthy as any non-smoking baby. The ISNs forget that cigarettes, like most other forms of matter, only produce smoke when lit on fire. And unless a very small bolt of lightning strikes the end of Newport Baby’s cigarette, there’s not much of a chance that he’ll be puffing any time soon.

I for one would like to see the ISNs separated from the rest of us. As human beings, we have the right to do as we wish with our offspring if it causes them no harm. (Physical harm, anyway. The crippling emotional stress I feel when I hear the term “bitch tits” still results in hours upon hours of sobbing emotional agony.) Honestly, unlit cigarettes are nothing to be worried about when compared to the myriad horrors of toddlerhood. Shitty cartoons are much worse, not to mention The Wiggles, who are no doubt a gang of child-abducting man-children who will turn any baby’s brain to mush. Given the entertainment we deem appropriate for our babies, we already consider them to be lowly beings with poorly developed minds. If we’re already putting them through The Wiggles, what’s wrong with a pack of smokes?

Child appropriate?

Posted in Propaganda.