Comment Comment by supr_strudl >Not because he was a pornographer, but simply because he did what he pleased and fought like hell to protect that right.That's what's wrong with the "free" world. If something's legal doesn't mean it's moral.He did what he pleased for sure, but at what expense. Many would argue he contributed to objectifying women. There's always a flip side. parent supr_strudl 5 years ago
That's what's wrong with the "free" world. If something's legal doesn't mean it's moral.
He did what he pleased for sure, but at what expense. Many would argue he contributed to objectifying women. There's always a flip side.