>>4186018No corporate would use my photography or anything similar to it. You know this.
>>4186017Having freedom of expression is not the same as "muh satanism". I think you're a bit hung up on that and have potentially lost your mind to an invisible non existent boogeyman, but hope you're just trying to derail because you don't like my work and have simply dug yourself into this weird hole of conflating and seething. It's totally fine if you don't like my photography and totally fine if you have a problem with pornography, I personally don't like or use pornography either. Although I believe in other people's freedom to create it and use it.
Sadly I kind of agree with
>>4185921 because most of what you're annoyed about you're assuming or is just unrelated stuff in your head.
>"I had a feeling so I came here to chastise you"Is really the ultimate undoing of your point because it just shows you to be an authoritarian who believe you have a right to police everything you see, shape the world around you to be only exactly what you deem "right" and attempt to exert power over others. That's more closely aligned with the satanism you claim to hate than my photography is.
>>4186067Not me (I always post a photo) but my work is no more pornography than a woman is a drug or a horse is a motorbike.
Cheers for the chat but I think it's getting a bit circular now.
