Now you’ve misinterpreted me. I was under the assumption that Hustler is a widely known pornographic publication/production house and Larry Flynt a widely known free speech advocate as a defender of said business empire.

I assumed (wrongly) that the objection to Hustler being in the title was a blanket rejection of sex work as a part of the general social contract worth discussing at all. But I assumed that based on very similar views widely expressed here, and a misunderstanding of very specific wording.

Believe me I don’t expect HN to ever be sufficiently pro sex worker. But I’ve seen enough anti that I’ve made a point to push back some when I can.

You've made a point to read into anodyne comments to credulously fit your narrative of what HN users believe or don't believe?

Actually, eat a metaphorical detective. I obviously didn’t make a point to read anything into your comment. I mistook your meaning because I sincerely thought it was other than what you clarified. And not only apologized directly for the mistake but purposefully made an edit at the top of my comment to be clear I recognized my mistake and had no ill intent. You coming for a snipe after is unnecessary.

I wasn’t as charitable in my interpretation as I could have been, but honestly I had no idea Hustler isn’t such a common name that there would be any ambiguity. You could take a charitable interpretation in turn and recognize that I sincerely thought you were upset by the prominence of that publication/brand being in the title and see where the rest of my response follows from that.