The title of the topic is not what other GC feminists feel, but what the limits should be. You are asking for a broad declaration when it must be and can only be a reflection of the individual's experiences and the sense they make out of the role 'erotic consumption and sexual behavior' play in the person's life and relationships and as they see it in society. I think in general we've taken too far the idea that "we" (any "we" there is) are some cohesive group with the same ideas and motivations and goals and needs and desires and experiences that can then draw up guidelines we can all agree to follow. The past decade or two has been one massive erasing of the fact that we are all individuals. I think it has left us where we're now easily manipulated as masses of "wes" by centralized authoritarians that ultimately really just despise us all.

I apologize, because I thought you were coming from a disingenuous place and were like a member of team QT trying to find ways to divide the rather loose GC community or to undermine the GC position by focusing on extreme outliers.

My best answer is that there are hurt people out there and they express their pain in sometimes over-reaching ways and by imposing their caution and their defense mechanisms on others. The idea of berating a woman for dating a guy who views porn or who has viewed porn is obviously unrealistic. There simply would not be that many of those guys to go around.

An honest and open discussion about it between the couple might be rare, and very tough, and probably long. The benefit could be amazing though. But, who really is open to that kind of transparency and scrutiny and all that, without the reflexive "well what about this other thing you do" getting in the way?

But women who are looking to kick out less strident women are probably acting out their own defense mechanisms, OR we're talking about fake accounts who are trying to divide people and push the most black and white world view to cause discord. There is so much of the latter, creating more homogeneous "wes" to categorize and manipulate, that we have to start accounting for it in everything. Minus that very real group of sock puppets, those were express it genuinely need healing.

The guys who are looking at porn have to understand it in at least two contexts. First being the obvious exploitation and damage that is going, both the seen and unseen, and both in the actual porn as well as in the industry that is not seen, but before the women even agree to get into porn. (and after). The other context is the inclination to get off on porn which has many contributing factors. The idea that we're just naturally supposed be masturbating should be reexamined. I doubt the dopamine addiction (I think that is what it is) was understood back when psychologists were pushing back against "it's a sin, you'll go blind and grow hair on your palms" (though, going blind might be an excellent symbolic representation of it) and no one listening to psychologists back then had any idea just how bad psych was with publish bad studies and doing bad work and the whole crisis of reproducibility it has.

The utility of using porn towards that end can not be separated from what is essentially the sexual or relationship propaganda that porn delivers along with the 'eye candy' during what I guess is the firing of mirror neurons in the process. Going back to the surprising and probably unintentional symbolism in "it will make you go blind", these lies in that propaganda blind the guy to what is real in himself and in women and in the woman in his life if he has one. I don't expect those GC women who are also victims of men, who then develop such strong defense mechanisms, to see porn that way nor to explain to guys why it's bad like a grown up talking to a kid. I don't expect many people to have thought about it deeply enough, and I doubt I have either.

Sorry for misconstruing your motivations, and I offer up the above words as an apology. I hope you like words in salad form!