Good News: Saving The Environment Through Sex

No, seriously (via Climate Depot)

(Guardian) “Blood and sperm. The perfect mix,” says a tattooed hippy, as he licks both off his hands, having just had sex with a woman in front of a small audience in a Berlin basement. “Life-giving fluids we are all so afraid of. We’re so afraid of ourselves! It’s all organic.” It’s not everyone’s idea of popular entertainment, but this scene can be experienced at a safe distance in a new documentary, F*ck for Forest, detailing the activities of the group of the same name (without the asterisk). They enjoy confronting society with sex, nudity and bodily fluids, but what Fuck for Forest (FFF) really want to do is save the world. So this isn’t just pervy performance art; it’s also fundraising.

Few people would imagine any overlap exists between pornography and environmentalism, but FFF smash the two concepts together right there in their brutally blunt name. It’s a concise signifier of what they do and how little they care about what you think of it. The live displays are a sideline; funds are primarily raised via their website, which has images and videos of its core staff members and whatever volunteers they pick up on the street in myriad sexual permutations, from naked people up trees to chaotic orgies. Subscribers pay about :£10 a month, and the proceeds go towards rainforest conservation projects in South America.

It’s difficult to know how to categorise such an enterprise. Is it kinky eco-activism? Porn for foliage fetishists? Exhibitionism with the fig-leaf of a good cause? FFF have a better question: What is more obscene, they ask, the depiction of people enjoying their sexuality or the destruction of our natural environment?

I’m kinda torn here: are they doing good, or are they a bunch of nuts? On one hand, they kinda want people to live the same lives as the indigenous peoples in the rain forests and get a bit militant in their methods of nudity and sex (read the rest of the Guardian story). On the other hand, they are actually using the money they raise to protect the rainforests in South and Central America to the tune of around $130,000 a year. And, while they’re website doesn’t ever seem to mention “climate change”, they do live a rather austere lifestyle.

Just to be clear, according to their website (FYI, as you could imagine, it is NOT safe for work), they are much more than simply being eco-friendly. Things like “body normalization”, “free love”, and “to be sexual is not a crime” are featured.

So, which is worse, these FFFers who tend to actually care about the environment and do it with “pornography” or the Warmists and environmental groups who preach a lot and demand that you comply while they don’t?

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Related Articles


The House Kills the Senate’s $322 Million Climate Service

FacebookTwitterEmail Last week the House killed a new Senate approved, bureaucratic boondoggle that according to the House Appropriations Committee would


We Need Safe Food, Not New Regulations

FacebookTwitterEmail Churchville, VA–Deirdre Schlunegger, the head of an organization named “STOP Food borne Illness,” warned recently on the Huffington Post


NBC And Olympic Environmentalism, Then And Now

NBC reports that the 2010 winter Olympics are being hampered by an overzealous commitment environmentalism. But what did the 2008 summer Olympics think of greener-than-thou NBC deploying outdoor air conditioning(!) to cool their set during the 2008 summer Olympics in Beijing?

Share This

Share this post with your friends!