clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

"Kinky Condos": Readers Provide Moral Compass, Entertainment

New, 1 comment

We've had a grand old time today, sitting back and watching other blogs' readers lose their minds over the mere idea of porn connoisseur Peter Ackworth constructing residential units of some ilk inside of the Armory building, home base to his kink.com studios. Is the fallout from this morning's Chron article simply due to a lack of reader comprehension— the spot makes no mention of residential real estate for rent or sale— or its it just another example of the Squares versus the Pink Ladies? Like others, we also suspect that these units (should they actually be built) will be used as live, 24/7 action pads— not the below market rate units Chron readers are currently squabbling back and forth over. This stuff is priceless:

jibber_jabber: Hilarious, the neighborhood idiots who whined about every use of the Armory got just what they deserved. I walked by just to see their protest a year or so ago and there was the news vans and twenty protester's. I stopped and asked a news van guy if I missed the protest and he laughed and said "that was it", we joked for a couple minutes. It must be tough to live in this liberal idiot town and not have your fellow commies turn out.

richardlyon: I think that Acworth should consider selling timeshares to culturally deprived tourists from the midwest. He could offer a package deal for them to put their dogs up at the Wag Hotel just down the street.

quercophile: How would rent in these condos be calculated? You owe a certain number of sex acts per month? Eviction proceedings would be amusing.

Sahmommy: "And porn isn't expression. Celine Dion is expression as is Barbara Kingsolver and Emily Dickenson and the Wiggles."

·Porn prince wants to build kinky condos in Armory [SF Chron]

[Cartoon courtesy cartoonist Tom Meyer and the Chronicle.]