Jacco

[Link]

Leaving them curbside and unpaid is one thing, but i've seen clips where they actually appear to drive off with purses still in the bangbus.
The mere sound of this guy's giggling alone, suggests not only would he lack the balls to deal with the pimps eventually seeking his ass, but the first spurned, vengeful BJ artist to track this joker down, would probably have him pissing his pants.

[Link]

If it wasn't, don't you think that at least occasionally they would pick up a girl that doesn't have a perfectly groomed bush?

The legal ramifications of them doing this, if the girls were not paid professionals, would not allow them to stay in business as long as they have.

[Link]

Edited by - scipio on 10/16/2005 1:36:37 AM

[Link]

I'm not much on Kierkegaard though I've read it extensively. I favor myself a deconstructionist in the vein of Jacques Derrida and Paul de Man (RIP) from Yale.

[Link]

As for the whole thing about the girls being perfectly groomed "down there," it is not uncommon for many young girls, especially sexually active ones, to shave or wax nowadays. In fact, alot of them do it just for personal reasons or to please their boyfriends. If a girl is the kind of chick who will have sex for millions of people to see, it does not seem unusual that she would also be the kind of girl who would wax regularly.

Also, please don't misunderstand what I am saying. I know that they are not really just picking up random chicks and asking them to have sex on camera. If that were the case, the guys would spend more time getting slapped, cursed out, and Mased than they would actually filming anything. The chicks know what they are getting into from the very beginning. They know that they are going to have sex on camera. And yes, they do sign contracts before anything happens. In fact, some of the episodes even show the girls signing something (or pretending to) once in the van.

The thing that I wonder about is the final "drop-off," not the sex. Even if the girls know that they are going to be having sex on camera, do they know that they will be left stranded and unpaid at the end? This, of course, is the whole gimmick behind the site. Like I said previously, most of the girls on that site are girls that I have not seen anywhere else, not even on any of these guys' other sites. The majority of them are not "pro" actresses, and they are not the same girls who you see popping up on every other teen porn site. Even if they sign a contract, who knows what's in the contract? Does the contract say anything about what they will be paid, or if they will be paid at all, or is it just a release saying they agreed to get fucked on camera and be posted on a website? After all, do the "Girls Gone Wild" chicks get paid? No they do not.

Plus, regardless of what the contract says, who keeps the contract? It is the directors who keep it. Usually, the only recourse that an actress has if she has been screwed over is to not to work for the guys anymore and to spread the word around to other chicks, which can be disaster for your career and reputation if you are in the "professional" aspect of the business. But if you are dealing with mostly newcomers and amateurs all the time, that's not really a major issue. And even if the girl tries to sue, what is she going to say? That she let some guy record her getting fucked and didn't get paid for it? That sounds alot like prostitution, which is illegal anyway. Besides, once again, who knows what was written in the contract?

There was only one bangbus episode that showed them going back to the girl after they left her. The girl left her purse in the van, and when she came back to get it, they drove off without giving it to her. They even started going through her purse to see what was in it. Later however, the camera showed them going back to where they left the girl to give her the purse back. She angrily snatched the purse from them and called them all assholes. Other than that, they never showed themselves going back to where they left the girls, which was another thing I couldn't understand. Why would they just show it that one time and not others?

But anyway, the one thing I can say about the bangbus site is that it does exactly what "reality" porn supposed to do, which is to make the audience think that it's real even if it's not. There are some "reality" sites out there that are so obviously fake that it's not even funny. Some sites say that their girls are amateurs when they've already been in 50 other movies, or they will have the girls act out a certain role which they girl won't be able to able to convincingly play to save her life, etc. But on bangbus, there are so many episodes I've seen where I really do have to wonder if the girl is for real, or if she is just that good of an actress. There was even one episode where I actually started to feel kinda sorry for the girl at the "drop-off." While she was getting fucked, the guys went into her purse and stole her jewelry that she had there. At the drop-off, they told her to look into her purse because they wanted to look at her jewelry again. When she saw it wasn't there, she started to get really upset and rummaging through her purse looking for it. Meanwhile, they sped off giggling as usual with the money they were supposed to pay her in hand. And I have never seen this chick anywhere else before or since.

I guess that's probably why I like the site. It's because even though I know it's not real, it just seems like it could be possible that it is. I must say, whether it's "real" or not, the guys who came up with it had a great idea for a successful gimmick.

[Link]

What recourse does a performer (or private individual) have if their pictures are used without a signed consent?
Lawsuit.
Not just never work for a director again. Not just spreading the word.

Does it sound like prostitution to you? We have many threads about that issue. Anyways, courts have distinguished the two, which is what matters.

[Link]

I thought porn girls all really loved gulping down huge loads of cum and could cum just thinking about taking 2 dicks up their ass at the same time and now this.

I swear ta god.... if it wasn't for the easter bunny and the tooth fairy, I would have no reason to live.

At least I have my squirting movies. Those are real thank god.

On a side note - anyone remember the story when they got busted in their van driving around Miami fucking away in the back of the van? too funny.
;-)

[Link]

Croy wrote:

Again, I am not arguing that this stuff is real. All I am saying is that the guys who make it do an excellent job of at least making it so convincing that it at least seems real, which is why so many people, even those of us who know better, sometimes find ourselves having doubts when watching these episodes.

It actually seems so real that none of the arguments against it being real work. Trust me, I have deconstructed all of the arguments, which I had already thought about myself. For example, you can't bring up the issue of STD testing because the guys wear condoms. You can't say that the girls are "actresses" because they are nowhere else to be found. You can't bring up the issue of contracts because some of the episodes actually show the girls signing a contract (or pretending to). Plus, even if they do have to wait however long for an AIDS test or have the girl sign a contract, how does any of that stop them from leaving girls stranded along the side of a highway at the end?

Believe me, I had already considered all of these possibilities for why it cannot be "real." And I already know that it is not real. That is not what I'm saying. Again, my point is that the brilliance of the site is that it is so good that it makes you think it is possible that it could be real. But then again, maybe it's just me.

[Link]

Interesting choices of philosophers you champion, perhaps you'd like to defend them In this thread.

You've probably read enough post-modern theory, likewise, to realize that in a way almost all films (or scenes) are documentaries (hence reality) to a certain extent (animation being one possible exception). After all, most films capture people, places, and some sort of action regardless of a fictional narrative or some non-linear narrative found in most avant-guard works.

In other words, film is still capturing/documenting Kate Winslet, Sylvia Saint, and even those models at the BangBus site at a certain time in a certain place, even if there is that fictional layer to take it out of "reality." Deconstruction as a tool (being used in this post to blur the boundaries of the fiction/documentary genres) is a fun game to play in the arts (been there, done that), but not in the sciences (e.g. philosophy). If I need to masturbate, I already have porn, I don't need Derrida (although I'll admit he is damn perverse in most of his writings, but aren't we all perverts ). Curious to know your thoughts.

Cheers,
K.

[Link]

Jacco

[Link]

I double-majored in English and Philiophy and wrote my master's thesis on de Man's evolution as a deconstructionist, so yeah I've read most of that list before. Intersting that Immanuel Kant's Prolegomena and Hobbes' Leviathan are not mentioned. But if it's based on citation alone...Kant was hard to read in English and even harder in German. Also reminds me of the Monty Python Philospher's Song.

But I came for porn, and porn it will be! Oh, I noted Plato once on XPT. It still surprises me that anyone thinks reality porn is real. It just doesn't pass the smell test. Of the dozens, now hundres of sites who drop the banged girls off/leave the banged girls in the water, etc, etc., no one has been rung up on criminal charges? I don't subscribe to the Bang Bus content but I've gone back to the original days of milfhunter.com in 2002. The majority of these people are porn performers maybe some just as they were getting into mainline porn like Ava Devine and Vicky Vette, maybe some amateurs...but you roll up with a camera crew unannounced and ask if you want to get laid? C'mon. It's fun, it's jerkworthy. but it just ain't real.

And now I can't get, "Socrates himself was permanently pissed." out of mind, damn!

[Link]

But like DAC, I saw Taryn Thomas, Aiden Layne, Nyomi Marcela, Persia DeCarlo, Annie Cruz, Veronika Raquel, Sin Star, Claire James, Mary Jane and others.

[Link]

As for the legalities...let's just leave that alone, I don't think you want to start that up. Maybe ask a porn girl here about the difference between prostitution and pornography.

[Link]

Also, hell yes on Hobbes and that thin work Prolegomena. I think I finally understood what Kant was trying to accomplish by reading that and his Groundwork on the Metaphysics of Morals (a work you've probably already looked at, but that 3rd essay in that piece is awesome). Don't get me wrong, I probably should read those 3 critiques, but they just look so nice on my bookshelf I feel like I shouldn't move them around too much .

Anyway man, nice. Honestly, if you grew up Catholic or semi-religious, Kierkegaard might be of some interest, but I really just used the name as the avatar looks like me somewhat and I knew Nietzsche was already taken on the board, hence...

Check out that Martin Jay work though, if possible, there's some interesting points made throughout the work. Have you read any Bishop Berkeley? His stuff fucks with my mind like nothing else. I was this close to going to grad school to study philosophy (specifically the British Empiricists, Hume is such a fucking bad-ass, my 2 cents), but went to film school instead. Hence all my diatribes about film aesthetics, taste, and other nonsense on this board .

Anyway, cheers man.

K.

[Link]

the reason you don't recognize most of the girls is because BangBus films in Florida. Most known porn stars are based in L.A. Bangbus certainly doesn't pay enough for them to make the trip just to shoot for BangBus, but they'll do it if they're there dancing or for Internext. They use whomever they can get either through agents or their newspaper ads. Jut because you don't recognize them doesn't mean they're no professional local talent -- i.e., strippers, hookers, etc. Do you get it now? LOL

BTW to everybody, to me this proves the problem with this kind of site -- the audience is not as sophisticated as we'd like to believe when we're making excuses for the depiction of rotten behavior towards women on reality porn sites as being "obviously fantasy."

[Link]

Part of the difficulty in reading deconstruction by Derrida...is that Derrida writes deconstructively. He intentionally plays off the endless jumble of signifiers and signifieds when he writes. He's also French, and therefore full of himself. Paul de Man (RIP) was a professor @ Yale. His writing is in the vein of Derrida, but with a more analytical approach. "Blindness and Insight" is a good one, early 1980s I recall. Some of his colleagues from Yale such as J. Hillis Miller and Barbara Johnson write well on the subject, too.

Considering the negative connotation that pornography has in Western culture, Derrida would no doubt find numerous differances here, not the least of which is the West's subordination of writing to speech.

[Link]

I know that these girls must sign release forms, take tests, consent to being filmed, and everything else. In fact, I have already said all this. But again, I repeat myself by asking the same question, How does any of this mean that they are not really ditching these girls at the end?

It has been mentioned that if the guys really did this, then they would be sued. This not true because, as I has written previously, fucking a girl and ditching afterward her is not a crime. Also, even with the issue of contracts, I had meant to mention before that porn contracts typically do not specify things such as payment amount, specific sex acts, etc. All a contract typically states is that the person agrees to have his/her activities recorded, and that such recording becomes the sole property of the director and/or the company to do with it whatever they please. Other things, such as what the actress will be paid, what sex acts she will perform, etc., are usually always negotiated between the director and the actress, and is not apart of the written contract. For example, a contract probably does not state that the girl agrees to be fucked in the ass, or to swallow jizz, etc. Those are things which are verbally agreed upon, just like how much she will be paid. Once an agreement is made between the director and the actress, the release contract is signed stating that the director has the right to release whatever he records.

You may ask, How does any of this relate to the bangbus "drop-offs?" I'm glad you asked. It has to deal with the whole point of my post, which everyone seems to keep missing. Just because the girls on that site are paid performers and sign a release form does not mean that they are also agreeing to be ditched at the end. I am sure that is probably not in the contract.

For instance, I will point out one episode as an example of why I am so convinced that the girls do not expect to be ditched. There was one episode where, when the girl realized she been locked out of the van at the end, she began cursing and kicking the van door... hard! She even threw rocks at the van as it sped away. Yet, I know it's easy to say that she was just "acting" angry. However, at the risk of possible damage to the vehicle, why would they plan something like this? Wouldn't they know that she could possibly dent the door, or possibly break a window or a light by throwing a rock at it (which you can actually hear hitting the van)? It just didn't make sense that they would plan something like that and risk damaging their own vehicle. By the way, when this same chick got into the vehicle, she had a purse with her. But when she got out, she did not. The guys pointed this out at the end as they were rummaging through it to see what was in it, as they do on many of their episodes. And yet, this is another chick that cannot be found anywhere else.

I am convinced that if these "drop-offs" (not the sex, not the pick-up, but only the "drop-off!") are not real, then the guys and girls on this site must be experts at improv, because in order for four people to make a "drop-off" look that convincing, they have to be talented, and I am not willing to give them that much credit.

Again, just because these girls sign contracts and gree to have sex on camera does not mean that they agree to be stranded at the end, which there is no crime for doing and no grounds on which the girls can sue them. That is the point of my post, and that is why I still debate to myself whether only the "drop-offs" must be real.

[Link]

Yes, it doesn't prove anything to you.

[Link]

First of all, I must comment on how amazing it is that I have seen several threads on this board with people up-in-arms claiming that women are being degraded and mistreated in porn nowadays. But when I mention the bangbus "drop-offs," it is suddenly "only fantasy," which I find odd.

The reason I say this is because even though I may not be sure whether the bangbus "drop-offs" are real, I would like to believe that they are not real because I find them demeaning (despite the fact that I still like the site), and was trying to see if anyone had any actual proof to state that they are fake. Bangbus is probably the only site that I find myself loving and hating at the same time. I watch alot of porn that people would label mysogynistic (throat gagging, spitting in girl's faces, head stomping, etc.), and I have no problem with it. In fact, and I know people will hate me for saying this, but I love seeing that stuff.

However, bangbus is the only site that actually makes me feel sincerely sorry for the girls, and I can't believe or agree with how badly they get treated. I think the reason I am focusing so much on the bangbus "drop-offs" is because they seem so real, while in other movies and sites, you know that the girl is only performing and can stop at anytime, so the degradation is not as real and therefore more tolerable.

For example, even on the Meatholes site, which advertises itself to be mysogynistically hardcore, you can still tell that the girl is enjoying what she is doing by her body language, what she says, etc. On the other hand, with bangbus, all you see at the end is a van speeding away from a pissed-off girl without paying her. There is no BTS footage of the girl laughing and joking after the scene; no BTS footage of the actors rehearsing or explaining the "drop-off;" no follow-up interview asking the girl why she agreed to be treated so badly on screen (like Brandon Iron used to do with "Slap Happy"), etc. The last image you see of the girl is of some angry chick either chasing after the van, yelling at them, throwing things, etc. And even I, with my sometimes-sadistic tastes, have to wonder, "How can these guys be so low?" And yet, even though I detest seeing the way they treat these girls, I still somehow find the site somewhat likeable, which is strange I know.

No, I do not believe the "drop-offs" are real, and I don't want to believe they are real. Yet, everytime I tell myself that it is all staged, I see another episode that sadly affects me in a way that no other mysogynistic porn does. Even though I tell myself it's not real, I still end up hating these guys and thinking they are assholes. Maybe I wouldn't think that if they would at least tell us that the "drop-offs" are not real. But then, if they did that, it would defeat the whole point of the gimmick.

I guess the only solution is for me to just stop visiting the site and to stop watching the episodes trying to find some hint or confirmation that the "drop-offs" are not "real" (when I actually only keep seeing stuff to further convince me that they are real). But I know I'm probably not going to do that. That is why I came here to ask the question to see if anybody would have any more knowledge about this than I do.

[Link]

2. If you're a pro or am and are selected to do BB, and you don't know how the schtick runs, you need to better homework.

Fact is, reality isn't so real. Riots in the streets, cats and dogs living together, mass hysteria! RTT

[Link]