We should probably change the title of this thread. I asked a simple question to start it, simply stated I was a fan of Max & it has turned into. . .actually I don't know what it has turned into?????
Ooh, I likes this thread I didn't investigate Max, I didn't prosecute Max, I didn't preside over Max's trial, I didn't convict Max, and I certainly did not sentence Max. That being said, the fact that he sits in jail really doesn't bother me - if for nothing else than the issue that no one will ever be able to convince me that all the girls were willing, consenting participants in all the scenes he filmed.
Andrea Dworkin was a lesbian despot that longed to be dictator of the USA so she could push her twisted, sex deprived, hedonistic desire to put all us men to death in this country or at least cut our dicks and balls off of us and beat us daily 300 times with a leather strap or even a two by four! In reality, she needed to get laid three times a day for a decade but her demeanor was so ugly that she could not attract a man due to her demand to be in charge of everyone and everything. I don't say this often, but I am glad Andrea Dworkin is dead and hope she never had any kids! As for that "friend" of hers that protested with her (I forgot her name), I think Mike South needs to find her and teach her the finer things in life.
After reading about her life, I respect her much more than I respect many people in porn and porn forums. She may have been off target in her anger, but I don't expect people to be entirely logical.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Mar 24 2010 : 6:13AM
^ I would agree that her background was sad and tragic but unfortunately she was given a platform completely unsuited to someone who was incapable of rational or nuanced thought. Her thinking was so crazy that I think she wasn't all there (I know dismissing women as crazy has a long dishonourable history but it's pretty hard to escape if you've read an entire book of ranting by Dworkin), the strange thing was that for a time in the 80s she was given so much legitimacy and attention, but then that was the decade of Pat Robertson as well. If she had her way the world we would be living in would be very repressive and absurd: she actually advocated that women should live as lesbian separatists from men in their own state like Israel. Seriously. Where that would leave straight women, non-violent men and the sons of women, not to mention the entire human race, I'm not sure she ever considered. Oh, and she wanted lesbians to stop using dildos and strap-ons, or having sub/dom sex, etc, etc...she wanted to tell lots of people what they could do in their bedrooms.
[Link]
Zablon Deactivated User
162 Posts 2/10
Posted - Mar 28 2010 : 9:08AM
I hope they leave him alone when he comes out. No need to dig further into his stuff to find any other dirt to convict him on. That happens all the time.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 28 2010 : 3:11PM
She WAS. It's a good bet that her weight and her bitterness killed her.
[Link]
AsianAnalPantyhoserGuy Deactivated User
Ass fucking/ foot fetish/ pantyhose= insanity! 465 Posts 3/10
Posted - Mar 28 2010 : 5:53PM
Max started out with his loops for Mr. Peepers, then we had the ANAL ADVENTURES OF MAX HARDCORE, and ANALVISION days, these were really graphic and well captured with high quality cameras for their time. When he went to work for ZANE, his production quality became the worst on the market. Later, as FILMWEST productions, he became the man who loved to tease foot lovers with all kinds of silly little compulsive tricks and gravitated purely toward blatant child molestation themes. By the time he was incarcerated, he had become a monster. Any company that promotes and profits off scenes that say loudly and clearly,..."I fuck girls 5 years old!" and "I ass pumped an 8 year old the other day while her mommy was watching!"...that company and its affiliates should be held accountable. It is to the best of my knowledge that they totally walked away from that action without incident.
Well, for the purposes of discussion, and only because I saw this counter argument recently and it made me think...how does Max differ from other "fantasy" representations of rape and misogny? Or violence in general? Is it the act, or how it is presented? Jody Foster gets brutally raped on Film and gets an Academy Award in 1989. Films beyond count feature murders and rapes and child abuse and win critical acclaim and awards and box office millions. Pretty Baby? Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Blue Lagoon? Last Tango? Scarface? Etc? I mean, hate and violence and sex is the calling card of modern cinema. Is Max REALLY so much more horrible that he needs to be imprisoned? Which of our modern award winners would have been jailed three or four decades ago?
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 29 2010 : 7:19AM
Nobody. Your post suggests Dworkin died as a consquence of her views, whereas she probably died in consquence of her weight. Her bitterness and the frustration of trying to sell what no one was buying, i.e. the abolition of sex. The latter cause, I suppose, could be construed as 'dying of her ideas, but I doubt it contributed much to the obesity. I doubt, at the moment, that Paul Little feels like a winner.
[Link]
AsianAnalPantyhoserGuy Deactivated User
Ass fucking/ foot fetish/ pantyhose= insanity! 465 Posts 3/10
Posted - Mar 29 2010 : 10:12AM
Guam, I feel you. I think that Hollywood is saturated with the same type of scum as Max, they just don't push it as graphically. This free reign of sex/violence promotion indicates the level of power and organization that they employ to brain-wash the populace. HOLLYWOOD HARDCORE
I guess that depends on what he was actually trying to accomplish. I'm not buying that he's crazy. Not completely, anyway (He sounds too rational when he speaks and writes something as Paul Little from the few examples I've seen). And I'm not sure I buy that he's a pedo (If he isn't crazy he wouldn't out himself like that if he was a pedo). And he tried entirely too hard to provoke the government for me to believe he didn't expect them to try and go after him eventually. Which is (I believe) why he used the young girls/abuse/humiliation thing. That's as offensive as it gets and is sure to get some kind of reaction. It was so over the top it was almost a caricature of everything the anti porners always said was bad about porn. But, of course, they always needed a guy just like Max to be the singular living embodiment of all of those things. And Max was right there in a great big spotlight making himself a perfect example of all of the ugliest aspects of porn. Is that an incredible coincidence or what? Catch my drift? So. What does this say? I think (IMO) that it says he's (probably) perfectly sane, probably not a real pedo (Though it's entirely possible he had some proclivities) and was trying his damnedest to get himself prosecuted. What do those things say? I'm not sure but it makes me a little suspicious about his motives. Edited by - randomprecision on 3/30/2010 1:16:57 AM
^ I'm still suspicious. I've been trying to figure out what to make of him for years. There are easier and much less painful ways to self destruct than getting yourself sent to prison. Not that people don't do it all the time. I don't know. I'm just saying something's odd and he was awfully convenient for the anti porn crowd.
No. I'm saying he's an old man who made the most objectionable porn he could make, for some odd reason. I don't believe in shape shifting lizards but I have no problems believing people occasionally have ulterior motives. That's been known to happen. I've never known anyone who could credibly claim to have seen a shape shifting lizard.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 8:09AM
You may be giving him too much credit, and making his motives way more complicated than they were. The fact that he stars in his own stuff suggests that he made the kind of stuff that turned HIM on. He openly bragged that the stuff he made ("I didn't push the envelope, I tore it up") was the most extreme, and probably assumed that porn was so established that he was immune from prosecution. Little, I think, is just your average misogynist ego junkie. Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity. - Frank Leahy
I don't buy that either. Nobody is that stupid. OK. Some people are. I don't think he is/was. Edited by - randomprecision on 3/30/2010 9:01:24 AM
[Link]
AsianAnalPantyhoserGuy Deactivated User
Ass fucking/ foot fetish/ pantyhose= insanity! 465 Posts 3/10
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 9:23AM
RandomPrecision, do you venture to insinuate that perhaps he was being utilized as a barometer for the patience of the public as to how much they would tolerate? Perhaps Little did what he did so that the government could come in and say "Hey, we need to make another law against the freedom of speech because we need to protect our citizens from smut like this." It seemed to me like the old PROBLEM/REACTION/SOLUTION method to me. Simply stated, Max created a problem with THEIR blessing, the people demanded a solution, and THEY were standing by with a solution that would further erode our Constitutional Right to freedom of expression.
Something like that. Except that they were already dealing with a known quantity. It was already known that the kind of shit Max was churning out was the kind of thing that was bound to piss people off beyond what most ordinary porn already does. It was only a matter of what was going to be the straw that broke the camel's back, wasn't it? It was pretty clear For a long time that Max was on a collision course with a courtroom at some point in the future. I was just speculating as to why he might have done it deliberately (as I think it's pretty obvious that he did).
Edited by - randomprecision on 3/31/2010 1:01:05 AM
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 31 2010 : 7:37AM
Have a look sometime at David Foster Wallace's vignette of MH in "Consider the Lobster and Other Essays." Then come back here and tell me this concieted narcissistic old misogynist had a clue what he was heading for.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 31 2010 : 8:32AM
Sorry. The book is a collection of essays, the first of which, "Big Red Son" recounts Wallace's attendance at the AVN awards, as I recall. Within that essay is a vignette of Max Hardcore. The description of Little's behavior in that vignette, in my opinion, is, as I say, of a concieted narcissist who supposes himself God's gift to porn. Thanks to my own stupid idea to winnow the book shelves, I no longer have a copy or I would have reproduced the bit about him. My recollection of Little in that essay was of an arrogant selfish, SOB, with about as much interest in anybody or anything besides his own welfare as a sociopath. Wallace is still in the bookstores, and you can skim to the bit about Little and read it in a few minutes. I only mention it to you, because I think you would fairly assess what you read about him, and I'd be interested to see if it changed your opinion any.
In that case, I'd say that I may look it up someday. Anyway, what I said earlier wasn't really so much of an opinion as much as it was me being my usual self and having suspicions about various things that go on. It's not a strongly held belief.
Out of curiosity I did some googling about the David Foster Wallace piece and found this link which I believe to be the entire text in question. It paints a rather interesting picture of Little, among other things. Here is a quote I found amusing for some reason, although it is rather tangential to the topic:Item (1) is just funny as hell: imagining the sight of a porn crew in matching jumpsuits makes me laugh. Item (2) is more than a bit suspect: although the fictional device of a newbie walking in and getting fucked straight away is used a lot in porn, because of the requirements of STD testing and age/ID verification these kinds of scenes - if meant for release - would certainly have to be scripted. I have to confess my lack of first hand knowledge of Paul Little's work. I think I saw one of his videos back in the VHS age and decided it was not for me - even though most of his trademark touches were missing. (Except for abusive language and rough anal sex.) After having seen the 2001 documentary "Hardcore" I of course wanted to steer clear of anything Max Hardcore. While I was looking for the Wallace article quoted above I stumbled upon this blog post (boingboing.net) which quotes [invalid URL removed]this one by Susannah Breslin. The latter especially catalogues the trademark touches pretty well. Edited by - witling on 4/1/2010 6:20:59 AM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 3:47AM
I went back and re-read that article once you mentioned it and Max's section is the funniest, he comes across as a completely clueless douchebag. Thanks to Skronker for recommending that book to me a while ago.
Paul Little aka Max Hardcore considers himself a martyr to his cause and will easily do the time he has remaining behind bars with the full knowledge of his conviction, which only reinforces his resolve to his original ideals. Eventually he will be released and he can continue the decadent lifestyle he led before - albeit with a bit of caution and discretion. Andrea Dworkin, on the other hand, will continue to rot and fester in her grave for all eternity. So while Paul may not currently feel like a winner, he will in the future once he's free while poor Andrea won't feel anything at all - except the maggots eating her bloated body. Edited by - Asmodeus on 4/1/2010 4:54:48 AM
If that is really Dworkin's picture, how did they get the handcuffs on her when she was arrested (with all the protesting she did, she had to run afoul of the law at least once)? She was bigger than I am and I am over 450 pounds and six feet plus tall!
Well...remember Larry Flynt got a sentence of up to 25 years for Hustler Magazine in 1976. As to pain, humiliation....really? There is a whole genre where you can see women's titties turned purple black with ropes and their butts spanked into hash. They seem in pain and I don't think they like it. I'm sure many of them are "one and done" due to their surprise at the "humiliation". MH has had how many thousands of girls on, and a handful of situations are regularly trotted out to show humiliated women. I wonder what the out takes and walkoffs look like for Throat Gaggers or Gag Factor, etc... Hey, look at me, I'm defending Max for the boredom of the argument :-)
You cannot condemn any form of legally produced media for the acts it portrays or the audience that consumes it. 'Clockwork Orange', 'Natural Born Killers', 'Nightmare on Elm Street', 'Driving Miss Daisy'? Or, I suppose you could condemn whatever you like, it does not make you right. People watch things for all kinds of reasons. If Max Hardcore glorifies misogyny then 'Call of Duty' glorifies killing people. No one can speak to what the raping community at large gets off viewing. And no one can say with certainty that this type of film will compel people to perpetrate harm on others. Sure, some sick people may go out and do things they see in videos, but if we as a society were to base our lives on our fear of that then no films, video games, music or books would ever be legal. Do you want to live in 'Fahrenheit 451'? As for BDSM, yeah, there are dabblers in all levels of adult entertainment. I am sure some girls do a couple of shoots, push their limits too far, get spooked and quit. So what? It's BDSM! Thats the nature of BDSM. But having been on set at all kinds of shoots, many of which were BDSM, I can say that most bondage models and producers know what they are doing and take it very seriously. For many it is a highly involved lifestyle within a closeknit society. Most either enjoy the scenes or know they have a tolerance for pain. Either way, they are putting their self-knowlede to work. They look like they hate it because that is what the consumer wants. A lot of times the talent is actually having a hard time keeping a straight face because the Dom and sub find the situation so contrived and laughable. Most bondage producers make the overarching goal of a shoot to keep a model in bondage for the least amount of time necessary to get the shots.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 1:24AM
Tell that to the American right wing, they'd have nothing to say about culture otherwise.
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 1:45AM
[link removed: No tube sites] This link is a complete shocker. Leanni is actually pissing on Max and not the other way around.
[Link]
Mudou Deactivated User
5 Posts 3/09
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 3:41AM
That's a bad choice of words there... The U.S. Government didn't find Max Hardcore's wonderful works of art to be "legally produced media," now did it?Exactly. The government condemned Max Hardcore for being "obscene." That doesn't make it right. Perhaps Max's wild fantasies were only that--fantasies. No one was actually harmed. I have a hard time believing that, and yet the government didn't prosecute him for recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury. The mind boggles.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 10:55AM
MH was, as I understand, prosecuted for DISTRIBUTING obscene material, specifically through the US Mail and the Internet, which allowed him to be prosecuted in Federal court. Since he was not prosecuted for MAKING pornography (I don't think anyone has been for quite a while). His working conditions and how his employees were treated was not at issue.
It's a similar hypocrisy to Tommy Chong going to jail for making bongs. Although, I suppose he would have had a good defense if he could have proven they were just being used for addictive carcingens (tobacco).
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 3:03PM
It seems very clear to me that many such laws, e.g. DISTRIBUTING obscene materials, making drug PARAPHENALIA, etc., are designed to be convenient ways to prosecute people at the federal level for things that otherwise would be very hard to prove or to justify, or, at a state or local level, would not win national political advantage. Also, prosecuting under specific offences like postal violations would avoid much of the vagaries in the law about what is obscene. How, for example can you prosecute someone for making pornography when literally thousands of people are involved in making it, bringing in millions in sales and tax dollars? Much easier to obfuscate your real purpose by cloaking it as a misuse of the mail so you can prosecute it as a high profile politically beneficial federal crime.
[Link]
Mudou Deactivated User
5 Posts 3/09
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 4:29PM
That makes sense, duefuss. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that the Bush administration was only trying to get points from the religious crowd for being "tough on porn." It didn't actually care about addressing any real problems with porn, if any. I expected better from Obama's administration, though... Before he was elected. Now it's pretty clear that he's not all that much different from Bush.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Apr 5 2010 : 4:42PM
I think it was Pornlaw, in another thread on these persecutions, who thought that Obama was finishing the prosecutions that Bush started but declining any new ones. Whether or not this is so I don't know, of course, but it makes some sense. This is not to say I agree with the policy, but making a point of actually stepping in and stopping a prosecution that was ongoing, which I would like to see, would open Obama to a rep of being actually pro porn, a stance that we'll have to wait to see from someone with a lot more courage, and a lot fewer bigger priorities, than the current Administration has.
IMO, it was always clear that he was more like Bush than many of his supporters thought. It will be interesting to see what Max does when he finishes serving his time. Edited by - Dr_Fell on 4/6/2010 2:54:10 PM
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Apr 7 2010 : 2:05PM
For the record, I think you are wrong. I am not an uncritical Obama booster, but I think your disappointed expectations of the man (whether you had them before or after he actually did anything) have made you too quick to dismiss him as another 'politician with his own agenda and and to Hell with the people' like I think Bush/Cheney was. I think the man is working to change things for the better, and that he's run up against the same necessity to compromise and other limitations of the office that have frustrated every single U.S. President. Like it or not, we're going to have to wait and see how it all comes out for the next 2 years or so, at least. Support what he does or not, of course, but I hate to see what seems to be the complete opposition to Obama and everything he says or does because it is Obama saying or doing it. I understand, for example, that much of the detail of the HC reform that passed was, at least at one time, suggested or supported by Republicans. Even if not, the man's plain efforts at bipartisanship, though failed, his moves to wind down involvement in two wars, whatever their outcome, his work to restore the economy, though not what I would have hoped for, are at least real attempts to at change for the better. If ultimately they fail, then we must work for someone better, and that's what we will do. But what I'M hearing is that people don't want him to succeed at anything, because they don't fancy some of what they think he wants to do. That's simply madness. It's the madness of a drowning Baptist who refuses to be pulled to safety by an atheist. Oppose the policies you don't agree with, but don't cripple his efforts to help YOU simply because Obama is making them. The vitriol and violence of the teabaggers and the incited is nothing new, really. What is new is the 'opposition for its own sake' nature of condemning everything Obama says, everything he does or tries to do, every breath he takes seemingly, whether it's to do with his job or not. Face it: much of this is racism, period. But race is invoked, I hope, also as America's too convenient, virtually automatic method of expressing extreme dislike for anyone of color, rather than true bigotry. I don't doubt that many who've used the word, 'nigger' and its kind in expressing their political feelings, would deny being racists, indeed be distressed by the accusation. That's how far we've fallen. People are seriously saying they'd rather be bankrupted by a disease or injury than agree with Obama. They'd rather our sons and daughters be killed and maimed in war than help Obama's efforts to end those wars well. They'd rather be laid off, see their investments tank, their retirement immpossible, than encourage and help Obama succeed in making the economy strong again. That's what I'm hearing, not constructive criticism, not other ideas for solving problems, just Fuck Obama. It puts me in mind, as so much human behavior does, of Walt Kelly's famous slogan for the first Earth Day: "We have seen the Enemy, and he is us"
Max Hardcore @ AEBN
Posted - Feb 23 2010 : 3:05PM
