As I've written before, it stands to reason that there are times when performers may regret performing a certain act, or working for a certain director/producer, or when the action on set takes an undesirable turn, etc., for a variety of different reasons. I agree with that point. However, there's a difference between acknowledging that these things do sometimes really occur, and forming the assumption that every depiction we see in porn that may look real is real, because most of it isn't. For example, there was a thread here in which posters harped on a scene in which the girl had said that she was sexually abused as a child. The scene was raked over the coals for that one comment. Then, when that performer came here to admit that it was all a lie that she only made it up for the camera, and that she saw nothing wrong with it, people still jumped on her for even making it up. There's also a pornstar who performed in a scene where she acted as if she were being raped, and did a very convincing job of it. After the scene, she laughed and admitted that it was all an act, and that she really loves rough sex. Still, there's a whole thread here debating whether or not that same girl was really abused in a similar porn scene, even though there has never been any indication that she was. Let's also not forget all the people who think that if you watch a 25 year-old girl wearing pigtails and knee-socks, then you must really be sexually attracted to children. There are alot of people who are uncomfortable with even the illusion of reality; even that which they know is fake upsets them. There is where part of the problem lies. Also, where is the performer's responsibility in this? If Khan did what he is accused here of doing, then I have to wonder why the girls didn't do or say something at the time. Why didn't Ashley tell him to stop? Why would she wait until much later to complain instead of doing so at the time? This seems to imply a very sexist idea that women are all helpless and weak. The men are all "evil jerks" for doing these things, but we say nothing about the adult women who consented to it, except to speak about them in the passive sense to say that they were "abused," or "taken advantage of." If these were male performers, would we still have this sympathetic view of them? What does this say about our sexual double-standards? What about all the girls who worked for Khan Tusion, and enjoyed the experience? Should we say that no girl should do it or enjoy it because others later regretted it? Should pornographers just start treating all their female talent like helpless children because they're incapable of being clear about their own limitations? I don't agree with that. It's good to care about the well-being of performers. But we must also realize that they're adults who are, or should be, responsible enough to look after their own well-being as well.
I don't think anyone here would disagree with the perspective that someone shouldn't be judged according to their fantasies - if that were the case, we would have to throw our own fantasies into the mix. I also think that the line between fantasy and reality in porn is difficult to navigate sometimes - but this shouldn't reduce us to passive, uncritical consumers.^ Trust me, this is something that I have read and written about for years now, and I know the debates very well - these ideas are at the heart of a lot of arguments over women in porn. No, we should not treat women like children, and certainly men are seen as always sexually aggressive and incapable of being taken advantage of (which is a damaging assumption), just as women are commonly seen as passive, sexual victims. I believe we can avoid such condescending views at the same time as being aware of the fact that women are frequently the objects of sexual violence. Simply saying that women can look after themselves, and that their very real experiences of sexual violence should be dismissed because they're adults, is just too callous for me, and ignores the reality of our culture.
You're the one writing an essay on what you imagine I believe, even though most things you've said have been contrary to what I've said. You need to look at each word I've said carefully before you compose your responses. You are saying that all porn is fake. Which might mean that, say, if a woman appears like she is in pain, in your eyes, that's 100% simulated, and therefore your conscience need not interfere with your jerking off. This seems to be what you're saying. And as much as you'd like to discredit my comparison, it is absolutely apt. It is completely fucked up to disregard reality like that.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 10:22PM
So all she has to do is "appear" to be in pain? We don't actually have to know whether or not she's in any pain, so long as it just "appears" that way to someone? In that strange twist of logic, you've missed the whole point of what a performance is supposed to do, further proving that you are unable to distinguish reality from illusion. If a performer is actually in pain, as opposed to just giving the "appearance" of it, yet performs the scene anyway, then my conscience has nothing to do with that. My conscience is not violated by the personal choices other people make concerning themselves. See my previous point about performers' responsibility. Also, if you think that your comparison is apt, then you are apparently in no position to judge anything as "fucked up." My conscience is more bothered by the actual evils which people commit in real life against others, not by appearances displayed in staged sexual performances. The fact that you consider these to be on the same level is what's really fucked up.
^ How about if you know the performer is in pain, because she said so? And I don't mean in a BTS "let me turn you on with my sexy rape story" type thing. I mean like Roxy Jezel and Rebecca Linares speaking out about Max Hardcore. You already said that the performers speaking out about what they experienced was of no concern to you, whether it was true or not, but do you really think this? Or are you caught up in an online argument? If you think that the performer (male or female) may have actually got in over their head and are starting to experience real trauma, does this bother you? And this isn't to target you necessarily, because I know there are plenty of people here that don't care, but you're talking, so...
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 6:15AM
I'm starting to doubt you've even watched the scene we're talking about. Most people would say that crying and having a nervous breakdown on camera does constitute 'complaining.' The scene is called off by all involved, so Ashley does stop the scene, even Khan realizes he's stepped over a line. The rest of your post is a straw man argument where you state various rhetorical positions that no one in this thread has taken. The only issue anyone took here was that you claimed that Meatholes was faked. Evidence was presented that it wasn't, then you said you didn't care about the evidence anyway, revealing that your original argument was craven self-justification.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 7:18AM
^To answer your question, I did not see the scene. As I said in an earlier post, I couldn't remember whether or not I had seen that particular scene. But after seeing the posted clips, it didn't look familiar. So other than few clips posted, I never saw the scene in its entirety. Nowhere in those clips does Ashley ever tell Khan to stop, neither does she ever show any clear signs of resistance. There is, however, a part where Khan asks if she's OK, and she tells him that she is, so he continues. There was no sincere crying, nor a nervous breakdown. But if what you say is true, and Khan did stop the scene when these things happened, then what's the problem? From some of the posts I've been reading here, it would make someone think that he had tortured her to death on a medieval rack. But if she resisted, and he stopped, then what's the point of all this?See my previous point about your lack of moral authority to make such a judgement about anyone. Please go back to comparing porn to genocide. Edited by - realtip on 11/29/2009 8:04:01 AM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 7:51AM
It's taken you this long for you to catch on, the point is that the breakdowns in Meatholes were for real. That was my only and now, final, point.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 8:02AM
Your point is that one may have been real. What does it have to do with the several other scenes on the site, or with the fact that porn as a whole is not real?
And on that fateful day, the hatred consumed me... 1423 Posts 3/09
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 8:10PM
At this stage, this is all going nowhere... Just circling around the same points and semantics. I think we gather all that's relevant... Going back to the thread's title (and the fact that it wasn't successfully uploaded), here's a photo of a contusion: Wonderful. And now, I shall leave this thread in the past...
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 8:58PM
To repeat, Gia Jordan said that all the scenes on Meatholes were real, not just Ashley Blue's scene. What does it have to do with porn as a whole being not real? Nothing, but that was your derail, not mine. See ya.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Nov 29 2009 : 9:12PM
^We've already established what one pornstar, Gia Jordan, told you in a private correspondence. I've already commented on that. My comment that porn is not real is simply an observation that the rest of the world already knows, with the exception of a few posters on this thread. The derail came from you and them, not from me.Wow! What kind of disturbed mind even thinks about saying something like this? First the Holocaust. Now jerking off to dying children. WTF is wrong with you? Seek help immediately. Edited by - realtip on 11/29/2009 9:19:09 PM
[Link]
StillHope Deactivated User
"You didn't say Car Ram Rod" 149 Posts 2/06
Posted - Nov 30 2009 : 3:13PM
Firstly, a belated Happy Thanksgiving to all. Secondly, it seems I stirred up the ADT pot just a little. To clarify, I do not believe all women, or all porn women, are weak and passive. That being said, even Sherlock Holmes can be set up. In case you didn't get the analogy, I am saying that even a strong willed, sexually aggressive woman has buttons and breaking points. And series like "MeatHoles" seem to take full advantage of this fact. I am surprised no one commented on the whole Donkey Punch scene , the whole concept of when does "stop" mean "stop". Socrates famously said the unexamined life is not worth living, to which Demtri Martin added "man". So, as a porn consumer, you must step back and examine your viewing habits and why you get excited by what you do. Only the lazy man will answer with a playground retort "cause I do"; you must really think about what you are watching, and why it excites you. So why does seeing a woman having a mental breakdown excite you? Why is "objectification" so popular in porn? Why does Khan produce such films? I mean, he is a talented guy, he could use various other methodologies and set-ups and still achieve the "degraded" look that appeals to his desired niche, yet he doesn't. If truly examined and truly thought through (and not just given a cursory glance), one can only conclude that Khan gets a personal satisfaction out of breaking down women. The reasons why someone would enjoy such a thing are too plentiful to enumerate at this juncture. And please spare the entire ADT forum with the ridiculous argument that real is better, such logic only leads to arguments that we should use real bullets in action movies because real blood looks better and a real dead person adds to the art. Just sayin'
I think it might be a good idea to consider this for a moment - Why would someone who likes porn insert himself into the porn business and make porn that was sure to cause a shitstorm? I wonder about guys like Khan Tusion. What exactly is his motivation? Yeah. I'm kind of a paranoid fuck but I think it does no harm to wonder when the consequences that people like him have on the business and it's customers are very real. I know some people will say he gets off on it and it's as simple as that and very probably, he does. But people are sometimes more complicated than that and nobody with a brain could even contemplate making the kind of porn he made without being fully aware of the reaction they would receive. As noted, I don't think he's a stupid man. He was, after all, smart enough to disguise his voice and hide his face as much as possible. Edited by - randomprecision on 11/30/2009 8:37:55 PM
[Link]
StillHope Deactivated User
"You didn't say Car Ram Rod" 149 Posts 2/06
Posted - Nov 30 2009 : 10:56PM
In some of the ALF scenes online he no longer disguises his voice and they don't black out his face if he accidentally gets in a scene, so I guess he is not as concerned with this line as he was with Oral Consumption or Meatholes. I agree that humans are more complex than a simple pop psych analyzation will impart; but let us not forget that as Holmes said, we cannot overlook the obvious either.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Dec 1 2009 : 12:00AM
StillHope, Happy Belated Thanksgiving to you as well. The statement you provided by Socrates is one of my favorite quotes. I like to think that I apply it to my own personal life. When Socrates made that statement following his conviction, it was partly a commentary against people just going along with the status-quo without exercising any independent thought as to why they're going along with it. It indicates that human beings should take time to thoroughly examine our values, virtues, thoughts, actions, and beliefs. In other words, it applies to much more significant aspects of one's life. I can't speak for everyone else, but for me, the type of porn I enjoy doesn't rank as one of those significant aspects of my life that's worthy of deep examination. It's like saying that examining one's life means questioning why one prefers Babyruth to Butterfinger. It just doesn't hold much importance. Personally, I'd be more interested in examining the reasons that others insist that these types of consensual acts are so terrible, and that anyone who doesn't agree is somehow mentally unhealthy. If you think about it, this is almost similar to what Socrates was dealing with. He was living in a society that was telling him to either fall in line and think the same way everyone else does, or face severe judgement and consequences. Likewise, today we are still dealing with people in society who insist that the popular viewpoint has to be the only right one, and that anyone who questions otherwise is somehow "fucked up." The more things change, the more they stay the same. Anyway, I also disagree with your assertion that "cause I do" is a lazy answer. Despite living in this age of overpsychoanalyzation where the Dr. Phil's of the world would have us all believe that every small meaningless idiosyncrasy must be an effect of our psyche (e.g., depending on how you tie your shoelaces, you might be a serial killer), the truth of the matter is that everything is not always that complex. Indeed, "cause I do" is sometimes more than a sufficient answer. Not everything requires a profound explanation. Why do I like purple more than yellow? I don't know; just because I do. Why do I like dogs, and not cats? I don't know; just because I do. Although human beings are complex creatures, there are still some things about us that are much simpler than we try to make them to be.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 1 2009 : 2:55AM
From interviews I've read it seems clear that in many ways Khan agrees with the critics of porn: he thinks that it is degrading, the women are whores, etc. This attitude often goes hand-in-hand with those who are most turned on by the most 'extreme' and degrading forms of porn. On some level he obviously thinks sex really is 'dirty' and 'shameful' and seems turned on by the idea of the shame and degradation he can elicit from the women in his scenes. Why it would be thought an accomplishment to make a woman who is alienated from her family, who may have a drug problem or history of abuse, cry on camera is beyond me. Seems more like shooting fish in a barrel. Edited by - BlackSix on 12/1/2009 2:55:58 AM
Yeah, Khan made all that for entertainment. He didn't do anything out of the girls free will. However, Max Hardcore scenes is something I'll never watch again because Max's scenes seem "forced." The majority of his porns are where he pins the girl down with brute force for the entire time and never releases, so the girl most likely couldn't leave if she wanted to. Khan Tusion doesn't use brute force to hold the girl down for the whole scene. If the girl didn't like what Khan Tusion was doing for the scene, she could just walk out of there. As far as sexual preferences and sexual play goes, there is a variety. And if a guy likes a certain sexual something, then there's also going to be a girl who likes the same thing.
[Link]
StillHope Deactivated User
"You didn't say Car Ram Rod" 149 Posts 2/06
Posted - Dec 3 2009 : 9:47AM
Excellent and well thought out replies, but I respectfully add that mental coercion/persuasion can be just as strong as brute force in some cases. Just sayin'
^ Plus, there's the ole' "not wanting to get a reputation for being difficult" thing, which I'm sure is powerful. Though I don't know that someone would think you're difficult if you stormed out of one of these shoots... Still, some of these women are so young, I didn't have the gumption to storm out of a shitty relationship when I was 19, let alone a porn shoot where everyone is telling me to get on with it.
My point all along is that it doesn't have to be that way. Let's say a porn girl gets a bad shake with a particular director and she brings her case online (with proof that what she says is true). On the one hand, you've got a hot chick that 90% of the guys love and on the other, you've got a faceless porn director who openly treats women poorly in his porn. Who's gonna come out looking bad? All they have to do is speak up and people will listen and give them a voice. Who is going to hold "being difficult" with Khan Tusion against a girl? If her story has the slightest bit of corroboration, Khan would be lucky to have one defender. The power of speech works best when it's used. Guys like this get a free ride because most of their criticism comes from random people who don't even know them and can't prove anything they're saying. Edited by - randomprecision on 12/4/2009 5:39:01 AM
I don't think a pornstar would be considered "difficult" unless she had an extremely hard time following SIMPLE directions. I.E this girl that I was "shooting" last month seemed braindead. I said "lift up your shirt" and she put her shirt DOWN. She couldn't pick up on tiny little common sense gestures either. I had to say "lift up your shirt" 3x before she would actually do it. A real waste of film lol. Anyways, despite popular sterotypes women in porn DO have brains. And if a pornstar girl doesn't want to do a type of porn, then it's just not her thing. She would just be in other categories. If it's not her thing, it's not her thing. Considering 95% of porn is "goody two shoes" porn, I know porn directors will understand if she doesn't want to do something "extreme." There'd still defintely be a ton of other movies she could do. If it's not her thing, it's not her thing.
^ And the folks who know better don't fire back? Believe me. They will only lose when good people stand up to them. If you're referring to the forum I think you're referring to, I wouldn't take any statement I had to that forum. If they're going there with it, no wonder. Edited by - randomprecision on 12/5/2009 7:10:28 AM
Well, Random mentioned "hot girl" and yes he's right for the most part. Most people will take a hot girl's side over anything because they are going to WANT to believe her side. I'm sure over 90% of men would take any hot girl's side or anything.
I watched the series Midnight Prowl and Khan Tusion was downright abusive to a female actress named Strawberry. This girl was new to porn and yet participated in a few of his films while he went out of his way to degrade her. What goes around comes around. Edited by - sisophous on 12/24/2009 11:30:25 AM
Yes it does look intense and I am not sure if she willingly agreed to such treatment. Although if you check out these links you will see two instances of models voluntarily get choked out by MMA fighters. No it's not really porn, but I think even Khan Tusion with his deranged mind would stay away from trying something like this. Joanne of MMA Girls Chocked Out Sinful Model Miki Black Chocked Out
