Reviewers Recommend
Tres ViasTres Vias - review by Captain Jack
Starring: Christian Clay, Alex Jones, Blake Blossom, Azul Hermosa, Madi Collins, Matthew Meier, Melanie Marie, Sky Wonderland, Eve Sweet, Rikako Katayama, Vixi Rafi. Read review
All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 267 > Politics & Porn
AuthorPost
realtip
Deactivated User

2301 Posts
6/04
Posted - Jan 25 2013 : 12:19AM
I was having a conversation with someone the other day that made me decide to post this thread. The person I was talking to works in the porn industry. We were talking about why there is no "extreme" porn being made anymore, which is a topic that has been discussed many times on this forum. As is always the case, the person blamed this on obscenity laws, saying that nobody wants to end up in the same place where Max Hardcore or John Stagliano did. I tried explaining to him that these things happen because of politics. I pointed out that those prosecutions were all initiated under the former administration, but that no major obscenity charges have been leveled against the porn industry under the current administration. In fact, this current administration is the most liberal administration that we've ever had in U.S. history, and it is highly unlikely that it is at all interested in going after porn. But it was like talking to a brick wall. All he kept repeating was how no one wants to go to jail, or end up having to pay attorney fees.
This causes me to ask, If the porn industry is still going to be afraid of its own shadow even with a porn-friendly administration in office, then what does it matter to them who's in office anyway? We keep hearing the porn industry talk about how having a Republican in office will be bad for the industry. But even with a liberal Democrat in office, everyone in porn is still scared shitless. Case in point, for the last fve years, porn hasn't done anything to push the envelope. They can't blame anybody except themselves for this. Yet, as soon as another porn-hating fundemantalist gets voted back into office again, the porn industry will start blaming the government on why they can't shoot anything anymore. But now that they have the chance, they still won't do it.
For this reason, the porn industry reminds me of the chained dog whose chain shocks him everytime he tries to run beyond a certain distance. Eventually, even when the dog manages to break the chain and eliminate the risk of being shocked, he's still too scared to run because he's been conditioned not to do it out of fear. The porn industry is now that chained dog.
mharris127
Senior Member

1844 Posts
8/09
Posted - Jan 25 2013 : 12:46AM
There is one fly in the ointment here. Even if something is produced now, there isn't a reasonable guarantee that a more conservative administration five years from now won't prosecute you based on that five year old scene. The statute of limitations is six years, too long for most people to take the chance and push that envelope. Also, Ira Issacs was prosecuted (and recently found guilty as hell of obscenity) by the Obama administration so don't say there haven't been any porn prosecutions by them.
realtip
Deactivated User

2301 Posts
6/04
Posted - Jan 25 2013 : 1:10AM
^As I said, there have been no major charges initiated by the current administration. The charges against Isaacs, just like those against Rob Black, Max, and Stagliano, were initiated under the former administration. The current administration did not interfere in allowing those prosecutions to continue. But it has not brought forth charges against anyone itself. To the contrary, the current administration has disbanded the Obscenity Task Force that began under the previous administration.
Besides, Isaacs was shooting movies that contained bestiality, which is explicitly illegal in the United States. That is not at all the same as movies starring consenting adults, which are not illegal regardless of the acts contained therein.
RandomPrecision
Senior Member

Enjoy!
8175 Posts
3/06
Posted - Jan 25 2013 : 3:17AM
I personally don't believe the current administration is as friendly to porn as you might think. I don't think the condom thing would have happened without the blessing of the top Democrats.
Look at it this way. Bush wanted to make a spectacle out of his anti-porn agenda but if a president didn't want to make a lot of noise about it, there are lots of ways he could do things quietly. Liberals are masters of using the machinery of government. If they wanted to make life difficult for the porn industry and do it quietly, it would make much more sense to do it using the massive bureaucracy that exists specifically to do things you aren't supposed to do in a roundabout way.
I can't really prove it but my opinion is that there is a reason for everything. My advice would be to look at the timeline. When did the trend you're seeing start? What were the milestones and when did they take place?
Edited by - randomprecision on 1/25/2013 3:29:08 AM
Amawatcher
Member

Show it to us!
134 Posts
9/11
Posted - Jan 26 2013 : 9:26PM
Jenna jameson wanted a Conservative president, because she wants to keep her money, others think a more liberal one will "let them" make more or better porn, which is a crock, because the liberals are always taking money ( I cite the state of Calif as example) to build senseless railroads,and then the economy sucks and men spend Less on Porn, and website subscriptions. Conservatives seem much more apt to protect free speech than the Liberals...and let ya keep more of YOUR money.....
 
Lurker01
Member

44 Posts
7/05
Posted - Jan 26 2013 : 11:45PM
Jeez, now this place too? What I wouldn't give for some sort of rule that you need to know the definition of the word "liberal" to complain about them.
You people who can't complain about anything for more than 1.5 sentences without parroting Fox News in the disguise of original analysis need to look the word up. You haven't been megadittoing what you think you have.
Amawatcher
Member

Show it to us!
134 Posts
9/11
Posted - Jan 27 2013 : 3:05AM
I am not patronizing anyone, its clear who supports a Free republic, and its also clear who "conserves" federal spending, giving US less.... its simple facts, and Im not even talking republicans cause most are just RINO's anyways .
Again I cite Liberal spending> mayor "Doombergs" many waterfall projects cost Many muti Millions and millions more to maintain....for.. nothing... taxes go UP...less to spend on Girls advertised here
Cody McLarge
Senior Member

2668 Posts
8/10
Posted - Jan 27 2013 : 5:38AM
Well, my taxes went up and, technically, I have less money to spend on porn. Does it make a difference? No. Am I unbelievably outraged that the money is going to a fucking bullet train that I hate with utmost passion? Absolutely. Do I exercise that outrage by pouring money into campaigns to stall that piece of shit idea? You bet. Has it made a difference? Nope.
Now, has porn influenced my politics? I don't think so. Have my politics and porn come into conflict? It seems so. Fear-mongering about the Romney campaign, in particular, made for some slight worried moments but it was a risk I was willing to take. And yeah, I think the biggest threat to porn I've seen is the increasing market share of tube sites that follow a legitimate business model but allow underlings to share other people's intellectual property with impunity and a ballot measure/city ordinance backed by deceptive progressives and the decisions of members of one party and one party alone, the Democrats.
Amawatcher
Member

Show it to us!
134 Posts
9/11
Posted - Jan 27 2013 : 12:02PM
You money into campaign against that railroad is well spent, I live 3,000 miles away from it and they have made it well know whats going on.. at least to those of us informed!



Jump To: