Well, people live in the corrals they're born into. Of course obscenity is bullshit. But at the same time, we have to wonder if there isn't a reasonable limit that the industry should willingly hold itself to simply for the sake of keeping things relatively peaceful. Stagliano ended up in a courtroom over plain old hardcore. Luckily it was thrown out. Max ended up in prison over the mere appearance of non-consensual sex. Whether or not any of it actually was, I don't know and I don't think was ever even seriously questioned in his trial.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Mar 31 2011 : 2:16AM
You never know. This is exact same Court that recently ruled that the 1st Amendment protects even the most offensive speech in the case against those Westboro protestors, who are even more repulsively offensive than anything that anyone will ever see in a porn movie. If the Supreme Court can acknowledge that the 1st Amendment is strong enough to protect those degenerates, then it must certainly have no problem acknowledging that it protects all types of legal pornography just the same.It is those in the porn industry who are already the ones keeping things peaceful. They're not the one causing the problems. They're not the ones going out of their way to infringe on the rights of others. They're just trying to peacefully exercise their own rights. Conversely, the people who oppose them are the ones seeking to infringe on the rights of the others. To use your argument is like saying that people should refrain from practicing their religion, or expressing their opinions, or rallying against their lawmakers if there's a chance that it will upset other people. If other people are upset by it, then that's their problem, and they should be the ones to set "reasonable limits" for themselves. Why should the rest of our right be infringed due to other peoples' personal political agendas? That's exactly the opposite of the way it's supposed to be.
Thanks for the wake up call Gore Gore Girl, really. I have been doing some self reflecting and trying to figure out how I got to where I am. I didn't see it before, but I might have found the creepy line I typed previously, and trying to put myself into somebody else's shoes who is reading what I type. I have always been an advocate for open sexually healthy relationships between consenting adults, but some of my own actions take me on a path that does borderline safety, no matter how consensual, even though the risks are well known on all parties involvled. It is sometimes referred to as "Edge Play," which is simply not exactly smart to do. There are a lot of things that aren't smart to do though. Where does one draw the line? How does one go back to being vanilla and socially accepted while still having wild fantasies? What is wrong and what is right? I keep pushing myself to the next level, it has taken me years. When I first started watching porn I was totally happy watching what I consider a lame feature, hot chicks fucking was good stroke material. Now I have to wade through it all and I'm disappointed in the films I watch because I can tell a fake orgasm fairly easily. OH BABY YEAH, FUCK ME, I'M CUMMING. I don't know, but I think I can read facial language, I like to see a woman's teeth grinding, and her cheeks get tight, her eyes close, her forehead tighten into a frown, her hands clench into a fist. I just like it totally RAW. If I type anymore, I will be way off topic.
^ Funny, considering your avatar... And just for the record, I love Crumb too. Edited by - zarinafan on 3/31/2011 7:37:55 PM
[Link]
screwcap Deactivated User
I'm walkin' here........ 1032 Posts 6/10
Posted - Mar 31 2011 : 9:09PM
Rape is a felony.For a forum that does not permit posting pics of pubic hair, discussions of Rape and/or vids that depict this assult in any form should be taboo. If I'm wrong, what's next? A discussion thread about Underage? Pleassssse.
Someone asked why there isn't any rape in porn. I think it's important to engage people who ask such questions and try to make them understand why it's just not done in porn. Discussing the reasons why it isn't (and shouldn't be) done will allow people who make porn to see that this is an area they don't need to go into and that there isn't any real interest in seeing it by the majority of their most loyal customers. And really. Someone who expresses an interest in this as a serious desire may actually benefit from seeing how most people react to it. It might actually serve as a reality check for someone who isn't completely lost but has just lost touch. Such people tend to get lost in their own fantasy worlds and might not realize how far out they've gone. Almost no one is really suggesting or requesting this be done. So really. I don't think there's any need to flip out over it. It's a delicate issue but I think most people here are handling it well. Edited by - randomprecision on 3/31/2011 11:01:27 PM
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Apr 1 2011 : 12:39AM
The interest in it may or may not be among the majority of pornviewers. Yet, as we can see just from this thread, there is a substantial interest in seeing it from members of both sexes. The majority of pornviewers may or may not be interested in seeing gangbangs, or interracial, or squirting, etc. Yet, each of these different fetishes exist in large numbers in the porn market for the members of the audience who do wish to see it. One thing that we can observe from this thread is that this is also an area that can attract a large audience. However, the reasons it isn't made are due to other political factors already mentioned, and has nothing to do with the unsubstantiated claim that there is no interest in it.I think most of us already know how other people will (over)react to it, which is their right to react however they wish. But I disagree that popular consensus should always be used as a measure to dictate what is and isn't acceptable for other individuals.I am.
Anything that's controversial can draw a large audience. That doesn't mean it should be done. The vast majority of that audience doesn't care about the reputation (or future) of the industry or it's customers. They're just rubberneckers in it for what they can see. When the show's over, they go home.You're trying to advocate taking it beyond fantasy and into a realm where many people are not going to recognize it as acting and/or role-playing. These are people who prefer to alter their perceptions to the point to where they already see rape in ordinary porn scenes that are clearly consensual.I said "Almost no one". I am certainly not. This is something which (to my knowledge) isn't currently being done. That means they have the opportunity to think about the potential consequences and realize it just isn't worth it. If it was already done, I'd have to look at it from the angle of whether or not anyone had actually been harmed.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Apr 2 2011 : 7:37AM
I've heard many people say the same thing about porn as a whole- It's too controversial, and shouldn't be done at all. How is that any different from what you're saying? Also, most of the porn audience in general may not care about the reputation or future of porn. They just watch their movies to get their quick stroke on, and then go on about their business. The survival of porn is the farthest thing from the minds of most of the audience. If that were not true, then the courtroom at the Stagliano trial last year would have been packed beyond capacity with his supporters. I was there. It was hardly packed at all. This is why I'm convinced that it's the people who are most willing to push the envelope who care the most about the industry, even more than many of the people working in it. From what I have seen, the most audacious pornographers are the ones who are usually the most willing to stand up and fight for its existence and survival. I haven't observed as much of the same tenacity from the porn industry as a whole.There are people who don't recognize horror movies, video games, and rap music as purely entertainment. Should these media also start practicing self-censorship for those too stupid to know that it's all fictional?It's not currently being done in American porn. I'm not sure why it doesn't appear to be a problem anywhere except the U.S. But for whatever reason, that's the way it seems. It's certainly not because Americans have an aversion to it that no one has. It's simply because we're still willing to allow puritanical politics to dictate the private lives of individuals.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 3 2011 : 8:00AM
Really, does the name Rob Black mean anything to you? Also JM productions left their own distributor out to dry when it came to court costs at the same time that Hirsch at Vivid (who I doubt you'd say is an 'audacious pornographer') contributed some funds to their cause. And the greatest champion against the government's anti-porn campaign back in the 80s was the head of Adam & Eve, again hardly backing up your argument. Edited by - BlackSix on 4/3/2011 8:08:43 AM
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Apr 3 2011 : 10:35AM
^All the people you named have been targeted in obscenity hunts over the years. Perhaps you need to better clarify the point you are attempting to make. I'll also point out that this is no longer the 1980s or the 1990s. I'm talking about the way things stand in today's anti-porn climate.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 3 2011 : 10:22PM
When the facts don't fit you try and get slippery and play dumb realtip. Besides, your statement didn't say 'these days' or apply any other modifier. As usual, you try to apply such disclaimers after shooting your mouth off. Of course, even with those modifiers you're still proven wrong by the facts. My point was obvious: Rob Black and JM Productions are 'audacious' pornographers who failed to stand up and fight for the existence of pornography, both cases are modern-era. JM Productions got off on a technicality and then cynically left their distributor out to dry for selling their products, Steven Hirsch's support for JM's distributors didn't happen in the 1980s or 90s, it happened a few years ago. Rob Black shot off his mouth and made a bunch of shitty porn but when the Feds came a knocking he plead out rather than take it to court, hardly evidence of audacious pornographers willing to stand up for pornography. Deny it all you want but historically all the major players who fought the government and won in legalizing pornography in the US, from Adam & Eve to Larry Flynt to Hal Freeman and Reuben Sturman (in whose name Stagliano's recent battle was awarded by the industry), were not 'audacious pornographers.' In fact, the most notable feature of all of them was that they are practical businessmen first.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Apr 4 2011 : 1:47AM
^You have not proven anyone wrong. You have simply vitriolically stated what we already know, which is that anyone in the porn industry is a potential target for the anti-porn crusade. I have said this many times before. However, it is undeniable that in today's climate, the more extreme pornography tends to be the more likely targeted, i.e., they are higher on the list. This is not to say that everyone else isn't on the same list. They're just farther down as far as strategy is concerned. Your statements against Rob Black and JM Productions are based more on personal negative opinion toward them than on any facts. Rob Black did fight in his case and initially won. Unfortunately, it was a financially costly battle. When the government appealed the dismissal of the case, Black could no longer afford to put up yet another defense. Black had to agree to a plea because he had no more money after fighting the first case. This is one strategy of obscenity prosecutions. Even if they can't defeat you in the courtroom, they'll defeat you in the wallet, which is what happened to Rob Black, and possibly to JM Productions. After having the mount its own defense as a result of being prosecuted in the same case as Five Star, JM was probably unable to financially support its distributor, whereas others like Hirsch thankfully could. I don't begrudge Vivid in the same way that you begrudge the others, such as by insultingly implying that some of them are not really businessmen. In my previous recent posts on this thread, I made no mention of Vivid, or any other specific company other than Evil Angel when I referred to their case. When I spoke of audacious pornographers, I was speaking in gernal terms, which I expected would be apparent and not require an explanation for those unwilling to understand. But since you brought it up, Hirsch certainly does not produce what is considered extreme pornographic content. That's not what his company does, which is no secret to anyone. It is true that I personally don't like Vivid movies. That is not a slander against the company. It is indeed admirable that he contributed support for Five Star in its case. I commend that. I also commend his fight that he took in his own similar trial, no different than any other pornographer in the same situation. Yet, the most recent trials have indeed been against pornographers who are on the more extreme end of the scale. In the 1980s and 1990s, the extreme content that became widely available in more recent years was not as widely available then. In the absence of Max Hardcore and JM Productions during past decades, obscenity prosecutors targeted those who we would consider "vanilla" pornographers by today's standards. It is true that they have fought for the survival of the industry, which is commendable. But again, that is not the overall case today by those in mainstream pornography.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 5 2011 : 1:41AM
Your (now 'clarified') argument is circular, you say that the Feds only go after the more extreme pornographers (which is true) but then say that it seems to be only the audacious pornographers that stand up for pornography. Well of course, it's hard for others who aren't dragged into court to do so isn't it? Beyond lending their support, what would you have them do? Five Star themselves openly talked on this forum about JM refusing them any support during any point in the case, as usual you're generous supplying motivations for the likes of JM, they've refused to respond to Five Star's story, merely calling it 'bullshit' but then claming up, despite their willingness to air other's dirty laundry whenever possible. What exactly do you find 'commendable' about that? Here's the thread where Five Star talks about JM and those who actually did help them out, not surprisingly the names of those who did help out are those who have the best reputations in general in the industry, for a reason it turns out. As for Rob Black, I do think that those who are infamous for not paying their talent (and this is before the obscenity prosecutions) are neither good businesspeople nor worthy of much respect. Edited by - BlackSix on 4/5/2011 2:05:17 AM
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 5 2011 : 12:32PM
Rob Black went to jail and most certainly did stand up and fight. Check your facts. Not only did he go to jail but so did his wife. To stand up and fight means having a war chest of money, which Ruben and Stagliano had. Sometimes you must cut your losses. Rob Black didn't have the resources that Flynt, Sturman, or Stagliano had, not even close. I don't think you know all the facts of which you speak. It is easy to stand up and fight when you are well vested, try doing it with no money.
There have been recent films that incorporated rape into the narrative (Throat: A Cautionary Tale, Cry Wolf, for example). These are examples of how adult film has recently incorporated dark themes and topics such as rape. As far as I'm aware, Vivid never got into trouble regarding these films. (Correct me if I'm mistaken). In the 70s and 80s, even with the most grimy exploitative flicks, rape was usually integrated into a narrative. I think that's an important distinction that people are failing to make in this discussion when broadly referring to "now" and "then" as though nowadays porn won't do something that in the old days they would.
All I gotta say is about people making these films is this, are they artistic? Rape Fantasies are prevalent with many women, not all. I like to look at them as ravishing fantasies. Adult Films have become so....circus bullshit acts, it's almost beyond reality. Ass to Mouth, are you going to kiss the girl who sucks the shit off your dick? Not me, sorry. I used to stand up for porn stars, now I am taking a second look. I always thought that a porn star wanted to be a porn star, I have talked to a few of these porn stars and all they want is a fast paycheck. They don't want to be a superstar, they just want to make as much money possible in a short period of time. This attitude totally takes away from a performer, IMO, and leads me to believe she is an over rated porn star.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Apr 6 2011 : 1:59AM
I would argue that these pornographers stand up for pornography because they already know that their content may possibly place them at higher risk of being targeted. Yet, they still continue to exercise their right to produce it. Don't you think Max Hardcore knew that the anti-porn crusade was just looking for a way to get to him? The trial that convicted him was not the first time that he had been dragged into court. Yet, despite the ongoing witch hunt against him, he continued to make the type of movies he wanted to make. Don't you think that Stagliano knows that the government can always prosecute him again, the same way it has done other pornographers that it couldn't get the first time around? These pornographers are aware of their rights and the possible risks of exercising them, whereas some other pornographers might just sit down and do as they're told. That's what I mean when I say that they are generally more willing to stand for the existence and rights of porn. They don't have to actually be dragged into a courtroom in order to stand for those rights. It's also great when those in the industry lend support to their peers who find themselves in the midst of anti-porn persecution. But we all know that doesn't always happen.Do you mean to tell us that girls only go into porn for easy money, and not because they really enjoy letting random dudes fuck them on camera? Get the fuck out of here! Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that Santa Claus isn't real.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 6 2011 : 4:22AM
I know that Black guilty plea involved spending a year in prison, and he made the deal because he ran out of money, but his bravado going into the case (he famously dared the Feds to come after him in a PBS documentary) make his eventual capitulation rather than risking a trial rather ironic. Also, it seems from what I've read that he was running out of money before the trial even began because of bad business deals (i.e. his attempt to enter pro-wrestling) and was failing to pay his performers. Either way, I see he and Lizzie are now working for Tom Byron (more irony) and I wish them luck, Lizzie's videos for Tom are certainly much better shot than her work at Extreme. To get OT, another example of a modern rape/revenge fantasy sequence, that is played rather straight, is in another Jake Malone title: Heather Gables scene with Brandon Iron and Jake Malone in Crimes of the Cunt. In this case, as GGG notes though, there is a fair bit of narrative attached to the scene, as Gables writes a fantasy that involves her being kidnapped and 'raped' by Brandon and Jake before getting her revenge at the end.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 6 2011 : 2:43PM
He dared the Feds to come after him and they did. There is a very famous song by The Bobby Fuller Four, I Fought the Law and the Law Won. THey rarely lose, if they think they can even remotely get you they will. They have endless funds in which to do so. I worked for Rueben and Larry. They got Rueben, not Larry. If they don't get you for one thing, they get you for another. The onslaught is never ending once you are a target. It is a very fine line in which we can cross, and doing so doesn't make you a martyr, it makes you poor and sometimes confined. Rape is a very touchy subject, not very popular amongst the masses. To depict a scene like that makes it ok in some peoples minds. Louie CK has a very funny bit about that. Taking home a waitress and nothing happens. Next day she asked why nothing happened. He said I tried, I kissed you, you pushed me away, I touched you but you pushed me away. She then tells him she likes to be forced. So he askes, You wanted me to rape you? Are you out of your fucking mind? What if you didn't want me to rape you and I did? Much funnier when Louie CK does it. But the point is, it can be a fantasy, but it needs to be clearly worked out by both parties before that fantasy is realized.
Like most respondents, I think actual rape is wrong and totally unarousing, but indulging and viewing a consensual, shared rape/ domination fantasy can be a turn on. The specific thing I'd like to hear about is where a girl filming a scene in the latter group actually asks to be raped, uses the word. Ideally for me she needs to be a petite and very submissive young thing, begging sweetly to be gang raped in the ass. That might be too much to ask. Any titles please?
[Link]
john_qyoo_public Deactivated User
265 Posts 7/05
Posted - Apr 13 2011 : 3:20PM
Actually, I remember reading somewhere that some huge percentage of women have rape fantasies. Like 30 or 40 percent. Rape fantasies mind you. You know, combine a bodice-ripping cover with rape, and you have a rape fantasy. Basically, a stud they want to fuck anyway just takes it without asking.
[Link]
john_qyoo_public Deactivated User
265 Posts 7/05
Posted - Apr 13 2011 : 3:31PM
The only one I've ever seen was another Kristi Myst scene, from Cornhole Armageddon I think. A couple guys rape her in a home invasion scene. The sickest part was the sound of a baby crying throughout the entire scene.
Nikki Brantz had an excellent early scene, as a submissive but horny teen taking it in the ass from two masked men in turn, a break-in scenario. Lost in the move from video to DVD....
Rape is a poor choice of word. Let's rename is thread to "surprise sex" that said.... can anyone give me a name of movie where Sasha Grey has been surprised?
I agree! Alicia Rhodes - Dirty Birds (surprise dap) Sophie Dee - Down the Hatch (surprise dpp) both these girls are enthusiastic as hell so no rape theme but when they end up with 2 in 1 hole its played out like that was not part of the script but just end up going along with it anyway :) its funny when alicia ends up with 2 in the ass she says "hey i haven't been paid for that" lol
Nice posts, LubeNLuv Blossom, I understood what you were saying from the jump and I do not find your position creepy or weird. FWIW, I've known a few women with rape fantasies--some of the fantasies were vague, others were increasingly dynamic with elements of violent compulsion and complete loss of control of unfolding events. In my discussions with these women, the fantasies seemed to revolve ultimately around finding the limits of their sexual desire, prowess, and attractiveness. As a layperson, I only once or twice found the fantasies "out there." But then, the fantasies are theirs, not mine. I've also known several rape victims. To my knowledge, none of these women had rape fantasies, but the topic never came up because "going there" never struck me as prudent. I've also come across strippers who have rape fantasies. Yes, I am aware that a stripper's conduct is almost entirely about performing, but in my experience, I've been able to get convincing answers--and compelling behavior--from women when I ask specific questions a certain way. (Strippers are surprisingly direct when you ask them if they like the work they're doing and the answer is "no.") I think that part of the controversy in this thread centers around us not all being on the same page as to what constitutes rape. Is it a crime of passion? An act of non consensual sex? A type of sexual conquest? Or is a rape an act of violence that has nothing to do with sex as we understand it? (MOO, the act of rape constitutes a violent crime on par with capital murder when it impacts a single victim and that mass rape should be considered a crime against humanity on the same level as ethnic cleansing.) Throw into this mix our fantasies about rape as a sexual act. I think some posters are pointing to an appealing aspect of the sexual fantasy -- unbridled passion on the part of the initiator that overcomes the resistance of the recipient -- or the incredible sexual allure of the recipient that she can make the initiator lose all control and resort to brute force. Within this matrix, the question becomes who really is conquering whom? Now, consider fantasies about rape as an act of violence. Do the fantasies connote something completely harmless -- just as one might fantasize an act of violence after getting cut off in traffic? Or is it something else? There are members of this BB who feel quite at ease in expressing this fantasy (such as dude008, a person whom I think does not belong on this BB). Do these fantasies indicate a hatred of women, a fear of women, a profound sense of self loathing, or a well placed sense of inadequacy? (In the aforementioned person's case, I think the answer is clear.) Through in all these variables and it becomes clear that many of us may be talking about different things when we talk about rape. A deactivated member whom I don't miss opined that conventional films do not depict rape in order to arouse viewers sexually. I think that this analysis is off the mark. For example, Clinton Eastwood, in many of his films during the 1970s, Clint Eastwood offered very sexually charged acts of rape (e.g. The Outlaw Josey Wales and The Gauntlet). Eastwood being Eastwood, it is difficult, decades later, to discern his intent--especially since in The Eiger Sanction, he plays an exceptionally bloodthirsty killer who jokes dryly about rape before having sex with a willing partner. MOO, it is a case of art imitating life -- at that time, America's understanding of rape is not what it is today. As our sensibilities about rape changed, so did Eastwood's depiction of it in Unforgiven. The point here is that when analyzing the depiction of rape in American mass popular culture--including pr0nography--we need to make sure that we know how we're defining "rape" and how "rape" is being defined in the examples under discussion. We also need to be mindful in our assumptions about the unending conundrum of cultural studies -- the artists' intent of a specific message, how it reflects and refracts the audiences' views, and if the message transmitted is the message received.
Marilyn Mansion - Internet creep - Fetish network (2018).
[Link]
KushIV20 Deactivated User
22 Posts 10/21
Posted - Feb 28 2022 : 10:48AM
Does anyone recall what scene/ cast or site this could have been from; The scene was 5 guys breaking into a girls house while she's in bed asleep, waking her up and proceed to have their ways with her forcefully. I want to say it was like Jessie Rogers or the main girls first name was Jessie probably. I've done some research of my own with no such luck yet. Any leads would be greatly appreciated! Thank you
Introducing Kalani Luana
Posted - Mar 30 2011 : 5:30PM
