Right on Cyberchicken!I read these threads and it seems obvious to me that there are a few members that think their opinion and taste on porn is the only one that counts.I have seen more than one instance when these guys demand an actress or director to preform or direct scenes that they seem uncomfortable with or just have no desire to do.I personally cant understand why the actress or director feel inclined to give in to these guys.when I found this site I thought how cool it was to be able to interact with the guys who actually made things happen.I enjoy the fact that I can vocalize my fetish and know that it will be seen.that doesn't mean that they will make a movie revolving around my taste.I know that adultdvd talk has a lot of members but we're a minute percentage of the porn viewers.I have a deversified collection myself.I buy what I like and dont really care if Mr.Zupko directed it or if its amature.If you dont like what one guy puts out dont buy it. there is always another director that will make a movie to your taste.I appreciate the guys posting here and would hate to see a select few run them off!
Renee, I already addressed what you wrote in my reply to Hardware on Page 3 of this thread. Here is a copy and paste of what I stated previously for your convenience:Moreover, SNL (and/or the directors thereof) hire/hired black guys (including an obscure fellow by the name of Eddie Murphy).
I consider your first post in this thread to be trolling, not because of the position that you took (you're entitled to express your opinion), but because of the way that you expressed it. Whereas, Hammer expressed the same sentiments, but without trolling at all. I don't mind dissent (that's one of the many things that makes America great), but, like you, I hate trolling. Trolling can lead to flame wars and locked threads (and I really don't want to see this thread get locked).
I have been a member of ADT a lot longer than Mr. Zupko has, yet I respect his right to be here and am not attempting to drive him away. But like you, Cyberchicken, I am entitled to express my views, no matter how disagreeable that they might seem to you. To the best of my knowledge, I have not breached any of ADT's rules in how I have been expressing my views in this thread. And at no time have I engaged in trolling. To the contrary, I have shown a lot of restraint, never calling Mr. Zupko a racist, while at the same time, cautioning other people from doing so. I have stated my arguments logically and without emotion. I have done my best to back up what I have written with facts and evidence. Unlike you, I have never insulted other posters who might happen to disagree with my position.
Moreover, I have made what I feel is a reasonable request of Mr. Zupko, and carefully explained why I was making that request. Clearly, from what I stated (and more than once), it was a request, and not a demand. Mr. Zupko finally responded, but he sidestepped my request. I would just like a direct answer, either yes or no. I have already stated that if he says no, then that's fine. I have also stated that if he says no, he doesn't need to explain why (or make excuses). A simple "no" will suffice. He doesn't have to respond at all. However, I'm a porn fan and Mr. Zupko claims to like and value all porn fans ("Each and every one of you hold a special place in my heart as we are all brothers and sisters in the same fraternity"). Therefore, I am hoping that he will voluntarily respond again.
Cyberchicken, please feel free to continue to post in this thread (or any other) if you want to, but don't engage in trolling just because you don't agree with someone. If you do so again, then I'm going to ask that ADT moderators either modify or delete the trolling parts of your post(s).
Pontus, I was just giving real examples of comedy shows where a white man has played a black man, and where a black man Chappelle plays white men, though lord knows, he could have gone out and hired a white guy.
As a frequent poster to this forum, you know this subject has a long history here, many times resulting in locked threads, because of comments that make my rant seem like a mother's day greeting card.
I've yet to see an ADT discussion of this topic, that did not turn ugly, and this thread was already heading in that direction. If I pushed it along even further, then I regret doing so.
While my choice of words could have been more restrained, my opinion stands.
I don't think there's much difference between repeatedly asking a performer or director why they haven't worked with a specific race, and challenging them on it, and I want the biz to be as pressure free as possible.
Personally, I'd handle it this way.
If a performer or director is ask why they won't work with a specific race, they should simply say that their decision on who they work with is a private matter, and not open for discussion. Then politely add that if the person asking the question ever decides to work in the biz, they won't hesitate to extend them the same courtesy.
No excuses that can be picked apart. Simply say it's a private matter, and leave it at that.
Perhaps?! Certainly possible?! Go back and read your initial post in this thread, Cyberchicken. It is brimming with insults and sarcasm (all of which were completely unprovoked and unnecessary). No only that, your initial (and subsequent posts) seeks to control and stifle all expression contrary to your own views.Yes, but that's not caused by the topic itself, it's caused by people engaging in trolling, which is what you brazenly did in your initial post in this thread.You didn't push it along further, Cyberchicken, you caused it. Prior to your post, IMO, all previous posters were in full compliance with forum rules. It was only when you entered the thread that anyone (meaning you) flagrantly breached ADT's rules. So far, from what I can see, you are the only poster who breached ADT's rules. I realize that the topic of race is an inherently sensitive subject. However, that doesn't mean that it's "ugly" to merely engage in an open and honest disscussion on this topic. As I have pointed out, I have shown great restraint in my posts in this thread (unlike you).Did I not encourage you to feel free to continue posting in this thread as long as you stopped engaging in trolling? Did I not state that I had no problem with dissent?But that doesn't give you the right to troll and infringe upon the freedom of expression of others. In point of fact, I never asked why Mr. Zupko hasn't hired black men, so don't put words in my mouth, Cyberchicken. My only 'challenge' (which was actually a request) was that Mr. Zupko shoot a white female-black male IR porn movie. After two weeks, Mr. Zupko responded in a way that I thought was disingenuous, while at the same time he completely sidestepped directly answering my request (neither stating "yes" nor "no"). I've already gone on record as stating that if he says he won't honor my request, that that is fine, but that I'd like for him to come out and just state it. However, based on the sentiments and comments Mr. Zupko made in his initial post that started this thread, I think it would make a lot more sense for him to honor my request, rather than to not do so (not because he's 'forced' or 'pressured' to, but merely because, if Mr. Zupko really doesn't have a problem with race as he claims, and if 2004 is really "the year of the fan," then why not honor a reasonable request by a porn fan?).Firstly, I make a distinction between a performer and a director. A director also typically functions as an employer and for that reason I think directors should be held to a higher standard. Secondly, although a director's decisions are private, the consequences are very public. For example, when Sean Michaels first entered the porn business, he found that no one wanted to hire him because he is black. He encountered racial discrimination at almost every turn. In fact, racial discrimination in the porn business was so bad in America, Sean had to go to Europe (in particular, Hanover, Germany) in order to make it in porn. When Sean Michaels first tried to enter American porn (about 16 years ago), to a very great extent, it was almost 'lily white' compared to the way it is now. To this day, racial discrimination is a problem in the porn business (occasionally, black porn insiders such as Lexington Steele still speak out about it from time to time). Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing Mr. Zupko (or anyone else) of being a racist. As I stated previously, I have done my best to avoid labeling anyone a racist, but instead have focused on behavior and actions. Once again, directors make private decisions that have very public consequences. I have bought and enjoyed some of Mr. Zupko's movies because I think he can shoot sex scenes in an highly erotic way (my favorite Thomas Zupko movie is In the Days of Whore ). Yet, as a result of his hiring practices, I have been deprived of seeing any white female-black male IR scenes directed by Mr. Zupko. That is a public consequence of private decisions by Mr. Zupko. Yes, there are any number of other directors shooting great IR porn, but I am very interested in seeing a Zupko-directed movie devoted to wf-bm IR porn because I like Mr. Zupko's unique style. I therefore made a request for what I would like to see. You have made requests for the things you'd like to see continually in various threads, Cyberchicken. But when I do it, you jump all over me merely because you disagree (notice that I've NEVER done that to you, even though you regularly take positions that I vehemently disagree with). You seem to have major control issues, Cyberchicken.See above.
The difference is that I see no pattern of racial discrimination on the part of SNL. If Mr. Zupko had been hiring black male porn studs from time to time to appear in his movies, but made the decision to use Mr. Pete in blackface to portray Sammy Davis Jr's character in Crack Pack, I never would have even mentioned it. My issue is not with that one hiring decision of Mr. Zupko's, but with his hiring pattern of excluding black men completely. So please don't get hung up on the Crack Pack thing, Renee. It is really irrelevant to my position. It only has slight relevance in the sense that it occurred within the context of Mr. Zupko never having shot sex scenes involving black males.
Tempting Schoolgirls - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Feb 29 2004 : 3:28PM