Max Hardcore Trial Outtake - "You Look Better with Puke on Your Face"

[gonzo]

--Tampa Bay Online

TAMPA - A panel of jurors saw an extreme hard-core pornographic movie today and is expected to see many more as it weighs whether a California porn producer, who uses the name Max Hardcore, has violated criminal obscenity laws.

Today, U.S. District Judge Susan Bucklew [pictured] decided federal prosecutors can show excerpts of the movies, rather than the DVDs in their entirety, as they put on their case. Defense lawyers for Max Hardcore, whose real name is Paul F. Little, argued that jurors need to see the entirety of the movies because the repetition of the acts is a necessary component.

"Over a period of time, the shock is blunted," defense lawyer Jeffrey J. Douglas said. "That is part of the presentation. That is part of the DVD."

Federal prosecutor Lisamarie Freitas argued that the defense is trying to "desensitize" jurors.

Defense attorneys decided they will show the jurors the remainder of each movie as part of its cross examination.

Little and his company, MaxWorld Entertainment, face five counts each of distributing obscene materials over the Internet and five counts each of distributing obscene material through the mail. If convicted, each charge includes a maximum punishment of five years imprisonment.

A federal indictment alleges that Little, through his entertainment company, distributed pornographic films to post office boxes in Tampa. It also alleges that Little and MaxWorld promoted the films via a Web site by transmitting over the Internet five obscene video clips as promotional trailers.

The prosecutors were flown in from Washington where they work for the U.S. Department of Justice Child Exploitation and Obscenities Section.

To determine whether the material is obscene, jurors will have to use a test set up by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972.

Jurors must determine:
Whether "the average person applying contemporary community standards" would find the work, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest

Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by state law.

Whether the work, as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value."

For about 40 minutes Wednesday and for more than an hour this morning, the entire DVD "Max Extreme 20" was shown to jurors.

As the DVD began, the jurors sat mostly stone faced. Two women blushed and smiled slightly. One woman sat wide-eyed.

The DVD progressed, and the smiles vanished. Hands often covered mouths. Men and women fidgeted in their seats.

Expressions turned to concern as women onscreen screamed in pain during some scenes.

In one scene, Little slaps a woman repeatedly, curses at her and urinates on her. She vomits.

"That's OK," Little says in the film. "You look better with puke on your face."

As the rough sex continues, they discuss her fictional 12-year-old daughter. Little, playing the role of Max Hardcore, tells the woman he had sex with the "preteen."

In another scene, a younger woman says she is a virgin. The Hardcore character gives her a modeling job.

He grabs her neck and the back of her hair, and forces her into a sex act. The girl vomits.

Several of the jurors wince. One man rubs his closed eyes for several seconds.

During a sex act, the young woman begins to scream.

"I've got to move," she says. "Ow, ow, ow."

Hardcore slaps away her hands.

"Stop, stop, stop," she says. "Can we stop for a minute? Can we have a break?"

The scene ends abruptly but begins again and lasts for several more minutes.

At the end of the movie, Little interviews the woman, now clothed.

He asks her whether she did anything she didn't want to. She smiles and says she did not.

She says it was a difficult scene, but she thought it came out well.

"I'd love to work with you again," she says.

The screen fades to black.

[ali25extreme]

If the models are willing and they get into that kinda stuff I don't see what the prob is! It is too much for me to stomach but..I am not the buyer! In my opinion it could help some live vicariously from the videos..and using the same test from 1972? That does not seem to be fair!

[softball]

The Sweets around here did way worse than Max stuff and they beat the rap which made just about any kind of porn legal in Canada. And their stuff was way, way extreme.
That is the problem prosecutors face. If they fail on Max, then anything less offensive becomes legal.
I still think America is way too litageous. Its the only country I know of where you can beat a criminal charge and lose on the same charge in civil court. OJ comes to mind. The law can just beat you up.
I hope Max wins. I don't particularly like his stuff nor his methods, but the result would perhaps shut down some local DA's on stupid quests.

[DannyCox]

Max gets a lot worse than the Sweets ever have! The stuff he shoots for the Asian and some European markets is insanely gross and to me, not the least bit sexual. But, if everyone involved is a willing participant and of age, then I don't have a problem with it. My idea of censorship is to just not watch it.

[ali25extreme]

Max gets a lot worse than the Sweets ever have! The stuff he shoots for the Asian and some European markets is insanely gross and to me, not the least bit sexual. But, if everyone involved is a willing participant and of age, then I don't have a problem with it. My idea of censorship is to just not watch it.

I have the same view...but it is hard to not look at gruesome things..couriosity can get the best of us!

[tony404]

for max to win it will take a miracle.

[softball]

Max gets a lot worse than the Sweets ever have! The stuff he shoots for the Asian and some European markets is insanely gross and to me, not the least bit sexual. But, if everyone involved is a willing participant and of age, then I don't have a problem with it. My idea of censorship is to just not watch it.
You may be right, Danny, but living in Vancouver and working with many grads of Sweet U, I find that very, very hard to believe.

[MRock]

What happened to hot chicks looking hot? I must admit I have never even taken a "peek' at stuff like Max shoots. I don't want it burned into my brain ... may never shake it out ... might damage me for life, but hey, if that's your thing ... :okthumb:

[softball]

What happened to hot chicks looking hot? I must admit I have never even taken a "peek' at stuff like Max shoots. I don't want it burned into my brain ... may never shake it out ... might damage me for life, but hey, if that's your thing ... :okthumb:
Hot babes are a minor component of selling sex. The internet has proven that. If the only mainstream porn you have access to is hot babes, like in the past with Playboy, Hustler, etc. then that is what you will buy. But if you have access to what really makes your motor run, then "hot babe" is relatively unimportant. Those who understand that do very well. Those that don't are denizens of the zoo.

Disclaimer: before anyone goes nuts, this isn't carved in stone and is subject to exceptions.

[Trixie]

It's bothersome that they're not showing the entire dvd, since part of the test is to judge the work IN ITS ENTIRETY. Jurors will either get bored of it . . . or get turned on. I wonder how that (getting aroused) would impact the average conservative juror's final judgement? Would their own arousal bother them so much that they'd judge it MORE harshly or would they realize even "normal" people can get aroused by extreme roleplays without it being harmful?

I'm not betting any money on the outcome. His shit is definitely obscene, I just think it's retarded to have laws against it.

[tony404]

from mike south's blog,it brings up a good point.

BT Writes About Max Hardcore On Trial In Tampa
By MikeSouth

Mike: I just read your post on the Max Hardcore trial in Tampa, and I completely agree with you. I also just reread the link to my December 2005 post on Rob Black on your site, and you know what - you and I were both right then in terms of timing and what happens next.

And, I stand by what I wrote then that someone will get one of these cases to the Supreme Court. I don’t know Sirkin, the attorney who is doing a lot of the defense work in these cases, but he seems to be a really smart trial strategist. I’m sure he’s itching to get one of these cases in front of the Supremes, as any lawyer would.

That could end up being one of those “be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.” Forget election year. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Bush, McCain, Hillary or Obama in office because the Supremes aren’t running for re-election. They’ve got tenure.

And you now have a majority on the Supremes that is more conservative than ever. I think they will say there are limits. And, I don’t think it’ll be five to four.

I’ve been reading Mark Kernes’ trial coverage on AVN, and Sirkin and his team are a lot smarter than I am when it comes to these things, but I think they’re making a mistake when they want to force the jury to watch hour after hour of Max Hardcore on the theory that his work has to be taken as a whole. He’s cited the jury in the JM Productions trial as saying they weren’t disgusted by all that stuff. In the end they were bored. I think he’s banking on the notion that he can desensitize the jury.

I don’t think that’s the case with extreme porn. I’ve seen my share of porn over the years, since I saw my first loop at about age 14 more than 30 years ago. And I still remember the first time I put one of Rob Black’s Cocktail videos in the VCR because I was a Jewel D’Nyle fan. No idea what was coming. So, there I am, happily watching Jewel, and suddenly I literally gagged and shut off the TV when she drank from a glass of cum and spit. Frankly, I almost gagged now writing that line. The memory still disgusts me. I don’t think you’re going to desensitize a jury at all. I think you’re going to disgust them. If you don’t, the streets of Tampa aren’t safe for old ladies, children and small animals!

Beyond that, the notion Max’s lawyer is pushing that you have to view a Max Hardcore tape in its entirety as a work of art is nonsense. He’s never heard the term fast-forward? Does he know that porn fans skip through all the stuff with the girls saying, hey, it was all make-believe? Does he know that they fast-forward to their favorite girls and could care less about the others? Or that they fast-forward to the part of the scene that includes the fetish that gets them going?

Porn ain’t about the whole. It’s about the parts. It’s the reason Max and every other pornographer films vignettes. It’s the reason there are chapters , cum-shot reviews and easy ways to jump right to the anal and DP even on Vivid and Digital Playground features. Who really cared about the storyline in Pirates? I wanted to see Janine take a facial.

But, as I wrote in 2005, at the end of the day, these cases aren’t about the trial court in Tampa. They’re going to be about the case that goes to the Supreme Court. And one of them will go because the standard is so confusing.

[softball]

Porn ain’t about the whole. It’s about the parts:-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl::-pearl:

[RawAlex]

Well, I don't know who wrote that post on Mike's blog, but I am sure glad they aren't a lawyer. The fast forward comment alone just entirely misses the entire concept of what is on the table here, a judgment system based on the work taken as a whole. It's the exact working of the law that is being used here, and it significant and important.

He may only be interested in fast forwarding to the cumshots (and I am sure a significant number of viewers would do that to any movie), but then again, there are people who go for the Mr Skin view of Hollywood movies too, fast forwarding only the parts of movies that show boobs, nipples, or "sexy" stuff. The end user's decision to view the material in any other order or to view only selected parts of a movie doesn't change the legal definition of "the whole".

That all being said, I have to say that I have a feeling that this case is not going to be a win for the porn industry no matter which way it goes. Let me explain:

If he is found guilty (and the material found to be obscene at least in that particular community) it will likely embolden other states and other AGs to take a stab at the porn beast. If Max's stuff is obscene, then there are plenty of other videos and plenty of other websites that could be considered obscene. Pretty much any site with gagging, fish hooks, choking, or any other similar material MIGHT become obscene. Guilty would throw the entire business for a loop, and the repercussions could be huge (for online businesses, Visa and Mastercard could come down and say "no fishhooks, no deep throat, no gagging, no choking, etc" and a certain number of sites would either get shut down or have to remove content.

Let's say Max wins. The jury doesn't find the material obscene. Suddenly it's a free for all and every other new website and video release will feature extreme gagging, puking, and verbal degradation. Pretty much everything up to that point will be "obviously not obscene", and the material might shift to that more extreme vein.

Either way, it is likely that both sides will ride this one right to the supreme court, and it could take YEARS for the true resolution to come out.

[softball]

Let's say Max wins. The jury doesn't find the material obscene. Suddenly it's a free for all and every other new website and video release will feature extreme gagging, puking, and verbal degradation.I beg to disagree. That was what happened in Canada with the sweets (you should know this) and that free for all never happened. Case in point.
In fact the Sweets are not producing any more as far as I know. The only extreme going on around here (vancouver) is COHF.

[softball]

It's bothersome that they're not showing the entire dvd, since part of the test is to judge the work IN ITS ENTIRETY. Jurors will either get bored of it . . . or get turned on. I wonder how that (getting aroused) would impact the average conservative juror's final judgement? Would their own arousal bother them so much that they'd judge it MORE harshly or would they realize even "normal" people can get aroused by extreme roleplays without it being harmful?

I'm not betting any money on the outcome. His shit is definitely obscene, I just think it's retarded to have laws against it.
Tasty and I agree. Nothing illegal or offensive about obscene. However, where we part company is extreme violence. I wish I could believe that role playing is harmless, but where I live there is a gang war going on and I believe it is fueled by violent images and situations portrayed as "normal".
Around here, another crack shack murder, or targeted killing is daily news. Maybe I am just old and fucked, or maybe it is the wisdom of age, but I really do believe that life imitates art and we all have to keep that in mind in our business. It is our kids that will inherit what we have helped to create.

[RawAlex]

I beg to disagree. That was what happened in Canada with the sweets (you should know this) and that free for all never happened. Case in point.
In fact the Sweets are not producing any more as far as I know. The only extreme going on around here (vancouver) is COHF.

The Sweets won, but it wasn't all that you think it was (I spent a fair bit of time speaking with all involved including their lawyer, who is a pretty sharp guy). In the end, it really wasn't a judgement on the content itself, as the original complaint was a confused websurfer who though they were really holding a slave girl in prison and abusing her (as opposed to being characters on a website movie). I was with the Sweets in Amsterdam when they were in the process of moving everything out of Canada during that time, at one of Little C's enjoyable events.

There wasn't that much extreme stuff being shot in Canada before, there are still significant rules and regulations in place that make it very hard to distribute and sell in Canada, and honestly, with the shift in the exchange rate, we aren't a cheap place to shoot porn anymore. That seems to have fallen back to the US at this point.

[bluemoney]

But, if everyone involved is a willing participant and of age, then I don't have a problem with it. My idea of censorship is to just not watch it.
I agree.

Personally I've never found him or his material appealing. Kind of like a cross between The Marquis de Sade and Hoss Cartwright.

[Hammer]

The thing that bothers me the most is what sort of individual watches those kinds of movies and actually likes it? At what point do we say, "You know what, you're a fucking sick individual that needs counseling and we're not going to provide you with the garbage you want."?

I know I'm in the minority in this business with some of my opinions and I'm well aware of the "slippery slope" argument but it just seems to me that in any civilized society there have to be rules and those rules should be based on a certain amount of common sense. Murder is illegal. Rape is illegal. Stealing is illegal. But why? I mean if we take the slippery slope approach to everything, at some point you end up all the way back at the top of the hill and have to say nothing should be illegal.

[softball]

The Sweets won, but it wasn't all that you think it was (I spent a fair bit of time speaking with all involved including their lawyer, who is a pretty sharp guy). In the end, it really wasn't a judgement on the content itself, as the original complaint was a confused websurfer who though they were really holding a slave girl in prison and abusing her (as opposed to being characters on a website movie). I was with the Sweets in Amsterdam when they were in the process of moving everything out of Canada during that time, at one of Little C's enjoyable events.

There wasn't that much extreme stuff being shot in Canada before, there are still significant rules and regulations in place that make it very hard to distribute and sell in Canada, and honestly, with the shift in the exchange rate, we aren't a cheap place to shoot porn anymore. That seems to have fallen back to the US at this point.
Its a pretty inexpensive place to shoot porn. The value of talent dropped along with the value of bandwidth and profits. I know the people that opened up that Amsterdam thingy and it seems it never flew. They were still producing serious shit around here up until a couple of years ago. As for the case, whatever the argument Mr. Snowell made, it still opened the door for extreme production that I don't see happening. As for distributing and selling in Canada? I could care less. Our market is the world. It is the ability to produce product without worrying about bubba knocking on the door that makes this a comfortable place to work.

[DannyCox]

There is still content being produced here for the Sweets. Most of the bukkakepee.com content is shot here in Montreal with local girls. We've helped Marie (who shoots it for them) with "Talent" on both the giving and receiving side of things.

[Trixie]

Tasty and I agree. Nothing illegal or offensive about obscene. However, where we part company is extreme violence. I wish I could believe that role playing is harmless, but where I live there is a gang war going on and I believe it is fueled by violent images and situations portrayed as "normal".
Around here, another crack shack murder, or targeted killing is daily news. Maybe I am just old and fucked, or maybe it is the wisdom of age, but I really do believe that life imitates art and we all have to keep that in mind in our business. It is our kids that will inherit what we have helped to create.
While I don't think obscenity & violent role plays, etc. should be illegal, I'm not saying I think they're *harmless* (and obviously as a feminist and a woman, I do consider extreme porn problematic, at the very least, while as a perv I concede that some of it gets me hot; for example, I'm turned off by stuff that looks painful in Max Hardcore films, but ummm . . . the taboo role plays, filthy talking, crying & gagging girls, etc. totally get me off). Great literature isn't harmless, either. True crime shows on television aren't harmless (and give plenty of sexually violent ideas and tips to would-be criminals as to make them every bit as appealing to a prurient interest as staged snuff porn, etc. -- "go to A&E to see more images of the dungeon where this violent sexual predator held girls as his sex slaves against their will for years! Get more interview footage online with this depraved lunatic!"). It's ludicrous to think that porn should be judged BY THE LEGAL SYSTEM more harshly simply because it's accompanied by graphic VISUAL sexual images. The point is that all of it needs to be protected as free speech. No one should be prosecuted for a thought crime or held responsible for how someone else responds to it. The best way to combat people getting inspired or improperly brainwashed by the bad shit is to have better education, media literacy, and teach people to, you know, have empathy and give a shit about other people. Basically to brainwash people to be smarter, nicer, etc.

There is shit on Oprah's book list that is just as violent, sexual and horrifying as Max Harcore and of course you can flip to those pages and jerk off to it to, if you want. I know because I've done it.

I do think there are serious consequences to having so much extreme porn out there, I just think there are better ways to deal with it than criminalizing its creation and distribution. There were plenty of people committing horrifying sex crimes and hating on women BEFORE extreme porn came along.

[Trixie]

The thing that bothers me the most is what sort of individual watches those kinds of movies and actually likes it? At what point do we say, "You know what, you're a fucking sick individual that needs counseling and we're not going to provide you with the garbage you want."

Ummm . . . plenty of regular, nice, normal people get off on "sick", twisted fantasies. Do you know how common rape and incest fantasies are? FANTASIES! Sometimes people get off on things *because* they are bothered by them; it's a pretty natural and even healthy thing, to be excited by things that scare you or make you feel guilty or speak to your dark side or are forbidden. That is human nature.

I agree that a lot of people who like extreme porn are sick fucks, and that there *are* a lot of sick fucks out there in general, and that a lot of people are dangerously incapable of distinguishing between fantasy and reality, but it's unfair to color everyone who gets off on *fantasizing* about depraved, fucked-up shit with the same brush.

[RawAlex]

There is still content being produced here for the Sweets. Most of the bukkakepee.com content is shot here in Montreal with local girls. We've helped Marie (who shoots it for them) with "Talent" on both the giving and receiving side of things.

In part, because in Montreal you can go into adult video stores and buy or rent watersports videos, which isn't something you can do in, say, Regina. Although we don't have the same community standards crap that haunts the US system, there is still a varying levels of tolerance in different parts of the country.

My own personal concern on extreme stuff has little to do with taste (people are turned on by all sorts of things we would consider weird or downright depraved), but more the question of how the lifeblood of the online world would react to some of it. Yes, Mastercard and Visa are key components of the online world, and if they say "you cannot process pee" then pee doesn't get processed, at least not via US accounts.

Discussions have been had on other boards at other times about the same thing: obscenity is only of the issues that limits the type of content that can be produced commercially in ways that can actually make money. Without the ability to make money, most of the extreme stuff would disappear, with only the true fetishists of the material continuing to produce stuff for their own enjoyment, without concern for income.

The levels of freedom of speech in the US far exceed the levels of tolerance from the companies that make this financial possible. A guilty verdict against Max would give those companies a chance to tighten the strings even a little further.

[Hammer]

Ummm . . . plenty of regular, nice, normal people get off on "sick", twisted fantasies.
We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I think there's a big difference between rape fantasies people have in their heads and people that watch rape scenes and get off on them, unless they are bland scenes in which the girl resists a little at first and then give in. IMO, violent rape videos and videos of men pissing in women's mouths and making them puke don't appeal to nice normal people. Unless of course your definition of nice normal people is considerably different than mine.

[gonzo]

Great debate once again. My hat is off to you all without making personal attacks to make your points.

I will contribute this.
We are all in the business of selling fantasy. People get off reading or seeing some of the taboo things on video. How much is too much? How far is to far?

Its hard to say.

There is a huge debate for instance on bareback sex specifically in gay videos. The argument is that the industry condones and sanctions bareback sex admist the danger with the gay community.

I believe that we sell fantasy and people watch what they should not and can not do in normal life. If you look at the numbers specifically with bareback vs nonbareback the consumer WANTS to see the bareback sex a LOT more than with a condom on.

Im certain this is prevelant in straight sex as well.

Maybe we need to start putting up a disclaimer like Jackass does before those episodes to say do no try this at home.

In the end Iwould go with doing what I think is the right thing. I sleep well knowing that I know the difference between right and wrong and do not factor in the economics of the situation when making the decison.

I cant say the same thing for many others in this business.

[Hammer]

The whole bareback argument is ridiculous. How many straight videos do you see with no condoms? What's the difference?, you can get HIV from straight people too. Why is it any less important to show safe sex in straight videos? We all know most of the models aren't married or monogamous.

[softball]

Unless of course your definition of nice normal people is considerably different than mine.
I have a feeling mine is......

[Trixie]

Unless of course your definition of nice normal people is considerably different than mine.
Yeah, I think we've already established that, you and I.

[EmporerEJ]

The whole bareback argument is ridiculous. How many straight videos do you see with no condoms? What's the difference?, you can get HIV from straight people too. Why is it any less important to show safe sex in straight videos? We all know most of the models aren't married or monogamous.

As I read all threads, including this, I keep thinking...So?
I don't care for Max's stuff. But the point is, I DON'T HAVE TO.
It's not about having to like it, it's about THE CHOICE.
I Choose NOT to watch Max's Stuff. But how does that make it Ok for me to stop some other dude that likes it?


And I think if he is found not guilty, we are gonna be in worse trouble. This isn't Canada. We over-react here. It will get all the good right wingers all wound up and pounding out last minute laws for their president to sign before he leaves.

(Sorry Hammer, mostly Not aimed at you.)

[EmporerEJ]

The whole bareback argument is ridiculous. How many straight videos do you see with no condoms? What's the difference?, you can get HIV from straight people too. Why is it any less important to show safe sex in straight videos? We all know most of the models aren't married or monogamous.


People don't want to see condom sex.
With regular testing, why is this such a big deal?
We are selling fantasy here, not "safe sex education."


If everybody wants to be safe, it's real easy. Use our machine. Can't catch a disease there, now can you?
See that? I just saved the world.
Aren't you all very impressed?

[Trixie]

I am opposed to mandating condoms, no matter how irresponsible I think it is to have condomless sex. Testing is nice, but it's not foolproof. Plus it does nothing to test for HPV which causes cancer, not just of the cervix but of the anus as well. It'll be cool when the vaccine is taken by everyone, but I don't think we'll see people doing that or being able to afford it unless it's made mandatory and paid for by the gov't.

[gonzo]

People don't want to see condom sex.
With regular testing, why is this such a big deal?
We are selling fantasy here, not "safe sex education."


If everybody wants to be safe, it's real easy. Use our machine. Can't catch a disease there, now can you?
See that? I just saved the world.
Aren't you all very impressed?
Someone still doesnt hear the oncoming storm.

[softball]

People don't want to see condom sex.
With regular testing, why is this such a big deal?
We are selling fantasy here, not "safe sex education."


If everybody wants to be safe, it's real easy. Use our machine. Can't catch a disease there, now can you?
See that? I just saved the world.
Aren't you all very impressed?
But sticking an organ in your machine is not having sex. It is kind of irrelevant to this discussion. I don't say that because we don't get along, I say that because I mean it. Having "sex" with your thingy is like having "sex" with a milking machine.

[softball]

I am opposed to mandating condoms, no matter how irresponsible I think it is to have condomless sex. Testing is nice, but it's not foolproof. Plus it does nothing to test for HPV which causes cancer, not just of the cervix but of the anus as well. It'll be cool when the vaccine is taken by everyone, but I don't think we'll see people doing that or being able to afford it unless it's made mandatory and paid for by the gov't.

You can never mandate condoms. Testing is pretty good and really lowers your risk. If you are in the porn business, it really is not a huge issue. I am sure being a clerk in a 7/11 or a cab driver is a riskier occupation. Its kind of like wearing a hard hat and steel toes, it won't necessarily save your life, and you do have to take some risks to pay the rent. How many people die or are disabled every year in the porn business. Not a lot, Scott.

[Trixie]

Yeah, but years from now a lot of girls are going to die from cervical cancer. Seriously, I have seen some horridly wart-riddled twats even in shiny, pretty porn and without having health insurance chances are many of them are not getting regular pap smears to catch things. I agree that testing is great and helps a lot AND there are many way more dangerous professions, but it's still risky, especially for anyone taking it up the pussy or ass.

[tony404]

if everyone used condoms on shoots and that's all that was offered.That's what they would jerk off too.

[softball]

Yeah, but years from now a lot of girls are going to die from cervical cancer. Seriously, I have seen some horridly wart-riddled twats even in shiny, pretty porn and without having health insurance chances are many of them are not getting regular pap smears to catch things. I agree that testing is great and helps a lot AND there are many way more dangerous professions, but it's still risky, especially for anyone taking it up the pussy or ass.
My point is that there is always a risk when profit is involved. I think you are taking a bigger risk eating processed food that will rot your guts from the inside out. No offense, G, but Krispy Kremes will probably kill you and no one thinks twice. But hey, sex without a condom, well that is "dangerous". I kinda think we have our priorities screwed up here. I think you are better off choosing who you fuck wisely than hoping a condom will save your ass or pussy.

[Trixie]

I do not want people telling me I cannot have condomless sex with my partners just because I'm making porn. That's ludicrous, invasive, and just . . . fucked. Even worse than seat belt laws. Of course, I'm pro seat belts and think kids should have to wear them, but jesus.

[softball]

I do not want people telling me I cannot have condomless sex with my partners just because I'm making porn. That's ludicrous, invasive, and just . . . fucked. Even worse than seat belt laws. Of course, I'm pro seat belts and think kids should have to wear them, but jesus.
In New Hampshire, you only have to wear a seat belt if you are a kid.

Live free or die

[gonzo]

In New Hampshire, you only have to wear a seat belt if you are a kid.

Live free or die
Shit now Vooman is going to be here looking for Big Vito.

[Trixie]

My point is that there is always a risk when profit is involved. I think you are taking a bigger risk eating processed food that will rot your guts from the inside out. No offense, G, but Krispy Kremes will probably kill you and no one thinks twice. But hey, sex without a condom, well that is "dangerous". I kinda think we have our priorities screwed up here. I think you are better off choosing who you fuck wisely than hoping a condom will save your ass or pussy.
I do agree with you, really, that people's perspective on this matter is totally skewed and blown out of proportion. I am much more afraid of car accidents than STD's.

Whoever said in jest we should have warnings that "this is not real" like jackass, etc. I think is actually on to something. I have said it over and over again, that while I'm opposed to regulating or criminalizing content, I do think our responsibility is more to provide at least a little education, warning, and perspective/reminders to people that that what they're seeing is risky behavior, fantasy/acting, would be a crime if done in real life, would be physically painful, is fake, etc. That's where I get really pissed about extreme sites, when they go out of their way to insist everything is REAL, not staged, etc. That was the problem I had/have with the sleep assault site, etc. I don't have a problem with rape fantasies and role plays, but I do have a problem with people presenting them in a way that seems to condone real crime or wants customers to believe a real crime was committed.

While the Max Hardcore exit interview with the girl may have been motivated purely as a get-out-of-jail-free card, I think it's a great thing to do. I think it humanizes the girl and puts the fantasy into the right context (if it's presented to the customer). I think extreme porn (and porn with taboo or dangerous themes) should be presented with a reality check. I try hard to do that myself on our sites. If someone loses their boner because of a reality check then THAT person is the kind of freak I would label as Hammer does: a menace in need of serious help.

I have an interesting anecdote that relates to this, but we're about to eat and go to bed so I'll save it for later.

[softball]

Personally I think that the only thing that a porn site should do to kill a boner is to create an orgasm.

[gonzo]

Whoever said in jest we should have warnings that "this is not real" like jackass, etc. I think is actually on to something.
Thanks- It wasnt in jest. Ill be using it right behind a 2257 statement from here on out.

[Hammer]

Funny Trixie but I can't help seeing your condom argument as contradicting itself. In one breath you say that testing is fallible which seems to indicate that a performer would be smart to demand condoms be worn if they had a brain and yet in the other breath you argue that you're against mandating condoms.

Are you saying that the laws we have in our countries are useless? Do you realize why we make laws and mandates? To protect the morons that don't follow the rules on their own. So, by not mandating condoms, you're condemning a lot of innocent people to death that have sex with performers who didn't use condoms because they believed their partners drug test was proof that they'd be safe.

I'm not arguing for mandating condoms, I'm just pointing out that arguing two sides of an argument with yourself is kinda funny.

Personally, although I hate watching videos with condoms, I think any performer that doesn't wear one while they have sex with a complete stranger (test or not), is a fucking moron.

[RawAlex]

The condom issue is actually a pretty funny one, and something that the porn industry needs to get use to if it ever gets the status of "acceptable". It's called Occupational Health and Safety. In the same manner that city workers have to wear reflective vests, highrise construction guys have to be tied off so they can't fall off the buildings and so on, condoms in porn may in end up being one of those rules of life.

Quite simply, if the government's don't act, they risk liablity for providing an unsafe workspace. More importantly, they risk financial ruin if someone gets sick on a porn set because no OHS rules were enforced.

The day porn becomes legit, this will all get more difficult (and much easier to regulate)

[softball]

The day porn becomes legit,
A day that will live in infamy.

[softball]

you're condemning a lot of innocent people to death
Are you sure about this? How many? Just a ball park will do and no jokes about filling one. I say this only because a lot of people toss this argument around like a mum and apple pie kind of thing.

[Hammer]

Are you sure about this? How many? Just a ball park will do and no jokes about filling one. I say this only because a lot of people toss this argument around like a mum and apple pie kind of thing.
I don't know an exact number, let me start polling some HIV patients and I'll get back to you on that one.

Remember these cases? http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/7348.php

Darren James had unprotected sex with 13 female performers while shooting in Brazil in 1999 and he's just one performer and what about all the other non industry women he had sex with? And how many of those 13 women ended up getting the virus and passing it on? When he returned to the US he passed the virus on to another performer, Lara Roxx who then also tested positive and hit the news. How many men did she give the virus too? Then Jessica Dee became the third porn star to test positive and started a massive scare in the industry during which time 53 performers were quarantined.

How many of those 53 performers actually ended up contracting the virus I don't know but even if it was only a few and those few along with the original 3 had unprotected sex with several non industry partners that we don't know about and those partners had unprotected sex with other partners, it doesn't take a math genius to realize that that could add up to a LOT of people. Maybe you could eventually fill a ballpark with the people that got the virus from the trickle down effect.

Sorry about the trickle down part. ;)

[softball]

I don't know an exact number, let me start polling some HIV patients and I'll get back to you on that one.

Remember these cases? http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/7348.php

Darren James had unprotected sex with 13 female performers while shooting in Brazil in 1999 and he's just one performer and what about all the other non industry women he had sex with? And how many of those 13 women ended up getting the virus and passing it on? When he returned to the US he passed the virus on to another performer, Lara Roxx who then also tested positive and hit the news. How many men did she give the virus too? Then Jessica Dee became the third porn star to test positive and started a massive scare in the industry during which time 53 performers were quarantined.

How many of those 53 performers actually ended up contracting the virus I don't know but even if it was only a few and those few along with the original 3 had unprotected sex with several non industry partners that we don't know about and those partners had unprotected sex with other partners, it doesn't take a math genius to realize that that could add up to a LOT of people. Maybe you could eventually fill a ballpark with the people that got the virus from the trickle down effect.

Sorry about the trickle down part. ;)
That is exactly the mum and apple pie argument I was addressing. You just can't "argue" it. Many feel that way about abortion and Iraq.
However, when I mentioned earlier about choosing your partners, dude had been to Brazil fucking trannies as well. That is tantamount to a crime. This is not the norm.
There are many industries with worse occupational hazards. How many sex scenes do you see in movies at the cinema where the hero pulls out a condom before they roll in the hay....albeit under the covers....but certainly not reaching for a condom.
That girl that got aids also did a double anal dp. Young and foolish and all that. However if you want to ever get old and foolish like me, you better be young and smart like I was.

[Hammer]

Like I said, I am not arguing for mandatory condom use, I used that as an example to point out the seemingly 'have your cake and eat it to' post Trixie made. It just sounded strange to me for her to make a case for using condoms while at the same time arguing against making it mandatory.

I think the argument that people would make about Hollywood not making a big deal about using condoms in sex scenes is that we all know they're not really having sex. On the other hand, since the performers actually are having sex in porn videos, some people get the wrong message.

[softball]

In the words of a great visionary Canadian, the medium is the message. Having said that, do we contrive our message to match our morals, or do we let Max Hardcore do that for us?

[Hammer]

The Max Hardcore case is not going to tell us anything useful. He isn't in court because of his extreme porn sites, he's in court for shipping extreme porn DVDs to a supposedly conservative community. If he loses the case it will be bad for anyone running extreme sites even though in reality we're comparing apples to oranges since most site owners don't ship content on DVDs.

[Trixie]

Hammer. HammerhammerhammerHAMMER.

There are a lot of things I believe in personally, behaviors I think are smart . . . actions I like to take to protect myself, etc. but that I DO NOT WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO MAKE FOR ME. This is supposed to be a fundamental part of our freedom in this country: choice. You sound like a total commie the way you're talking about people being so stupid they need the government to step in and take their choices away.

I also disagree with comparing this industry to other OSHA regulated industries because we are depicting SEX. Something regular people have recreationally. SEX. An activity that's our birthright. Or biological drive. How you have it, who you have it with, all of that stuff is NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS TO REGULATE, nor is it the industry's business to regulate it. There are a lot of people (like my partner and I) who are making porn depicting our real sex lives, not a studio act. Condom mandates would be a really invasive, restrictive and unnecessary thing to foist upon amateurs who make real porn depicting their real sex lives. For example: we're trying to get pregnant (and just set aside your judgment on us for doing that and pretend we're a "nice, normal" couple). We have spycams and we make porn. So basically a condom mandatory law or regulation would be like telling us we aren't allowed to get pregnant the regular way since we are on cam all the time.

People need more/better education, not more laws and mandates. These issues are more complex than just being all for something or all against something. You can be critical of and concerned about something (condomless sex in porn) without automatically concluding the best remedy is a bunch of inflexible, freedom-taking rules and regulations.

[Trixie]

Clarification: of course I support studios, directors, actors and actresses who insist upon condoms for shoots. I just don't think the industry or the government should demand it across the board.

[softball]

and just set aside your judgment on us for doing that and pretend we're a "nice, normal" couple
I think you guys are a very nice, normal couple. But my opinion of normal might be a bit skewed. But nevertheless, not particularly abnormal apart from maybe the camera deal and that is only a maybe.

[softball]

BTW, we suggest condoms for anyone who is not with their partner. If they know each other and trust each other, that is entirely up to them to make that call.
But there are tons of things that condoms won't prevent and then it opens a can of worms on oral sex....etcetcetcetc....ad nauseum

[Trixie]

I think you guys are a very nice, normal couple. But my opinion of normal might be a bit skewed. But nevertheless, not particularly abnormal apart from maybe the camera deal and that is only a maybe.
Likewise! And thanks for the character reference (Hammer thinks it's wrong for us to have children). ;) I think we're a super vanilla, 99.9% monogamous, responsible, healthy couple and totally boring except for a few little kinks here and there.

[Trixie]

BTW, we suggest condoms for anyone who is not with their partner. If they know each other and trust each other, that is entirely up to them to make that call.
But there are tons of things that condoms won't prevent and then it opens a can of worms on oral sex....etcetcetcetc....ad nauseum
Yeah, once people start in on mandatory condoms, that logically means all sex should involve barriers and I think it's fucked to insist on dental dams for every pussy-eating or ass-rimming. I have no desire to suck cock or eat pussy or ass through a latex barrier. Unless maybe there's some weird cyborg role play going on. I do like licking around the sides of panties, though. It doesn't make it safer, but I do like to have a few barriers sometimes for the tease.

[softball]

Yeah, once people start in on mandatory condoms, that logically means all sex should involve barriers and I think it's fucked to insist on dental dams for every pussy-eating or ass-rimming. I have no desire to suck cock or eat pussy or ass through a latex barrier. Unless maybe there's some weird cyborg role play going on. I do like licking around the sides of panties, though. It doesn't make it safer, but I do like to have a few barriers sometimes for the tease.
Yeah, we know what normal is....lol

[EmporerEJ]

But sticking an organ in your machine is not having sex. It is kind of irrelevant to this discussion. I don't say that because we don't get along, I say that because I mean it. Having "sex" with your thingy is like having "sex" with a milking machine.

Funny, I don't recall shipping a unit to your address.
So, your comments are kind of "irrelevant" to this discussion.

[EmporerEJ]

Someone still doesnt hear the oncoming storm.


This is like the 3rd, or 4th? such comment?
Sort of reminds me of the color alert system.
I've stopped watching over my shoulder.
If there is something to be considered, spill it. Otherwise, thanks, but it's not funny anymore.

[EmporerEJ]

Yeah, but years from now a lot of girls are going to die from cervical cancer. Seriously, I have seen some horridly wart-riddled twats even in shiny, pretty porn and without having health insurance chances are many of them are not getting regular pap smears to catch things. I agree that testing is great and helps a lot AND there are many way more dangerous professions, but it's still risky, especially for anyone taking it up the pussy or ass.


Ya know, the guys on the Alaskan fishing show take a risk too. Some of them die doing their Jobs.
Every one of those ships would be perfectly safe in the harbor......but that's not what ships were made for.
Some of the fishing guys don't stay long...others do.

[EmporerEJ]

(Hammer thinks it's wrong for us to have children). .

China has some funny ideas about who, or who should not, have children.
But we don't live there.

[softball]

Funny, I don't recall shipping a unit to your address.
So, your comments are kind of "irrelevant" to this discussion.
very relevant. Emp that was not even a good try. Its a machine. You can masturbate into a fence if you like, but I would argue that it is not sex. Therefore, irrelevant to add to this discussion.

[Trixie]

Ya know, the guys on the Alaskan fishing show take a risk too. Some of them die doing their Jobs.
Every one of those ships would be perfectly safe in the harbor......but that's not what ships were made for.
Some of the fishing guys don't stay long...others do.
GAH -- I know that. Something can still be risky while being considerably LESS risky than many other things.

I believe in taking calculated risks. Obviously part of the calculating is comparing it to other risks. But you still need to acknowledge that THERE IS STILL RISK, particularly for women or guys being poked up the butt by wet penises, even with AIM testing. I am definitely not one of the people worked up into a panicked lather over it and I totally agree there are many much more risky jobs and recreational activities in the world and have said so many times, I just don't think the risks should be summarily dismissed as inconsequential even if they are much lower and less life-threatening than people make them out to be.

Seriously. Just because something is less risky than fishing on the Bering Sea doesn't make it not risky at all. There are a whole lot of still-risky things that are less risky than that. Because that shit is totally risky! That's why there's a show about it! I totally agree, though, that if those risks are tolerable enough to make an entertaining show about it (where they recently showed drunk driving, too, without any sort of public service announcement or lecture about it and the drunk fucker fell into the water) then people should certainly be able to make porn without condoms if that's what they choose to do.

[EmporerEJ]

very relevant. Emp that was not even a good try. Its a machine. You can masturbate into a fence if you like, but I would argue that it is not sex. Therefore, irrelevant to add to this discussion.

Your usual inane blather, about nothing of importance.

[EmporerEJ]

GAH -- I know that. Something can still be risky while being considerably LESS risky than many other things.

I believe in taking calculated risks. Obviously part of the calculating is comparing it to other risks. But you still need to acknowledge that THERE IS STILL RISK, particularly for women or guys being poked up the butt by wet penises, even with AIM testing. I am definitely not one of the people worked up into a panicked lather over it and I totally agree there are many much more risky jobs and recreational activities in the world and have said so many times, I just don't think the risks should be summarily dismissed as inconsequential even if they are much lower and less life-threatening than people make them out to be.

Seriously. Just because something is less risky than fishing on the Bering Sea doesn't make it not risky at all. There are a whole lot of still-risky things that are less risky than that. Because that shit is totally risky! That's why there's a show about it! I totally agree, though, that if those risks are tolerable enough to make an entertaining show about it (where they recently showed drunk driving, too, without any sort of public service announcement or lecture about it and the drunk fucker fell into the water) then people should certainly be able to make porn without condoms if that's what they choose to do.

I guess my point is, I pretty much agree with your thinking.
I'm sick to death of the "Nanny state," wanting to dictate rules and regulations to us.
Tired of the governmant trying to protect me from myself.
You wanna feel safe and use condoms? Fine.
(Not gonna sell, but fine)
You wanna not use condoms? Fine...your risk.

[Trixie]

Gotcha -- thanks for clarifying.

[Hammer]

Will someone please point out to me where in this thread I supported government mandated condom use? The commie would like to know.

[softball]

Your usual inane blather, about nothing of importance.
Of all the blather on this or any other board I have seen you on, yours is up there with the most banal and/or inane. I think, Emp you are calling the kettle black again. When you miss a point, which is very frequently, this is your response. I believe you have constructed a macro to do this. Now, I will continue to read your words of wisdom and have a good chuckle. Or have you been on tv lately so I can tune in or record your pitch for your milking machine.

[softball]

I guess my point is, I pretty much agree with your thinking.
I'm sick to death of the "Nanny state," wanting to dictate rules and regulations to us.
Tired of the governmant trying to protect me from myself.
You wanna feel safe and use condoms? Fine.
(Not gonna sell, but fine)
You wanna not use condoms? Fine...your risk.
So why don't you do something about it instead of whining. You voted for these clowns, I am sure. Or are you one of those Libertarian thingys....???

[softball]

"we by no means intend to abolish this personal appropriation of the products of labour, an appropriation that is made for the maintenance and reproduction of human life, and that leaves no surplus wherewith to command the labour of others"

I guess that Karl means fuck the condoms and get busy procreating....
There you have it, you Commie bastard....

[Trixie]

Will someone please point out to me where in this thread I supported government mandated condom use? The commie would like to know.

You said "Do you realize why we make laws and mandates? To protect the morons that don't follow the rules on their own. So, by not mandating condoms, you're condemning a lot of innocent people to death that have sex with performers who didn't use condoms because they believed their partners drug test was proof that they'd be safe."

That's why I made the Commie remark.

But the whole of what you said puts us in a dog-chasing-its-tail situation: Funny Trixie but I can't help seeing your condom argument as contradicting itself. In one breath you say that testing is fallible which seems to indicate that a performer would be smart to demand condoms be worn if they had a brain and yet in the other breath you argue that you're against mandating condoms.

Are you saying that the laws we have in our countries are useless? Do you realize why we make laws and mandates? To protect the morons that don't follow the rules on their own. So, by not mandating condoms, you're condemning a lot of innocent people to death that have sex with performers who didn't use condoms because they believed their partners drug test was proof that they'd be safe.

I'm not arguing for mandating condoms, I'm just pointing out that arguing two sides of an argument with yourself is kinda funny.

Personally, although I hate watching videos with condoms, I think any performer that doesn't wear one while they have sex with a complete stranger (test or not), is a fucking moron.You're saying my "contradiction" is funny, and in the same breath you're agreeing with me, thereby contradicting yourself if I, indeed, am contradicting myself.

Sounds like we both agree that condomless fucking in porn has risks but that we don't want to see condom use mandated. Or am I misunderstanding you?

To clarify, YES, I think a smart person will use condoms when fucking strangers or anyone with tons of sex partners, whether in porn or not, however I do NOT think that choice should be made by anybody except the people fucking. If a studio or director or partner insists upon condoms, then the person has a choice whether or not to work with them unlike if the government or CCBill or some broad gang of industry knuckleheads decides to require it for everyone.

[gonzo]

Will someone please point out to me where in this thread I supported government mandated condom use? The commie would like to know.

Ill get you the proper red shit for Florida you commie bastard!

[Hammer]

What do commies where in the summer? I sure don't want to wear my fur hat in August.

Yes Trixie, we agree, I was just pointing out that it struck me strange for someone to make such a strong case for the use of condoms and then not be for some sort of requirement to use them. Then again, I won't deny that I think there are times when the government needs to pass laws for the good of the masses when those masses are too dumb to think for themselves. Like I said, most of us know that murder is wrong and yet there are people that don't seem to agree so we have a law against it and a punishment for failure to comply. Sometimes it becomes necessary to have a higher authority make the rules. However, I don't think condom use in adult films is one of those cases.

[deviant]

Ill get you the proper red shit for Florida you commie bastard!

That would be a quick way of getting hammer into some trouble. I got my first two degrees down in Miami. A couple years ago these kids I'd seen around campus selling political T-shirts were down on Calle Ocho walking around with some pro-commie signs and they were attacked by an angry mob of old cuban guys in their 60s & 70s. The footage made the local news, it was pretty funny, the old guys chasing the college kids down the street trying to hit them in slow motion with their walking sticks and umbrellas, throwing their coffe cups at the car they jumped into. They asked for it though, alot of those older guys (and younger ones too) went through some serious nightmares when castro took over.
Communism isn't a joke down there. I wouldn't dare an enemy to wear a shirt like that in Miami. I know you're playing though gonzo, I just wanted to tell that story. It still makes me laugh.

[softball]

alot of those older guys (and younger ones too) went through some serious nightmares when castro took over.
Castro overthrew a gangster president and Meyer Lansky. Those guys that got run out of Cuba should have been very afraid. The country was becoming a gangland haven created by a dictator that seized power himself.
Cuba is in a financial mess because the US has been boycotting it for so long. How many countries could stand up against that and still have a higher literacy rate and lower infant mortality rate than the US?

[deviant]

Those guys that got run out of Cuba should have been very afraid.

LOL. Just curious, what would happen to you and your business if a theoretical Castro took over your country tomorrow?

[softball]

LOL. Just curious, what would happen to you and your business if a theoretical Castro took over your country tomorrow?
No idea, really. It is way to hypothetical. What would happen to you and your business if your country was blockaded for forty years, harassed, invaded and choked by a foreign nation many times your size. The Cuba you see today is a creation of that blockade. Who knows what would have happened if Fidel had been accepted into say, NAFTA.
Another thought. If your country was run by Meyer Lansky, do you think you would have a hope in hell of running a legit porn business?
Too many questions and too many whatifs to make a rational judgment.
It might be a good movie script, though.

[Hammer]

Our continued boycott of Cuba after all these years is ridiculous. Kennedy tried to overthrow Castro in the Bay of Pigs and fucked it up for everyone. I want cheap Cuban cigars and to be able to vacation in Cuba. Hell, it's a quick plane trip for me.

[softball]

Every decent corner store around here sells Cuban cigars. Most of my friends vacation there. I haven't been there myself but Havana sounds like a lot of fun. You can go, just fly through Mexico.

[DannyCox]

I have a number of American friends that regularly go to Cuba. The Cubans are good enough not to stamp your US passport, put to just give you a paper you keep with your passport until you leave the country. They then give you another to give to the authorities in your next port of entry. Some fly through Canada, others Mexico, and still others go through Jamaica or the Caymans. Very common.

[RawAlex]

Clarification: of course I support studios, directors, actors and actresses who insist upon condoms for shoots. I just don't think the industry or the government should demand it across the board.

Trixie: Part of the protection of public health is in the interest of everyone. A trade off between personal freedom and safety for the masses, like speed limits, seat belt laws, or smoking laws. You limit some of the freedoms of the masses because in the end it is better for the masses, and saves the state huge amounts of money because they don't have to clean up after things.

Don't make the mistake of mixing up your personal freedoms (you can fuck without a condom if you like, you can fuck a doorknob if you like... you are free to do so) with things like Occupational Health and Safety laws.

You can do work on your own house and you don't have to wear a hard hat. But in theory, a contractor coming to do the same may be obliged to do so. He might be obliged by law to wear steel toe boots, you may be able to wear sandles or nothing at all. That contractor may wear his fuzzy bunny slippers when he works on his own house. You have personal freedom when you do personal things, you have business liablities and rules when you do work for your business.

If condoms were made manditory for all porn shot in your state, as a business owner you would either have to comply with the law, take them to court, or face the penalties prescribed by the law if the state decides to take action. It isn't at all a question of personal freedoms, just another law about workplace safety.

[bluemoney]

Damn! Dude has his own icon at Oprano ----> :cowboy:

[softball]

as a business owner you would either have to comply with the law, take them to court,
Here in lies the problem. I have just spent two years and close to a hundred thousand dollars fighting a lawsuit. I won. And I would not recommend this misery on anyone, win or lose. However, here's what I have learned. Anyone can pass a law and guys like you say if you have a problem, sue them. That is what my adversary did.
Easy right? Not a chance. You better have deep pockets and a very thick skin.
Guys like you are what make it easy for tyrants to do what they like. You have to interrupt the injustice before it is codified. In this case I agree with Tasty and think you are about four hundred feet out in left field.

[Trixie]

It isn't at all a question of personal freedoms, just another law about workplace safety.

Not at all a question of personal freedom, eh? Not at all? Not even a little bit? Huh.

Right there is half of the foundation of where you and I do not and have never seen eye to eye and why we never will.

[RawAlex]

Not at all a question of personal freedom, eh? Not at all? Not even a little bit? Huh.

Right there is half of the foundation of where you and I do not and have never seen eye to eye and why we never will.

Like I said, your personal freedom to produce any material for your own use in any manner you choose (providing you don't break any existing laws, say by fucking children, dogs, or similar) then knock yourself out.

You and I agree entirely, your personal freedoms cannot be restricted. Neither the government nor anyone here is suggesting for a second that your personal freedoms should be limited. In fact, Max Hardcore if he produced this material for fun and gave it for free to a friend in Tampa would not be on trial today.

However, Max is operating a commercial business. He has ended up in court because of a business transaction.

In the same manner: If the state of California passed a law that said "all porn performers must wear condoms during actual penetration", then the companies producing porn would have the three choices I mentioned before.

You and I won't see eye to eye on this (or pretty much anything else) because you don't have a line that runs down the middle and seperates your personal life from your "professional" life. You also fail to catch the basic concept of personal freedoms versus business regulation, which is very important for understanding why Max is in court and not some of the people posting personal videos on newsgroups that cover the same material.

[softball]

Like I said, your personal freedom to produce any material for your own use in any manner you choose (providing you don't break any existing laws, say by fucking children, dogs, or similar) then knock yourself out.

You and I agree entirely, your personal freedoms cannot be restricted. Neither the government nor anyone here is suggesting for a second that your personal freedoms should be limited. In fact, Max Hardcore if he produced this material for fun and gave it for free to a friend in Tampa would not be on trial today.

However, Max is operating a commercial business. He has ended up in court because of a business transaction.

In the same manner: If the state of California passed a law that said "all porn performers must wear condoms during actual penetration", then the companies producing porn would have the three choices I mentioned before.

You and I won't see eye to eye on this (or pretty much anything else) because you don't have a line that runs down the middle and seperates your personal life from your "professional" life. You also fail to catch the basic concept of personal freedoms versus business regulation, which is very important for understanding why Max is in court and not some of the people posting personal videos on newsgroups that cover the same material.

Let me ask you this then. Around here the Sikhs are protesting the fact they will be forced to wear hard hats on construction sites and sawmills. They, of course wear turbans. The Sikhs are calling it a human rights code violation. They are also whinging about wearing motorcycle helmets.
How do you stand on this safety issue?

[RawAlex]

On that stuff, I stand on the side of "the law is the law". If they cannot wear the gear, then they should do a different job or not ride a motorcycle if they cannot comply. Nobody is forcing them to comply - only to comply if they want to participate. This is especially true in Canada, because of social medicine, the state would be forced to bear a bigger burden if one of these people was injured because they failed to be wearing safety gear.

Example in Minneapolis Airport: Some of the taxi drivers there, being Muslim, refuse to take passengers who might be carrying alcohol, which is against their religion. They have even refused to carry guide dogs or helper dogs ( http://www.onenewsnow.com/Blog/Default.aspx?id=116428 ) - which is again against their religion.

If that is an issue, perhaps they should get a different job. Nobody is denying them the personal freedom to do whatever they want, but there are also guidelines and policies that come with most jobs, and you need to be able to fill them. We don't hire blind taxi drivers, and generally we don't hire deaf people to answer phones. Some things are "obvious".

[Trixie]

You and I won't see eye to eye on this (or pretty much anything else) because you don't have a line that runs down the middle and seperates your personal life from your "professional" life. You also fail to catch the basic concept of personal freedoms versus business regulation, which is very important for understanding why Max is in court and not some of the people posting personal videos on newsgroups that cover the same material.

And you fail to catch the basic concept of capitalism, of obscenity laws (even if he weren't making money what he does could still be found illegal, it would just lower his chances of being caught), and of the way that they intersect in porn cases to create a uniquely discriminatory system that is UNPARALLELED in our country. You also fail to recognize the grey area created by all of this intersecting with SEX which is obviously different and more personal than roofing or taxi driving. You fail to figure in consent or gender issues or the fact that what is motivating all of this legal bullshit is not people's safety or "business", it's people's morals and asthetics. Religion and personal taste are not supposed to figure into laws like this.

[softball]

Keep the lawyers and snivel servants out of our bedrooms. What is going on here really, is a morality war. A crusade by the Christian right. Not unlike the crusade in Iraq. Same principal. They feel a certainty and a calling to proselytize and eradicate evil. However, historically that has been the "American Way". Spreading light and freedom around the world whether the local wogs like it or not. This is just a domestic manifestation of that holy war.
Onward Christian soldiers....

[gonzo]

Keep the lawyers and snivel servants out of our bedrooms. What is going on here really, is a morality war. A crusade by the Christian right. Not unlike the crusade in Iraq. Same principal. They feel a certainty and a calling to proselytize and eradicate evil. However, historically that has been the "American Way". Spreading light and freedom around the world whether the local wogs like it or not. This is just a domestic manifestation of that holy war.
Onward Christian soldiers....
Bill Clinton knew the value of a blowjob.

[softball]

Bill Clinton will go down in history as a great American president. Hopefully the next one will be as good if not better. Last chance, kids.

[RawAlex]

Trixie, I swear you aren't reading what I post:

Your personal freedoms to choke when you suck cock, to vomit on your boyfriend, or for that matter to do your own personal two girls one cup isn't being infringed. Nobody is telling you what to do in your sex life. You are ENTIRELY FREE TO DO WHAT YOU LIKE.

Your personal freedoms are intact.

You can also video tape the event, and give copies to your friends if you want. You are also free to do this. However, if you send that material by US mail and it happens to be found to be obscene, well... different kettle of fish.

You also miss the point: I agree with you, but under the legal framework that exists, obscenity still exists as a crime, and the Supreme Court of the US has upheld the law and created a (faulty) way to judge it. That is what there is, and off you go.

As for wearing of condoms or other in COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS, the state pretty much has the right to mandate occupational health and safety rules. Production of porn for retail sale is a commercial undertaking, and if the state feels that there is a compelling need to protect people when they are making a commercial product, it is within their powers to do so.

Again, nobody is denying you your write to fuck without a condom (or on your head, or getting fucked in the ear if it turns you on) but as part of a commercial product, as part of a business, you are subject to the laws that apply to business the same as anyone else.

You are blurring the line between business and personal because that is the choice you have made in your own life. When sex becomes a business, it is in reality no different from any other business, and the state has an interest in protecting everyone on the job. Heck, even the porn industry as a whole understands the need to protect it's workers and mandates frequent testing and such. As a performer, I am sure that you have been through these tests many times.

[Hammer]

Let me ask you this then. Around here the Sikhs are protesting the fact they will be forced to wear hard hats on construction sites and sawmills. They, of course wear turbans. The Sikhs are calling it a human rights code violation. They are also whinging about wearing motorcycle helmets.
How do you stand on this safety issue?
Here's where I stand. Fuck the Sikhs and anyone else that won't follow the rules of the country they live in. If they can't figure out how to get their fucking turbans stuffed into a hardhat, they either take off the turban or find a different job or move back to their own country.

And I agree with Alex. Max Hardcore wouldn't be in the trouble he's in if he hadn't violated a law that he should have known about. Anyone that distributes extreme content or sex paraphernalia knows that there are certain areas of the country that you don't distribute to because of their community standards. Again, if you don't like the fact that there are laws and rules to follow and don't want to take the time to learn what they are or you feel your personal beliefs are being violated, get out of this business and get a safe job.

[gonzo]

Bill Clinton will go down in history as a great American president. Hopefully the next one will be as good if not better. Last chance, kids.
Gonzo's first rule of porn

"Most every guy likes his dick sucked."

Freel free to ad yours

[softball]

Here's where I stand. Fuck the Sikhs and anyone else that won't follow the rules of the country they live in. If they can't figure out how to get their fucking turbans stuffed into a hardhat, they either take off the turban or find a different job or move back to their own country.

And I agree with Alex. Max Hardcore wouldn't be in the trouble he's in if he hadn't violated a law that he should have known about. Anyone that distributes extreme content or sex paraphernalia knows that there are certain areas of the country that you don't distribute to because of their community standards. Again, if you don't like the fact that there are laws and rules to follow and don't want to take the time to learn what they are or you feel your personal beliefs are being violated, get out of this business and get a safe job.
I think there is a business opportunity here. A hard hat or helmet that looks and functions like a turban. This time next year, we could be millionaires.

[EmporerEJ]

Example in Minneapolis Airport: Some of the taxi drivers there, being Muslim, refuse to take passengers who might be carrying alcohol, which is against their religion. They have even refused to carry guide dogs or helper dogs ( http://www.onenewsnow.com/Blog/Default.aspx?id=116428 ) - which is again against their religion.


I'd be interested in knowing how the ADA/religion battle turns out....
Personally, I think you need to carry the dog.
If I gotta put the cut curbs in, make my doors a certain width, put special padding around my special bathroom sink, make special shitter bars, put 2 never used handicapped parking spaces with loading zone per 20 in my parking lot, and every other damn ADA thing for that one wheel chair dude that comes into my store, then the Muslim gotta carry the damn dog.

[softball]

I'd be interested in knowing how the ADA/religion battle turns out....
Personally, I think you need to carry the dog.
If I gotta put the cut curbs in, make my doors a certain width, put special padding around my special bathroom sink, make special shitter bars, put 2 never used handicapped parking spaces with loading zone per 20 in my parking lot, and every other damn ADA thing for that one wheel chair dude that comes into my store, then the Muslim gotta carry the damn dog.
Oh happy day....Emp and I agree.

[Hammer]

I think there is a business opportunity here. A hard hat or helmet that looks and functions like a turban. This time next year, we could be millionaires.
Do the hard hats have to pass any kind of testing? Otherwise I see another opportunity here as well.

[EmporerEJ]

Oh happy day....Emp and I agree.

So THAT's why there's snow outside my window!

[RawAlex]

I'd be interested in knowing how the ADA/religion battle turns out....
Personally, I think you need to carry the dog.
If I gotta put the cut curbs in, make my doors a certain width, put special padding around my special bathroom sink, make special shitter bars, put 2 never used handicapped parking spaces with loading zone per 20 in my parking lot, and every other damn ADA thing for that one wheel chair dude that comes into my store, then the Muslim gotta carry the damn dog.

...or the muslim can protect his personal freedom to refuse dogs by driving his personal car and not working in the taxi business. Nobody is forcing him to accept dogs in his car - UNLESS HE USES IT FOR A PUBLIC BUSINESS.

If I have to accept his wife covered from head to toe in a bedsheet in my store, he can accept a handicapped person's guide dog.

[gonzo]

yall might want to look at this court coverage on Max at AVN.

Looks like they are wanting to bust him for a distributor mailing a postal inspector DVDs that max had only produced. He didnt mail em.

http://www.avn.com/video/articles/30534.html

[EmporerEJ]

Do the hard hats have to pass any kind of testing? Otherwise I see another opportunity here as well.

You guys got it wrong.....
the turban boys don't DIG in the sand...they hire Indians to do the work.
Turban boys just own the sand, and come over here and own 7-11s, and drive cabs. All part of the master plan to control the US by withholding the slurpies, and paralyzing the city's transportation when the time comes for a jihad.


Oh, I feel bad...what terrible stereotypes....

[RawAlex]

yall might want to look at this court coverage on Max at AVN.

Looks like they are wanting to bust him for a distributor mailing a postal inspector DVDs that max had only produced. He didnt mail em.

http://www.avn.com/video/articles/30534.html

I read that last night, and it really does look like the state is reaching some fierce on this. If anything, the video company may be more likely to be on the hook. I also think that if the underlying charge (sending via mail obscene material) is knocked down, the rest of the house of cards falls because it would be outside of the jurisdiction of the court in Florida to look at.

The biggest risk? There is potential that the Max Hardcore servers were located in Tampa Bay area... which may still give them some jurisdiction in the case (but would almost certainly be something that would get appealed over and over to the top)

[Hammer]

What about the Muslim chick that worked at Walmart that refused to ring up a customer's order because she was buying pork products? Then she demanded that the conveyor belt be cleaned because the pork has touched it. Then to top it all off, eventually that Walmart stopped carrying pork products and started carrying produce that was specifically geared towards Muslims because they had a sizable Muslim clientelle. Time for some white folks to fly a fucking plane into that Walmart if you ask me.

[tony404]

I read that last night, and it really does look like the state is reaching some fierce on this. If anything, the video company may be more likely to be on the hook. I also think that if the underlying charge (sending via mail obscene material) is knocked down, the rest of the house of cards falls because it would be outside of the jurisdiction of the court in Florida to look at.

The biggest risk? There is potential that the Max Hardcore servers were located in Tampa Bay area... which may still give them some jurisdiction in the case (but would almost certainly be something that would get appealed over and over to the top)

does this mean its time to move servers off shore for a extra level of protection?

[gonzo]

does this mean its time to move servers off shore for a extra level of protection?
Thats bullshit if you think that will protect you. As long as you live here you can be potentially prosecuted. Same thing for offshore banking.

Ask Joe Francis.

[softball]

So THAT's why there's snow outside my window!
around here the moon turned to fire red.

[softball]

You guys got it wrong.....
the turban boys don't DIG in the sand...they hire Indians to do the work.
Turban boys just own the sand, and come over here and own 7-11s, and drive cabs. All part of the master plan to control the US by withholding the slurpies, and paralyzing the city's transportation when the time comes for a jihad.


Oh, I feel bad...what terrible stereotypes....

You should. The guys I am discussing are Sikhs. Stop being such a stereotypical ignorant American.

[softball]

What about the Muslim chick that worked at Walmart that refused to ring up a customer's order because she was buying pork products? Then she demanded that the conveyor belt be cleaned because the pork has touched it. Then to top it all off, eventually that Walmart stopped carrying pork products and started carrying produce that was specifically geared towards Muslims because they had a sizable Muslim clientelle. Time for some white folks to fly a fucking plane into that Walmart if you ask me.
Business is business. BTW, it was white folks who flew the planes on 911.

[Hammer]

Business is business. BTW, it was white folks who flew the planes on 911.
Saudis may be considered Caucasian but I'd hardly call them white folks.

[Trixie]

Okaayyyyyyyy . . . always good to remind myself why I stay off the boards. This is some ignorant, ugly shit, but of course I'd expect nothing less from RawAlex and Hammer. Bye guys! Have fun with your irrational, deluded, out-of-context supremacy trips. Always a waste of time trying to speak rationally with/around you.

[Buckwheat]

Saudis may be considered Caucasian but I'd hardly call them white folks.
Like I used to tell the Smothers Brothers, "Ya'll all look alike to me"

[RawAlex]

Okaayyyyyyyy . . . always good to remind myself why I stay off the boards. This is some ignorant, ugly shit, but of course I'd expect nothing less from RawAlex and Hammer. Bye guys! Have fun with your irrational, deluded, out-of-context supremacy trips. Always a waste of time trying to speak rationally with/around you.

I know it sucks. It's only ugly and ignorant because you choose to look at things based on the way you wish the world was rather than the way it is. There are any number of court rulings already out there, there are any number of laws out there, and providing laws are applied equally to all, the courts rarely strike them down just because it doesn't satisfy one person.

There is no supremacy trips here. Just a discussion of a reality you aren't liking.

Don't let the logic gate hit your ass on the way out.

[softball]

Saudis may be considered Caucasian but I'd hardly call them white folks.
Look white as you....
As a matter of fact, I have blond hair and blue eyes,and pink skin. Maybe we are the last of the real "white" folks. The rest of you look strangely related to the Spanish...

[Hammer]

If you say so. Maybe they look white after they live in Canada for a while. All the Saudis I've seen have dark skin and black hair. Maybe you've confused Lawrence of Arabia with a real Arab.

As for Trixie, what the fuck got her panties in a bunch?

[softball]

If you say so. Maybe they look white after they live in Canada for a while. All the Saudis I've seen have dark skin and black hair. Maybe you've confused Lawrence of Arabia with a real Arab.

As for Trixie, what the fuck got her panties in a bunch?

You have dark skin and black hair. I am sure you consider yourself white. I have pink skin. I would guess that in the scheme of things I would be "whiter" than you. My experience with Saudis is from living in the Middle East. Let me ask you this......wait for it....are Jews white? Time is ticking and I have spent a lot of time in Israel.

[softball]

and as for Tasty, you will have to ask her.

[softball]

Dude, I had another look at your picture. I would hazard a guess that if I wrapped your dark face in a khafia, you would never get past airline security. I, on the other hand, was turned down at the last minute to travel to Pakistan to interview Osama Bin Laden because I couldn't fit in because of my blue eyes and blond hair and would be a security risk. That was a couple of years before 911. So please, one more time, tell me exactly what your definition of white is. In my books, you might not fit. That could be tragic for you living around all those non white Cubans. Or do you consider them white folks?

[RawAlex]

As for Trixie, what the fuck got her panties in a bunch?

Long story. Let's just say that Trixie doesn't like it when the real world gets in the way of doing whatever she pleases. It's the tough life of a self-name Web Whore when it's hard to seperate your personal life from running a business.

Once you throw that "limited" or "inc" or "llc" or whatever up there, suddenly the real world gets in the way.

[Trixie]

I know it sucks. It's only ugly and ignorant because you choose to look at things based on the way you wish the world was rather than the way it is. There are any number of court rulings already out there, there are any number of laws out there, and providing laws are applied equally to all, the courts rarely strike them down just because it doesn't satisfy one person.

There is no supremacy trips here. Just a discussion of a reality you aren't liking.

Don't let the logic gate hit your ass on the way out.

You can't even identify what I'm referring to which is only further proof that you're a dumb fuck.

[Trixie]

Long story. Let's just say that Trixie doesn't like it when the real world gets in the way of doing whatever she pleases. It's the tough life of a self-name Web Whore when it's hard to seperate your personal life from running a business.

Once you throw that "limited" or "inc" or "llc" or whatever up there, suddenly the real world gets in the way.

I don't like misogynists and bigots, I don't like self-righteous, judgmental morality police, and I especially don't like people who think it's cool to scheme about ratting out amateurs to the feds who live and work at home for not complying with 2257 to his liking. That is the "long story". RawAlex likes to point fingers at all the people he doesn't like who he thinks are threats to the industry because they aren't making the vanilla teen porn he likes and talk about how they should be shut down, not allowed to make money, censored, etc. He is a turncoat advocating for prosecution and persecution. That's the long story. He's a scary little simpleton.

[Trixie]

If you say so. Maybe they look white after they live in Canada for a while. All the Saudis I've seen have dark skin and black hair. Maybe you've confused Lawrence of Arabia with a real Arab.

As for Trixie, what the fuck got her panties in a bunch?
You didn't notice the grotesque turn of conversation in this thread? Of course not. But it does remind me that you're the judgmental prick who thinks my partner and I shouldn't be allowed to have kids because my partner is transgender. :thumbdown

I'm sure you think you're a "nice" guy and all, and maybe you are deep down, but seriously -- I would be embarrassed to have a stranger hop into this thread and think that I consider either you or RawAlex "colleagues". I want as much distance from the two of you as possible. I'm sure the feeling is mutual. I'm sorry I tried once again to have a rational discussion with either of you.

[softball]

I especially don't like people who think it's cool to scheme about ratting out amateurs to the feds who live and work at home for not complying with 2257 to his liking.
OK, Alex, this needs to be addressed. Serge Oprano tried this out on me and I was not amused. I have no idea who you are or what you do, but this is serious. What's up doc?

[RawAlex]

I see Trixie is up to her old tricks. Lose the argument, tar and feather the opposition.

He's a scary little simpleton.
I don't like misogynists and bigots
which is only further proof that you're a dumb fuck.

The rest is in the past, and Trixie only goes there because she isn't enjoying being beaten with logic.

[RawAlex]

Oh yeah, Trixie...

If you choose a lifestyle that isn't similar to everyone elses, if you are pushing past stereotypes, and if you are attempting to do things that the laws say you are not suppose to do, don't be shocked when you get resistance. We aren't all a bunch of misogynists and bigots, rather very normal people who don't have a great desire to toss all of our normal lives out of the window so that your unique situation can define everything for the rest of us.

Please understand, I am not attempting to make any of this personal. You have taken a discussion about facts and turned it into a pissing match. You might have been able to play bully games elsewhere, but you aren't going to have any lucky here.

Rhet, the 2257 thing at the end of the day involves someone disclosing a personal discussion in a private board to Trixie, even though they had agreed never to discuss what was in that private board. I expressed the opinion that people who bitch about the laws and then use a mailboxes Etc as their 2257 address as a primary producer might have a different opinion if they had to deal with the feds... the comment wasn't in the best of taste, but it was done in an area that I thought a few people would laugh about it, call me names and move on. Sadly, someone broke the "fight club" style agreement, and it went on from there.

It got worse from there.

Trixie has revealed her true self again in this thread, quickly sinking to insults, name calling, and attempts to shout me down. It will be a cold, cold day in hell before that will work on me anymore.

[RawAlex]

I don't like misogynists and bigots, I don't like self-righteous, judgmental morality police, and I especially don't like people who think it's cool to scheme about ratting out amateurs to the feds who live and work at home for not complying with 2257 to his liking. That is the "long story". RawAlex likes to point fingers at all the people he doesn't like who he thinks are threats to the industry because they aren't making the vanilla teen porn he likes and talk about how they should be shut down, not allowed to make money, censored, etc. He is a turncoat advocating for prosecution and persecution. That's the long story. He's a scary little simpleton.



Oh and Trixie, sorry... but FUCK OFF. You don't know me, you don't know my tastes..

Guys, you want a funny story? trixie and her grilfriend were all pissed off because the credit card processors wouldn't allow them to run a site specifically about the girl having her period and showing the bloody tampons, masturbating while bleeding, and otherwise engaging in sex acts during the time of menstruation. The CC processors, at the direction of Visa and Mastercard, had (haven't checked if it is still current) a rule that said "no blood in porn". We all know that this is more typical to avoid gore, violence, etc... but their monthly period site got snagged and declined.

Trixie and company expressed an intent to go after the credit card companies (in a court of law perhaps) to attempt to force them to accept the site.

My opinion was simple: The credit card companies have a poor enough opinion about porn sites in general, there is no good reason to be picking a huge fight with them to get them to try to accept MORE extreme porn, as the chance is that they will instead come back and be even more restrictive in the future. IMHO, if 90% of the money is made in mainstream straight, gay, lesbian, and Transexual porn, why would you risk a huge pie in order to gain the last 1% at the end? The risk / reward on that is pretty low.

As has happened in this discussion, Trixie objected wildly that I was trying to limit her PERSONAL FREEDOMS. Do you see a trend here? I think she has all the rights in the world to open a menstruation porn site if she wants, but I think few people in the online porn world would want her picking a fight with Visa over it. Visa has set business rules (which do change from time to time, and perhaps that site now does have processing), and we the porn mongers must live with those rules. Nothing in Visa's actions stops anyone from exercising their right to free speech - but they retain their rights to not be commercially involved in it.

Trixie has a very hard time to tell her personal freedoms from life in business. If you don't agree with her, you get labeled misogynists and bigots, small minded simpletons, and as a lover of "plain vanilla teen porn".

Her reactions, well... they speak for themselves - freedom of speech only applies to Trixie, the rest of us can shut the fuck up.

[gonzo]

Personal freedoms and the business world rarely mix.
Visa has gotten big enough to do whatever they want. And they do.

Remember the entire party ends tomorrow if Visa decides to stop processing adult. Which I dont think is very likely. But then again the times are changing.

Whatever happens to Max will certainly be an indicator. And personally I think the case looks weaker and weaker against him daily.

[Toby]

Whatever happens to Max will certainly be an indicator. And personally I think the case looks weaker and weaker against him daily.
Even if this jury convicts there has been more than enough issues raised by the defense during the trial to be considered by a court of appeals.

[softball]

It got worse from there.
A fight broke out I understand. Invoking or provoking the feds is another matter. Everyone knows that boards are spider bait and are watched. I am not quite sure what you mean by the above quote, but it does not look good. A good rumble on a keyboard is fair game. Calling "the cops" is an instant disqualification in my books. Personally, I don't see anything laughable in that. Perhaps I am missing something.
The rest of the argument you guys are having or perhaps "continuing" is fair and square. Its this legal issue that disturbs me.

[RawAlex]

A fight broke out I understand. Invoking or provoking the feds is another matter. Everyone knows that boards are spider bait and are watched. I am not quite sure what you mean by the above quote, but it does not look good. A good rumble on a keyboard is fair game. Calling "the cops" is an instant disqualification in my books. Personally, I don't see anything laughable in that. Perhaps I am missing something.
The rest of the argument you guys are having or perhaps "continuing" is fair and square. Its this legal issue that disturbs me.


Rhet, comment made in a private area of a board (about 10 people, suppose to be private and secret) and someone shared that communication with a third party out of anger. They broke a promise and disclosed information that should not have been disclosed. The comment didn't even directly involve Trixie. It wasn't something said in public, nor was it intended to be so.

Most importantly, it is entirely no relevant to this discussion, but rather is an attempt by Trixie to throw shit at me because she no longer has a valid point to make in the discussion. Mudslinging, name calling... we all know why she went there.

I leave it at that.

[Hammer]

Well, my skin right now isn't very dark but now that the summer is here I'll get tan again, however, if you'd ever seen me in person there is no way you could mistake me for an Arab. My skin is obviously brown from living in Florida and not it's natural condition and my hair is not black, but dark brown with some grey in it now and my eyes are green and my features are European.

But I'm baffled at this whole argument. Are you saying that you are 100% Arab blood because I don't' have to have lived in the Middle East to know that a blond blue eyed Arab must be a very rare site indeed. As for Jews, of course they're light skinned and many have light hair but since when is a Jew an Arab?

As for Trixie, I'm not sure why this conversation is offensive, we're just talking and as for her family life, what the fuck is the point of bringing up an old grudge in this thread. Has anyone seen me say anything about her family life? She brought it up just to start a fight I guess.

[Hammer]

You didn't notice the grotesque turn of conversation in this thread? Of course not. But it does remind me that you're the judgmental prick who thinks my partner and I shouldn't be allowed to have kids because my partner is transgender. :thumbdown
Why the fuck are you bringing that up? I didn't say anything in this thread about your so called "girlfriend". My opinion hasn't changed but this thread isn't about you.

And how can a thread take a grotesque turn when it was grotesque to start with or do you consider puking during sex to be a pleasant thing?

[Hammer]

My kids go to a private school with a large percentage of Middle Eastern children and I see those kids and their parents often. The thought that anyone could ever confuse anyone from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran or anywhere else in that part of the world with "white folks" is just plain funny.

[gonzo]

My kids go to a private school with a large percentage of Middle Eastern children and I see those kids and their parents often. The thought that anyone could ever confuse anyone from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran or anywhere else in that part of the world with "white folks" is just plain funny.
COMMIE BASTARD!!!

[softball]

My kids go to a private school with a large percentage of Middle Eastern children and I see those kids and their parents often. The thought that anyone could ever confuse anyone from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran or anywhere else in that part of the world with "white folks" is just plain funny.
There are red haired blue eyed arabs around. They are called Circassians and they are all over Syria. But you missed the point in all of this. You were prattling on about white people vs "muslims" or something and lumped Pakistanis, Sikhs, and Arabs into the same mold. I believe it started with a turban discussion and that is what Sikhs wear, not Saudis. You differentiated them from "White" folks. I mentioned Jews, because in Israel, I have a very hard time distinguishing an Arab from a Jew. On the road I look at the license plates if I am interested.
You live around a bunch of refugee Cubans who are certainly no "whiter" than a lot of Arabs and Jews.
The point in all of this, is that your description of Arabs being non white is fallacious at best. The best was something about Sikhs in turbans digging in the sand like they came from the desert.
All in all a pretty poor knowledge of people who wear turbans or don't come from around here.....

btw, this lack of understanding is what got GW Bush back in the White House and into Iraq.

[Hammer]

I lumped all Middle Easterners into the same mold and I don't give a fuck if they wear a turban or not they ain't white folks. Here endeth my debate with you because it's a waste of my time and is accomplishing nothing. If you want to consider Cubans, Arabs, and Jews as "white folk" be my guest.

And I didn't bring up Saudis until you made your idiotic comment about it being "white folks" that flew the planes on 9/11 when everyone (I hope) knows that most of the hijackers were Saudis. Saudis are not "white foks" and that was the only point I made. You're the one that went off bringing Jews and your pink skin into it.

[Trixie]

I'm sorry I don't have the free time and patience to connect all the dots for those of you who can't do it yourselves, nor can I bring you up to speed on dialogues many people are having (and have been having for years) regarding constitutional rights, issues regarding regulation of business, sex, sex worker rights, blah blah blah so I guess those of you functioning on RawAlex's level can believe that I am the only person in the world with the perspective I've only partially tried (and obviously failed) to represent here. You can believe it has nothing to do with progressive, rational thought, and has everything to do with illogical hypersensitivity and my supposed personal inability to recognize ways in which the business and personal spheres are different. You will be wrong, but I don't have time to hold your hand through an apparently bewildering forest of contemporary thought and complex ways of thinking so enjoy your ignorance and straight, white, male supremacy trip that leaks out in so many directions whenever you post that you aren't even aware of it and can't even identify it when someone points it out to you.

If anybody reading this wants to know more about the menstruation/porn thing unskewed by Alex's perception of it, you can read one piece I wrote about it in this book: http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sex-Writing-2008/dp/1573443026

Until the next time I develop an uncontrollable urge to kid myself into thinking it's possible to have a sane discussion of complicated issues on one of these boards, enjoy your little bubble, boys.

[softball]

I lumped all Middle Easterners into the same mold and I don't give a fuck if they wear a turban or not they ain't white folks. Here endeth my debate with you because it's a waste of my time and is accomplishing nothing. If you want to consider Cubans, Arabs, and Jews as "white folk" be my guest.

And I didn't bring up Saudis until you made your idiotic comment about it being "white folks" that flew the planes on 9/11 when everyone (I hope) knows that most of the hijackers were Saudis. Saudis are not "white foks" and that was the only point I made. You're the one that went off bringing Jews and your pink skin into it.

They do teach geography in American schools, don't they? India is 2 or 3 thousand miles from the middle east. That is where Sikhs are from...the guys with the turbans. It ain't the middle east. Its not a desert. The fact that you don't consider Cubans, Arabs, and Jews as white folks is a little disturbing to say the least.
It was a round about way to find out what you really think. Now we know.
As for ending the debate, be my guest. There never was a debate.

[Hammer]

Not sure what's disturbing about it. When I originally used the term "white folks" I wasn't using it to refer to Caucasians, I was talking about the kind of people that are referred to as "white folks" in the South. Now you're tying to make me out to be a bigot. But that's what trolls do I guess, try to get a rise out of people.

[softball]

Not sure what's disturbing about it. When I originally used the term "white folks" I wasn't using it to refer to Caucasians, I was talking about the kind of people that are referred to as "white folks" in the South. Now you're tying to make me out to be a bigot. But that's what trolls do I guess, try to get a rise out of people.
Nothing to do with trolling. This is the world here, Hammer. As far as anyone reading this thread is concerned, unless perhaps they live in a little corner of the world you call "The South", you think jews, cubans, arabs, etc. ain't white and are believe India is in the Middle East. No wonder Americans are taking it on the chin around the world.
And as far as the troll thing goes, that is usually the last line of defense. Don't get even, get mad.

[Hammer]

Show me the post where I said Sikhs were from the Middle East. Show me the post where I said India was in the Middle East. You talked about the Sikhs early on in this thread. I never included them in any posts where I talked about the Saudis or the Middle East and the only reason I brought up the Saudis is because you made the stupid comment that "white folks" hijacked the planes on 9/11. Saudis may be Caucasian but they aren't "white folks" any more than Cubans are "white folks". A huge percentage of Cubans are actually black. As a matter of fact, I seriously doubt that Arabs or Cubans would even appreciate being referred to as "white folks".

[softball]

I lumped all Middle Easterners into the same mold and I don't give a fuck if they wear a turban or not they ain't white folks.
there ya go

[Nymph]

Not sure what's disturbing about it. When I originally used the term "white folks" I wasn't using it to refer to Caucasians, I was talking about the kind of people that are referred to as "white folks" in the South. Now you're tying to make me out to be a bigot. But that's what trolls do I guess, try to get a rise out of people.


Did you take a drive over to Arcadia? Sounds like you been hangin' with the crackers over there ;)

And don't get your tidy whities in a bunch, I'm just teasing, and I do understand what you meant.

[pam]

does this mean its time to move servers off shore for a extra level of protection?

Ask Chris Wilson if hosting overseas helped him.

[softball]

I am outta this cracker barrel....
y'all come back now.

[tony404]

Ask Chris Wilson if hosting overseas helped him.

Well one of the things they are getting him on is a server in tampa. So its not a safe zone but could be one less charge.

[RawAlex]

Well one of the things they are getting him on is a server in tampa. So its not a safe zone but could be one less charge.

The server company is in Tampa - is the physical server in Tampa as well? if so, then technically someone download from the server into Tampa wouldn't be importing anything, because it was already legally in the state.

[softball]

The server company is in Tampa - is the physical server in Tampa as well? if so, then technically someone download from the server into Tampa wouldn't be importing anything, because it was already legally in the state.
Now that is an interesting concept...