Pornographer sentenced to nearly four years in prison

Great idea.

 

There is a difference between flimed war attrocities and exploiting obscenity.

If I am correct, the obscenity laws have not changed, but the focus of the Justice Department has. I believe it was during the Clinton Administration there was a huge crackdown on the pornography industry (hard to imagine), but during the Bush administration it got put on the back burner. The guys in the adult film industry have been taking a gamble by releasing much of what they have in the past decade. Their lawyers know that they could be prosecuted at any time, but the money at stake is so large that they apparently found it was worth the risk.

Frontline has an excellent documentary on this subject.

 

That is a good question. There really is some disturbing stuff out there. In the documentary I mentioned in my previous post, they interview a girl that is an "actress" in very violent BDSM films. She literally gets raped and gets her ass kicked. This in my opinion crosses the line. I have seen some horrific shit first hand in my life, and was conditioned to not react to it, but I have to admit that the clip they showed in the documentary was hard to watch. What is more disturbing is the self esteem this woman must have to put herself through that, and also the people that get off on watching that kind of "entertainment". I don't remember the filmmaker's name, or the actress, but it was one of the pornographers that was knowingly operating outside the law.

Some people call it violation of First Amendment, but I think that in cases like this we DO need to have laws regarding obscenity. There is no reason why we need to abandon the morality of our society so that sick fucks can feed their morbid obsessions.

 

You have a point

 

Duh. It's obscene. It's not art, it's not exactly about fornication is it? It's mostly about puking and vomit and other human suffering and/or torturing. Dunno, never seen these sick and disgusting films because I don't support any such industry. The sooner it is abolished, the sooner we can get back on track and talking about the things that matter instead of getting shock value and attention that detracts from real sex, not payable sex. Is it even eroticism? I mean, there's a line. Judge said this dude crossed it.

 

I find it disturbing that so many are against the freedom of speech here. Who are any of you to tell people what kinds of movies they can make? As a filmmaker, I find this appalling. I don't make films anything remotely like what this guy makes but I don't doubt that some people won't like mine, either. There is no agreed upon definition of what "art" is. This guys films, regardless of subject matter, takes at least a certain amount of technical skills and imagination to create them and bring into existence. Just because some people don't like the subject matter they put the guy in jail. Things like this are all the more reason to protect the rights of free speech. I haven't seen any of his films nor do I want to. I don't think any movie should ever be deemed illegal, as long as the performers are consenting adults acting under their own free will. Sounds like the puritans have won a victory against freedom, but hopefully on appeal to a higher court, he will be vindicated.

 

I knew it wouldn't take long for somebody to defend this.

Some links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscenity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California

I think as the moral values of the US continue to be eroded, there will be a time when no act is classified as obscene. If a girl's sexual abuse as a child manifests into a compulsive desire to be willingly physically abused and raped, and an "artist" puts a certain amount of technical skills and imagination into filming it then why shouldn't it be art, right? After all, one man's obscenity is another man's art.

 

"Moral values" and "laws" are two different things. Many things that religions consider immoral are perfectly legal. Legislating religious moral values is inherently anti-American and unconstitutional. Religion should mind its own business and stay out of politics.

 

Some people can see simple acts of sex as obscene. What's obscene for one person, is not for another.

I dunno, just saying. Also, there is a world of fetishes out there. Not everyone see's it as 'torture' or 'obscene', and one doesn't have to have a low self esteem to partake in any of it.... I mean... they may even like it, even if others don't understand why.

 

Sounds gross... but if no one got hurt, where's the beef? It wasn't available to minors was it? I didn't think there was a court that determined what pron was okay and what wasn't. Me, I'm not a fan of it at all, but that doesn't mean I'm going to interfere with someone else's kink as long as it's harmless.

And 8.5 hours to deem it obscene, lol... Srsly, guys? 8 and a half friggen hours??

 

Haha. That's kinda what I was thinking.

 

lol, it seems like they were trying to shock the jurors into finding him guilty.

I bet they were all Mormons.

That often happens in our justice system.

 

Lots of scientologists 'round those parts...

 

What is ironic is that most of the porn related crackdowns on obscenity were during the Clinton Administration. Haha. The President that sticks his Cohiba up his interns pussy and shoots his load all over her dress. Haha. I wonder if inserting a cigar into a pussy is considered obscene? Probably if only on film.

 

lol


To the Amish, we are all obscene. What is obscene is all relative.

The fact is, these women had to sign a contract and were briefed beforehand on what was required of them. If you're 18, you should know whether or not you wanna be pee'd on :-/

It seems like someone had a personal vendetta on the guy.

I change my mind. This was wrong of them to convict him.

He was probably one of the most professional perverts in the game.

This guy said it nicely:

"by PL Oct 5, 2008 9:55 AM IF they cannot define what is obscene, it should not be a legal term. Consenting adults, no children, no force, no victim. Other than the man now sentenced to prison. "

 

Just maybe this guy will make a career change and express his free speech rights and become president. Who knows, this could have saved his ass from going down a dark path of continuing to pay women to perform degrading sexual acts for profit.

 

What if they like those degrading sexual acts? They'll just find someone else... It's not like these people are going to track down every pornographer in the country with a nasty kink.
But I guess everyone believes differently on this issue. I agree on the distastefulness, but I also recognize that not everyone agrees, including those who participate.

 

What if who likes sexually degrading acts?

If you play a Marquis de Sade card you get put into an insane asylum for the rest of your life, or in this dude's case, jailed and fined.

 

Aristartle, read about the Kinsey Report. Whats degrading for one person, is acceptable, and even ENJOYABLE for another. There is a whole world of kinks out there.


----
Sadomasochism

12% of females and 22% of males reported having an erotic response to a sadomasochistic story.[20]



In other words, some people gain PLEASURE out of pain. Some people gain PLEASURE out of being humiliated, as another example. As long as the end result is pleasure, and is brought on through consent, then it isn't wrong - some of the most mentally balanced, intelligent people can be into it. Who knows, someone in your own family might like it.



The fact still remains: These women/men must sign a contract beforehand. No one's FORCING these people to be a part of the business. If you hate your job, then get out of it. It isn't hard.

Watch the show: Family business - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Business_(TV_series)


It's just another job. An alternative way to earn a living.

 

QFT. That's exactly what I meant.