Powered by Max Banner Ads
Larry Flynt And Joe Francis To Lobby Congress For Porn Industry Bailout
Hustler founder Larry Flynt and Girls Gone Wild Founder Joe Francis are planning to lobby congress for up to $5 billion dollars in bailout money for the adult industry:
Francis is in the process of drafting a petition requesting financial assistance from the newly assembled 111th Congress in response to a drastic 22-percent drop in DVD sales and rentals in favor of adult websites over the last year, as well as general financial downturn as a result of the economic recession. Upon completion of the petition, Francis is planning to present it to Congress in person, Owen Moogan, LFP press relations representative, told XBIZ.
I would have preferred my tax money go to the adult industry than to the UAW. I know some people scoff at the thought, but the adult industry is as important a business as any other especially in California. The adult industry contributes about 15% of the total tax revenue for California every year.
More porn movies are filmed in the San Fernando Valley than anywhere else on earth. The adult industry employs thousands of people who are feeling the economic downturn as much as anyone.
I’m not in favor of bailouts period, but the porn industry deserves the same consideration as any other business if money is being handed out.
(image via XBIZ)
Script Released For Palin Porn Spoof
You’ve probably heard in recent weeks that Larry Flynt had a porn spoof in the works starring a Sarah Palin look-alike. Well, today we get a first look at the title and the script itself. It’s called “Who’s Nailin’ Palin?” and the main character is named Serra.
Sarah Palin herself isn’t the only figure who’s mocked however. Other characters include “Condi” and “Bill Orally.” “Orally” works as a newscaster for a strange place called the “Int. Faux News Studios” and the Serra character attended college at The University Of “I – Da – Ho.”
I think you have to give Hustler points for creativity on some of the themes as they are mildly amusing, but it’s nevertheless crass and tacky. Flynt often makes porn spoofs based on current events, so he’s not going out of his way to humiliate Palin. I also don’t think the movie is necessarily meant to be mean spirited, but you can be the judge of that.
I do think it smacks of sexism, because turning the governor in to a porn star is just another way to marginalize her personally and as a candidate.
-Chris Jones
Adult Filmmaker Gets 46 Months In Prison, $1.4 Million In Fines
What do you consider ‘obscene?’ What do you think your neighbor would consider ‘obscene?’ Is is possible that you and neighbor might differ? Do you know people who might disagree with what you consider ‘obscene’?
These are all questions that must be considered when looking at the outrageous case of Max Hardcore. Max is a pornographer pure and simple. His real name is Paul Little and he makes some of the filthiest and most degrading porn around.
If you saw one of his movies you would likely be totally disgusted. However, as despicable as his films may be to the average person there are some people who like his movies. Let me be clear, we’re not talking about child porn here. I’m talking about consenting adults who are in these movies and who watch these movies.
The federal government decided that Paul Little’s movies offended them so they charged Little with 10 counts of distributing ‘obscene’ materials through the Internet and mail.
Little went on trial and 12 jurors sat through several hours of his movies, and after a lengthy deliberation they too decided his movies were offensive. This was despite testimony from some of the women who starred in Little’s movies. The women told the jury that they were well paid and had no regrets about doing the films and were certainly never forced to do anything.
Today Paul Little was sentenced to 46 months in federal prison and fined more than $1.7 million dollars for distributing material that some deemed to be ‘obscene.’
My point here is not to gain sympathy for a pornographer, but to highlight the bigger picture and what it means for free speech.
The Supreme Court uses what is called “The Miller Test” to determine whether or not something is ‘obscene’ or not. There are 3 factors all of which must be satisfied in order for something to legally be considered ‘obscene.’
- Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
- Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[2] specifically defined by applicable state law,
- Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. (This is also known as the (S)LAPS test- [Serious] Literary, Artistic, Political, Scientific).
The reason this is deeply flawed is because it lacks a national standard. How can you apply a ‘community standard’ to something transmitted over the Internet? Moreover, a community standard might be different in Georgia than it would be in California.
For these reasons, Little has a very good shot at overturning his conviction on appeal. However, that still doesn’t change the seriousness of these kind of prosecutions by the government and what they mean for free speech.
You may not care about the porno guy, but what if next time it’s a song? Or maybe a painting? What if next time the federal government decides a certain book is obscene? The real truth is that ‘obscenity’ is in the eye of the beholder.
One person may find a rap song riddled with the n-word to be obscene and offensive, while another person may like the rap song buy find pornography to be offensive.
In the United States pornography provided all parties involved are at least 18 years of age or older is completely legal. So for the government to single out certain adult filmmakers for prosecution because they don’t like the kind of stuff consenting adults are doing in the films is totally unacceptable.
Pornography does have its legal limitations in the U.S. as well it should. It’s flat out illegal to film persons under the age of 18. It’s illegal to have sex with animals and dead people — which we can all agree are good laws.
At no time was it ever alleged that Paul Little’s movies contained any illegal acts — but merely taken as a whole they were deemed to be ‘obscene.’
The government cannot make pornography illegal, because that would be unconstitutional. So the idea is to try and put pornographers out of business by charging them with ‘obscenity.’ Little’s case is the first one they’ve actually been able to secure a guilty verdict.
In the end the feds don’t really care if they get a guilty verdict, because the cost of defending an obscenity case in court usually bankrupts the porn company in question — so the government ‘wins’ either way.
This is the kind of crap you would expect to happen in Russia, but not in America. Underhanded tactics like that are the real obscenity in this country.
Regardless of how you may feel about porn, this is an outrageous prosecution and represents a shocking abuse of power by the Justice Department and is fundamentally unconstitutional.
-Chris Jones
House Legislation Would Keep Porn Mags Off Military Bases
As important as it is to fight back against the far-left which has absolutely hijacked the Democratic party, it’s also important to fight back against far-right kooks whenever they emerge. One such far-right kook is Rep. Broun of Georgia who wants to take porn magazines away from soldiers.
U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga., has introduced legislation that would close a loophole in the current law that allows the sale of some sexually explicit material on military bases by lowering the threshold required to deem material “sexually explicit.”
This is in response to a Department of Defense committee that reviews materials sold on bases ruled last year that magazines such as Playboy and Penthouse are not pornographic. But Broun’s Military Honor and Decency Act includes language that could make those magazines eligible for the ban.
The new language in the law could eventually lead to a ban on magazines such as Maxim or FHM, which do not show nudity and are not pornographic in any way. Regardless of what Broun says, I can assure you that his underlying intention is to rid bases of any magazines that show even a little skin.
With all the problems this country is facing right now with high gas prices, egregious health insurance costs, rising food prices, and an overall slumping economy, it’s keeping soldiers from reading ‘Playboy’ that most concerns Rep. Broun.
Here’s his explanation:
Broun said he is concerned by the negative effects of all pornography, including an increase in the number of violent sexual crimes on military bases.
“It erodes the family as a primary building block of society,” he said, “and it denigrates the moral standing of our troops both here and abroad.”
Reading the latest issue of Swank doesn’t erode families, but untreated Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) sure as hell does.
It’s not the bloody guerrilla insurgency that our troops are currently fighting that’s causing marital problems, its gotta be the stroke books. Yeah right.
Maybe Rep. Broun should take a break from trying to legislate morality and work on making sure our soldiers are getting everything they need when they return from war.
People like Rep. Paul Broun need to quit with the self-righteous nonsense and start working on issues that actually matter.
-Chris Jones
Former American Idol Contestant Subject Of New Sex Tape
Former “American Idol” contestant Jessica Sierra is apparently the latest celebrity to have a sex video released.
Sierra finished 10th in the fourth season of “American Idol” in 2005. Since then she was arrested on drug-related charges and was sentenced to a year at an in-house drug treatment facility followed by three years of probation.
“Jessica Sierra Superstar,” from Vivid Entertainment’s Vivid Celeb line, is scheduled to street Jan. 30.
Adult Club In Japan Serves “Pee On The Rocks”
A popular adult club in Osaka, Japan called Impulse was recently targeted by Police for a number of “eyebrow raising” practices.
Recently six of the club’s hostesses and one male customer of Impulse, a “sexual cabaret club,” were arrested on charges of indecent exposure after the hostesses allegedly worked while in the nude while the customer exposed his genitals.
That’s the tame stuff according to XBIZ, it’s the other “indecent acts” that are a little more disturbing.
“As soon as you enter the club, a hostess will give you a hot towel that she has already used to swipe her private parts. You can start fondling the hostesses’ breasts as soon as you sit down, but that’s nothing.
You immediately get a drink, but it’s a hostess’s urine served on the rocks. They also serve tidbits sprinkled with cuttings of the workers’ pubic hair,” Shukan Jitsuwa reported.
“They also had a service where the ice served in drinks is first inserted into the hostess’s private parts. They just kept on getting wilder and wilder and I think they went too far in the end.”
I have no problem with adult clubs whatsoever, but that’s just disgusting. You can always count on the Japanese to get carried away when it comes to matters of sex.
What’s funnier is that many in the community are complaining about this so-called “crackdown” and hope the cops will just leave them alone in a couple of months.
Again, I have no beef with adult clubs and all that goes with them, but come on!! That’s an off the charts public health issue to say the least.
-Chris Jones
Playboy Invites Viewers To Vote For Playmate Of The Year
Playboy junior photo editor and star of E! Network’s “The Girls Next Door” series Holly Madison will host Playboy TV’s “Playmate Review 2007,” showcasing the 12 nominees for 2008 Playmate of the Year.
“While thousands of girls have dreams of becoming a Playmate, only 12 girls, the Playmates from 2007, can dream of becoming Playboy’s Playmate of the Year for 2007,” according to Playboy director of photography Gary Cole.
“However, it will be the results of Playboy’s online voting poll for Playmate of the Year that will determine which Playmate’s dream comes true.”
The winner, announced in the June 2008 issue of the magazine and on Playboy.com, takes home a cool $100,000, a new car and other prizes.
Starting Dec. 9, members can go to PlayboyTV.com to view video profiles of each candidate, hosted by Madison, and then visit Playboy.com to cast their vote for their favorite Playmate.
Voting opens Friday and lasts until Feb. 7.
Via XBIZ
Plaintiffs Drop Suit Against Girls Gone Wild Founder
A representative for “Girls Gone Wild” (GGW) founder Joe Francis has confirmed the two women who filed suit against him have dropped charges, after video surfaced showing the two women verbally stating they were of age to be filmed and also consenting to it.
The video of plaintiffs Brooke Patsolic and Christina Brose was posted last week at MeetJoeFrancis.com, an apparent attempt to inform the public of his extensive legal woes.
In a statement Francis said that he would forego suing the two women in exchange for a public apology, which he was sent soon after. In it, Patsolic and Brose acknowledge that GGW parent company Mantra Films and Francis suffered as a result of their actions.
“We have agreed to dismiss our lawsuit and acknowledge that no money has been paid to either of us,” the women wrote. “Further, we understand that by dismissing this action, Mantra Films Inc., ‘Girls Gone Wild’ and Joe Francis have agreed not to pursue legal action against us stemming from the filing of our lawsuit.”
In the suit, both women claimed that they were enticed aboard the GGW bus and coerced into exposing themselves and engaging in sexual acts after being promised the footage would not be used for commercial purposes. Free clothes and alcohol — though they claimed they were under 21 — also allegedly were provided.
However on the videotape, released several months later, features Brose telling Francis that he has permission to “put this on anything, I don’t care,” and later provided her full name and age on tape.
Patsolic also gave consent to use her footage and even pointed out that there were police officers present at the time.
“Tomorrow, we’re going to be like, “What the [expletive] were we doing?’” Patsolic said on the tape.
Posts
