Comments on: holy shit: John Stagliano indicted on 8 obscenity counts

By: violet

violet — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:00:50 +0000

@ Dave: I really like his Voyeur series, especially as it went from 17-23. I have to say though, Fresh Meat #17 (“City Morgue” — all the names here sound awful for such great porn and and sex scenes) was especially hot, and his Voyeur collections of blowjobs and anals (I’m rilly just into his lovingly-filmed bj’s) are incredible. I also really enjoyed his first few Voyeurs, just for the buildup and focus on voyeurism… the leadup to the sex is often hotter than the sex in that series. plus, big butts, sexy Euro men and women… :)

also, I met him once at a sex and culture museum gathering — he said he knew who I was which was shocking to me — and he is a really cordial, nice and genuine fellow.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 04:45:54 +0000

Oh yeah – Belladonna DOES rock! Ever since I saw her in one of the Jack’s Playground gonzo flicks. She shot one of her films in L.A’s The Standard hotel on Sunset, which is one of my favorite places to stay down there. Since I saw the vid, it’s always felt a little different staying there ;-)

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 04:42:02 +0000

This is a travesty!

But… John Leslie? An oldie but goodie. What films of his do you like? I remember him back in ‘early’ porn history during the Seka days and ‘Every Woman Has a Fantasy’.

By: anon

anon — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 02:41:20 +0000

Yeah, I think you nailed it. Go after something that ultimately won’t matter to close down the new thing that might.

We still live in a world (not just one society) where it’s ok to show people being humiliated for fun and mostly ok to show people being ripped to shreds. But a hint of sex? Nonono. And this has been true forever. Religions tightly control sexual relations but don’t worry much about violence, etc.

But porn studios and productions have been around for a long, long time. They haven’t caused too much fundamental change. The actors still are the “them” to the sexually controlled “us”. It’s separated and segregated, so the general social impact is very limited.

Now production isn’t limited to studios. Anyone can put up videos. And people see that sexuality isn’t limited to “them”. Uh oh.

So you definitely nailed it. First step is to go after a “bad bad bad” porn studio. Then use the precedent to shut down the *new* means of communicating.

The worst thing is that some people honestly believe that the control is good. These things need to be controlled. We (including themselves) cannot be trusted to be sexual beings.

Changing that will take generations. But the wider communication and breaking down the us/them barriers really seems (to me) the only way to bring about that change.

By: aliyah

aliyah — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 01:21:18 +0000

damn! having provided props and wardrobe to john for some of his flicks, i can honestly say he is very nice in person. i have enjoyed the professionalism he brings to the industry. i have dealt with others who leave me with the impression they sleep under rocks and slither.

i agree with #6 in that there is a lot at stake with regard to sites hosting video and pics of consensual adult porn.

By: violet

violet — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:47:07 +0000

it’s this part everyone with a website (and every porn-loving adult, and those who want their teens to evolve healthy attitudes about sex on the web) should be worried about:

“(…) one count of using an interactive computer service to display an obscene movie trailer in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age (…)”

IMHO, that’s unenforcable. *but* it will work as a vague, undefined, Mafia-style scare tactic to scare webmasters from Flickr to YouPorn into removing their perfectly legal, consensual adult porn — or heavily censoring their users to the point of making us all feel like the Internet is only for 10-year-olds. it’s the suggestion of *not* knowing whether what we do in regard to adult content is legal or not that makes us scared — and that’s exactly how the Feds like to play it.

By: twizted

twizted — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:47:30 +0000

I knew the lame duck Feds would be scrambling to do as much damage as possible before their departure. They’re clearly trying to see what they can get away with. Who the hell is going to be deciding what’s obscene? This is ridiculous.

So far, every attempt like this has been tossed out. I just hope this happens before Evil Angel is pushed to jeopardy of financial ruin.

By: anon

anon — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:02:43 +0000

Different image: A bunch of repubs running around with bras on their heads and their little sticks pointing out yelling “Distractinate! Distractinate!”

By: anon

anon — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:41:09 +0000

Gee, David Vitter (aka Mr. Diapered Repub) is being called to the stand in a sex-related trial… Quick! Distract! Distract!

By: quehanna

quehanna — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:53:23 +0000

What’s obscene is the bullying tactics of the self-righteous censor-hounds in our government.
And don’t even get me started on the amount of money they’ve already wasted picking on him.

By: libby

libby — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 12:05:19 +0000

evil angel is (imo) hands-down the most innovative mainstream porn house in the valley. their business model and their excellent products have been top of the line for decades. if there’s anyone who can shred an obscenity prosecution, stagliano and devereaux are up for the job.

it’s a shame that crappy cookie-cutter porn isn’t illegal. it’s much more offensive than anything ea has ever released.