I’ve been waiting since spetember 13th for this performer’s program, they announced, to come out. 5 months later and nada. I wanted to buy my dot xxx but they blocked me from doing so and put me into that performer’s program instead, giving me no choice in the matter. I own my dot com, but wait, ICM Registry’s lawyer (Sheri Falco) is also Webpower’s lawyer. Webpower owns my dot net. I grandfathered the dot com. Doesn’t matter I guess huh? I don’t have a lawyer who also works for ICM, so I guess that dot xxx is never really going to be an option for me, is it? Look up who owns amanda36c.net and then look at who did the trademarks for that company. It’s Falco.

Conflict of interest? Indeed. I have several WordPress blogs on this topic. If anyone’s interested in reading them, you’re welcome to. Just Google “amanda36c wordpress”. I hope it’s OK to point to my blog here, Voilet. Thanks for posting this. We need to fight these pricks. Everyone!

Since Chloë was much better-looking than any other model he worked with previously, he made sure she would be his cash-cow.
He earnt & still makes a nice cash on Chloë’s pix, making two books, countless publications, plus $ilver prints sold to rich fat old guys from the 50000 images (incl. scat) he has of her .
The funny part? Chloë NEVER made a cent on this stuff whereas Dahmane owns two flats in Paris with the products of “his” (ahem) efforts.

As we speak Chloë des Lysses is broke, on welfare, almost homeless, legally harassed by her ex-husband whereas Dahmane is rich and has become the official snapper for one the French industrial mogul. She’s considered a whore by the judges therefore she’ll never ever win in courthouse : she’s been denied any control over what they did TOGETHER by the French justice (i.e. she’ll never make a buck on her pix) and she’s been sentenced to pay her ex-husband taxes for the time they were together. Neat, huh?”

Source: http://www.avmaniacs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31600

Perhaps its just another job for them to make ends meet and principles be damned since principles don’t feed you?

But I guess these ads are indicative of the violated feeling most adult webmasters have about the whole .xxx affair. And the fucked-over feeling you get when you discover that someone else has registered your trade name in .xxx. Despite the fact that you grudgingly and unwillingly registered with ICM explicitly to stop that from happening. And the slightly ill feeling you had when ICM then used that registration to say you supported the idea of .xxx when pleading their case to ICANN. And that “used” feeling you get when ICM didn’t contact you or give you first option on your trade name – despite the fact you registered solely for that – and just let someone else have it.

Or is that just me?

I disagree with most of what it says about the film, though. I watched the Swedish version years ago and again before the U.S. version was released, and I thought they feminized Salander in the make-up and costume design in ways that didn’t match up with the physically slight, androgynous character in the books and changed her demeanor dramatically in an effort to make her more of a sexy goth dominatrix. She was pleasantly powerful, but I wasn’t buying that anyone believed she was stupid, which is a huge part of the people in Lisbeth’s life misunderstanding and taking advantage of her and key to the point the book makes about how women are targeted. I liked Rapace’s performance a lot, but if differed from the character in the book significantly more than Mara’s and in ways that seemed designed to make her a sexualized femme fatale. It seems really weird to me to accuse the U.S. version of not being true to the character in the book while implying that the Swedish version got it right.

I do think the Swedish film had a much firmer grasp on the Blomqvist character, but that’s a different story.

Additionally, the appearance of a woman’s nipple or a nice pair of bare butt cheeks is a welcomed relief to the current stuffy, blushing ‘OMG I think I just saw something’ childish approach to the human body that we Americans seem to hold dear. In fact, I have watched shows where the fact that the woman is clutching a blanket to cover her breasts actually draws attention to the fact that she has breasts and they are right there. I find myself trying to will that damned blanket to slip. It won’t but a guy has to have hopes doesn’t he?

The very thought that an accidental nipple slip that looked more like the popping out of some sort of weapon from a robotic breast then any real nudity could possibly bring about hefty fines is Victorian and more than a little bit stupid. For once the Supreme Court made a good decision.

I think parts of this article may be drawing simplified conclusions from the same sources, but this book makes dramatically goes much deeper.

Ah, EvPsych. Don’t go changing.

I’m tired of blatant sexism against males, but it’s never challenged because it’s a “feminist perspective.” If there isn’t a clear logical argument with specifics to support the claim, then the media piece fails…. regardless of the position.

Also, as a man…. with a penis… and a brain… I can confidently say: some of us have the mental capacity to be far complex and contemplative than we are given credit for.