Page 9 of 28 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 272

Thread: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity charges

  1. #81
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    01-21-11 @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    471

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    You're not supposed to masturbate to Freddy Kreuger. If someone makes a habit of it, they should probably be under psychiatric care.
    Why are depictions of rape, torture and murder "evil" only if someone admits that they can be sexually arousing?

    After all, many an Anne Rice novel could easily be characterized as a depiction of rape, torture and murder. Adolf Hitler would have burned her books and the woman herself, too. He was a staunch opponent of pornography and any "degenerate" expression, after all. Today, his fans would also have us believe the Holocaust never happened. If they could make all the footage of the Holocaust disappear, they would in a heartbeat. If they ever are able to use state power to make that happen, they will. Who but a dangerous deviant would want people to be able to possess such disgustingly obscene material?

    Why do the same social conservatives who would ban photographs of Abu Ghraib as "obscene" tend to be the most outspoken supporters of the very militarism which led to Abu Ghraib in the first place?

    Why is it that these great defenders of morality are also most likely to support expansive prohibitions against "sedition" and "treason" which in practice are applied to protesters against such militarism?

    Forget what some lisping liberal subversive says the flag stands for. Just make sure the flag is never "desecrated" through burning, or "profaned" by being flown upside down. Don't ever look to where the finger is pointing, just suck on the finger and repeat all together,

    "It's a finger, a finger, a finger! This is the reality and anyone who disagrees is a liar, a pervert and a traitor."

    To sweep "evil" under the rug will never make it go away. The less freedom of inquiry and expression we enjoy, the less we will understand the darker aspects of human nature. In this respect, knowledge is power, and a lack of knowledge is truly dangerous.

    In many cases the "evil" turns out to only be consensual sex, perhaps even "immoral" activity such as group sex or honest S&M. If these are dangerous, they are dangerous only to people who want to control others, especially women, through sexual repression and perpetuate the cycles of authoritarianism.

    The horrible and scandalous "child pornography" which had a photographer facing 8,000 years in prison turns out to be pictures of teenage glamour models no more explicit than your average issue of Cosmo or Vogue (which also use teenage models). This man rotted in jail for nearly a year before the ludicrous charges were finally dropped.

    Meanwhile, video game propaganda to recruit young people into the meat grinder of militarism is not only legal, but actually funded by the state. Apparently it is always the "degenerates" who are sick; there's never anything wrong with "normal" society itself. There's nothing obscene about obscenity laws that have been used to stifle discussion of marital rape is there? There's nothing perverted about a society that will shame a girl from going topless if her breasts have started developing, but will praise her father for dropping bombs on other girls across the world? At least they suffer and die with dignity, I suppose. Just don't take any pictures! Someone somewhere might admit to getting off on those pictures, and his or her honest admission of sadism might drop a hint about the dishonest sadism which motivates bloodthirsty supporters of war.

    The advice of the three wise monkeys is to "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil." It's a cute saying, but what happens if we actually apply it literally? We end up blind, deaf, and dumb.

    The more you think about it, the more sense it makes why right-wing authoritarians want to literally enshrine this advice into law and custom as much as possible.
    Last edited by Sov; 11-18-09 at 08:03 PM.

  2. #82
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    01-21-11 @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    471

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Sov can I point out you half heartedly lectured people on viewing feminists as a monolithic movement and then proceeded to describe all social conservatives as a monolithic movement?
    Half-heartedly? You can be assured that my whole heart was in it.

    That said, I will grant that not all people who call themselves socially conservative are particularly authoritarian. For example, in the US there are some self-described social conservatives who consider individual freedom and tolerance to be traditionally American values and actually seem to mean it. I was referring to right-wing authoritarians who go by the label social conservative, who unfortunately outnumber those of any other tendency associated with that description, at least in centers of power such as the courts, legislatures, media outlets, etc.
    Last edited by Sov; 11-18-09 at 08:27 PM.

  3. #83
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    01-21-11 @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    471

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    You're right. I didn't answer your questions, because they are all based on the psychologically faulty premise that sexual arousal, masturbation, and orgasm are all purely biomechanical functions. Sexual arousal is a physical response to emotional stimuli; masturbation and orgasm create feelings of pleasure and release bonding hormones which create positive, relational associations with whatever other stimuli are available.
    Obviously, sexual pleasure is an emotion, but you are artificially attaching a good deal of other baggage which does not necessarily play a role in sexual activity, either watching or doing.

    Although this does not necessarily hold in your case, there is often sexism involved in the assumption that women cannot enjoy watching or doing sexual activity without inhibiting strings attached. Many people, after all, have no trouble believing that men can enjoy pornography, casual sex, or prostitutes without being "scarred" yet refuse to believe that women have the same capability. You don't see many people complaining about the twinks in gay porn being "exploited," after all, because relatively few have trouble believing that men can enjoy being sexually promiscuous. Yet a pornstar like Sasha Grey who insists (outside of porn) that she truly enjoys being at the center of a gangbang is widely assumed to be lying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    Divorcing these positive associations from other human beings, or indiscriminately associating them with strangers, is both a cause and a symptom of psychological sexual dysfunction.
    I'm curious as to what psychological research you have in mind when you make assertions like these.
    Last edited by Sov; 11-18-09 at 08:56 PM.

  4. #84
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,897

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by MC.no.spin View Post
    Max Hardcore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    This seems to be a little bit beyond the First Amendment. What an asshole.
    Proof plz.
    "I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."

  5. #85
    Fool & Troll Handler
    MC.no.spin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Last Seen
    08-26-17 @ 02:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,392

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    Proof plz.
    The Supreme Court has usually refused to give obscenity any protection under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court decided in Miller v. California that a work is obscene if it depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

    Along with what I included in my earlier post, here are some more things from this guy to compare that standard to:

    In Max Hardcore movies--"Anal Agony," "Hardcore Schoolgirls," "Max! Don't F**k Up My Mommy!"--women are verbally and physically degraded in an unprecedented myriad of ways. They are choked, slapped, throat-****ed, penetrated with fists, given enemas, pile-driven, urinated upon, vomited upon, and in some instances instructed to drink from glasses the money shots that have been delivered into their rectums. Most of the time, Little as Hardcore is the perpetrator of these acts.

    Not infrequently, his scenes are fraught with pedophilia themes, beginning when he stumbles upon his subjects in playgrounds, where they sit alone, in pigtails, talking baby-talk, and sucking on lollipops. Mostly, the sex scenes end with his latest costar a mess and Hardcore triumphant. Even for the most jaded porn watcher, Little's ouevre is over the top.

    Watching Little's work is less like watching a porn movie than it is akin to witnessing a vivisection. On the screen, Hardcore bends over the female bodies before him, sometimes with speculum in hand, as if attempting to get at something within her at which he can never quite get, and so to which he is doomed to return, his methods more and more hardcore.
    Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity charges (UPDATE) - Boing Boing
    "Everyone has his axe to grind - his favorite fiction to pimp. We live in a world of hustlers and clowns."
    ~ Bob Somerby

  6. #86
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,897

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    The Supreme Court has usually refused to give obscenity any protection under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court decided in Miller v. California that a work is obscene if it depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

    Along with what I included in my earlier post, here are some more things from this guy to compare that standard to:
    Ok, so you have actually no proof that the actors in any of these films were coerced or abused in any way, and you are simply basing your judgment on whether you (yes, you; you are just using the supreme court's decision as an appeal to authority) think his work is obscene.



    EDIT: And if his work had no "artistic" value then they wouldn't be selling now would they? Clearly there is a large enough population to consider his work to have some form of artistic value or they wouldn't be buying it.
    Last edited by Khayembii Communique; 11-19-09 at 04:54 AM.
    "I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."

  7. #87
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Why are depictions of rape, torture and murder "evil" only if someone admits that they can be sexually arousing?
    Because if they are sexually arousing, they are being depicted as fun and pleasurable activities, and with enough viewings, as normal activities. I should never have had to explain once, much less over and over again ad nauseam, how being conditioned to associate sexual pleasure with other peoples' suffering is a bad thing. It should be self-evident to any sensible person whose head has not been stuffed with nonsense about how we are all isolated individuals whose private lives do not affect one another's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Adolf Hitler would have burned her books and the woman herself, too. He was a staunch opponent of pornography and any "degenerate" expression, after all.
    Go ahead, compare me to Hitler. Get it out of your system. Everyone else does.

    Then, without relying on the fact that he was wrong about invading Poland, starting a two-front war, killing seven million Jews, and swing music, explain to me why he was wrong about pornography. Better yet, offer up a good argument for why I am wrong about pornography-- because the last time Hitler used his brain for anything was more than sixty years ago and that was as a backstop.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Today, his fans would also have us believe the Holocaust never happened. If they could make all the footage of the Holocaust disappear, they would in a heartbeat. If they ever are able to use state power to make that happen, they will. Who but a dangerous deviant would want people to be able to possess such disgustingly obscene material?
    Why settle for the real thing when you can get a couple of anorexic models and a smooth jazz CD and give all the white trash a chance to masturbate to it? After all, that's what you are defending here.

    Historical footage is not pornography. For one, as you might guess, it has historical value. It's not fiction. It isn't designed to titillate, to subvert anyone's natural sexual impulses into something more commercially exploitable. And it doesn't glamorize anything unless it is propaganda, in which case it is glamorizing what the society, through the State, considers desirable. If the State itself is glamorizing something unwholesome, your society has much bigger problems than either my objection to pornography or your objection to censorship.

    I think there is a very clear and distinct line between censoring fiction and censoring non-fiction. The fact that you must resort to examples of censoring non-fiction to demonstrate harm suggests that you cannot demonstrate that harm is caused by censoring fiction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Why do the same social conservatives who would ban photographs of Abu Ghraib as "obscene" tend to be the most outspoken supporters of the very militarism which led to Abu Ghraib in the first place?
    Don't ask me, ask them. I never supported enhanced interrogation, and I've crossed swords with numerous "conservatives" over the issue. On the other hand, when you look at the methods chosen by those soldiers when told to "be creative" and left to their own devices, it sure looks an awful lot like they took their inspiration from the kind of pornography you're defending.

    Matter of fact, within days of the Abu Ghraib photos leaking, porn sites were making their own-- encouraging the kind of immoral and antisocial behavior you're now complaining about. How can you abhor people for committing acts without abhorring the people who applaud them for committing them? The people who tell them that it's fun, sexy, and normal to degrade people?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    To sweep "evil" under the rug will never make it go away. The less freedom of inquiry and expression we enjoy, the less we will understand the darker aspects of human nature. In this respect, knowledge is power, and a lack of knowledge is truly dangerous.
    So humiliation porn is really just a stepping stone in the noble quest for truth? There's a difference between denying evil exists and refusing to participate in or tolerate it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    The horrible and scandalous "child pornography" which had a photographer facing 8,000 years in prison turns out to be pictures of teenage glamour models no more explicit than your average issue of Cosmo or Vogue (which also use teenage models). This man rotted in jail for nearly a year before the ludicrous charges were finally dropped.
    Teenage glamour models are adults and the law should recognize that, so the point should be moot. That's also a different issue than the one we're discussing, because something that is not more explicit than an issue of Cosmo or Vogue is not pornography.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Meanwhile, video game propaganda to recruit young people into the meat grinder of militarism is not only legal, but actually funded by the state.
    As it should be, because our nation's military is necessary and serving in it is an honorable career.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Obviously, sexual pleasure is an emotion, but you are artificially attaching a good deal of other baggage which does not necessarily play a role in sexual activity, either watching or doing.
    Like what? What is the purpose of the bonding hormones released during sexual stimulation and orgasm if not to establish and deepen bonds? Operant conditioning somehow just doesn't apply to pleasure when it's sexual pleasure? I'm not attaching that "baggage" to human sexuality, that "baggage" is the function of human sexuality and it's human biology that put it there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Although this does not necessarily hold in your case, there is often sexism involved in the assumption that women cannot enjoy watching or doing sexual activity without inhibiting strings attached.
    Who said anything about women? For that matter, who said anything about people not enjoying porn? If porn hurt, noone would watch it and I wouldn't give a damn about it. The problem is that it feels good so people don't realize what it's doing to them-- they don't realize that what they find attractive is changing and that they're slowly being desensitized to real sex with real sexual partners. They don't realize that they are losing the ability to connect with other people sexually.

    Just because it feels good, doesn't mean it's good for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Many people, after all, have no trouble believing that men can enjoy pornography, casual sex, or prostitutes without being "scarred" yet refuse to believe that women have the same capability.
    If anything, men are usually the ones more damaged. After all, they're the ones being encouraged by our culture to seek out these things-- and they're not allowed to admit that it stops being fun after awhile.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    You don't see many people complaining about the twinks in gay porn being "exploited," after all, because relatively few have trouble believing that men can enjoy being sexually promiscuous.
    Honestly, gay porn is just better. Both sexes. Maybe it's because they're the same sex... but all the gay and lesbian porn I've seen hasn't been one-tenth as abusive or as degrading as most straight porn.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    Yet a pornstar like Sasha Grey who insists (outside of porn) that she truly enjoys being at the center of a gangbang is widely assumed to be lying.
    Hell, I'm sure she does. It's not my thing at all, but it's easy to imagine how someone can enjoy being the center of that much attention-- and getting that many people off at once. Bet you that's a big part of what drives the porn stars that really enjoy their work, knowing that they're touching that many lives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sov View Post
    I'm curious as to what psychological research you have in mind when you make assertions like these.
    This is basic Skinner. Operant conditioning, and what people are conditioned to respond sexually to. Will you deny that human beings are supposed to be sexually attracted to other human beings, whom they can have sex with? And that they are generally supposed to be emotionally attached to those human beings and enjoy pleasuring them as much as they are being pleasured?

  8. #88
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    Ok, so you have actually no proof that the actors in any of these films were coerced or abused in any way, and you are simply basing your judgment on whether you (yes, you; you are just using the supreme court's decision as an appeal to authority) think his work is obscene.



    EDIT: And if his work had no "artistic" value then they wouldn't be selling now would they? Clearly there is a large enough population to consider his work to have some form of artistic value or they wouldn't be buying it.
    That's the Supreme Courts view, not mine. That's what the judge referred to in his ruling and sentencing in this case.

    My view isn't that, though.
    I feel that no porn or anything, however "weird" "fetish" or "degrading" it is is worth jail time. That's rather archaic, IMHO (throwing people in jail because of sex) - and I hope that this is overturned, actually.
    I feel it's, also, hypocritical - they're judging it based on "artistic merit" (or lack of, in this case) - but beauty and art is in the eye of the beholder. Does the majority of the populus need to approve of someone's sex-act in order for it to be artistic and worthy of showing to others who find it appealing? (I don't think so - it's sex, not public approval on election day).

    If that were the case then the majority of the country would be in jail.

    I think it's ridiculous - but the lesser courts don't have the say in overturning the Supreme Court decision - it has to go all the way back up to the Supreme Court.

    The Supreme Court is wishy washy - they can't define "this is offensive" and "this isn't" - so if they can't decide then why hold it against someone?

    The only thing offensive to me is something that's done without someone else's consent. The courts need to stay out of my goodie bag.
    Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 11-19-09 at 09:56 AM.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  9. #89
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    I just wanna know if I can marry my shower head and vibrator since we've "emotionally bonded" so much.

    I also want to know how something is 'degrading' me if I'm enjoying every minute of it and begging for it to be done to me? If I fantasize about it daily, masturbate to it, and absolutely love it when I do it with another person(s). How could something possibly be degrading me if *I* am not degraded?

    I also wonder how porn shaped my wants and desires when I had these same wants and desires many, many years prior to ever seeing or reading any porn? I wonder how that worked.

    Weird, eh?

  10. #90
    Fool & Troll Handler
    MC.no.spin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Last Seen
    08-26-17 @ 02:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,392

    Re: Adult film director Max Hardcore sentenced to 4 years in prison on obscenity char

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    Ok, so you have actually no proof that the actors in any of these films were coerced or abused in any way, and you are simply basing your judgment on whether you (yes, you; you are just using the supreme court's decision as an appeal to authority) think his work is obscene.


    You asked for proof that this seemed to go beyond the First Amendment. If you were asking for proof one or more of the actors were abused in any way, you should have quoted that text instead. Perhaps you should watch the film it mentions and verify it.


    EDIT: And if his work had no "artistic" value then they wouldn't be selling now would they? Clearly there is a large enough population to consider his work to have some form of artistic value or they wouldn't be buying it.
    It's taken by community standards, to an average person, not a pervert.

    The Miller test was developed in the Miller v. California. It has three parts:

    1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

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

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



    The work is considered obscene only if all three conditions are satisfied.

    The first two prongs of the Miller test are held to the standards of the community, and the last prong is held to what is reasonable to a person of the United States as a whole. The national reasonable person standard of the third prong acts as a check on the community standard of the first two prongs, allowing protection for works that in a certain community might be considered obscene but on a national level might have redeeming value.

    For legal scholars, several issues are important. One is that the test allows for community standards rather than a national standard. What offends the average person in Jackson, Mississippi, may differ from what offends the average person in New York City. The relevant community, however, is not defined.

    Another important issue is that Miller asks for an interpretation of what the "average" person finds offensive, rather than what the more sensitive persons in the community are offended by, as obscenity was defined by the previous test, the Hicklin test, stemming from the English precedent.

    In practice, pornography showing genitalia and sexual acts is not ipso facto obscene according to the Miller test. For instance, in 2000 a jury in Provo, Utah, took only a few minutes to clear Larry Peterman, owner of a Movie Buffs video store, in Utah County, Utah, a region which had often boasted of being one of the most conservative areas in the US. Researchers had shown that guests at the local Marriott Hotel were disproportionately large consumers of pay-per-view pornographic material, accessing far more material than the store was distributing.
    Last edited by MC.no.spin; 11-20-09 at 05:26 AM.
    "Everyone has his axe to grind - his favorite fiction to pimp. We live in a world of hustlers and clowns."
    ~ Bob Somerby

Page 9 of 28 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •