screw the boring presidential race. you know what really makes me angry? this.

[travisezell]

I'm actually very upset by this, and have been loosely following the story since the arrest of Max Hardcore, a disturbingly graphic and faux-abusive pornographer. They couldn't find a DA who was willing to prosecute this horseshit case of "obscenity" so they took the Pasadena-based case to Tampa Bay, FL, where they found a judicial system

Comments

[octi_stripe]

Did you actually watch or read descriptions of his movies. I'm pissed that he was taken down on charges of obscenity cause there should have been more of a fight about whether or not there was actual consent.

[travisezell]

I'll go you one farther. I've seen excerpts of some of the films themselves on the ol' Internet. (Suffice to say, it's not my cup of tea. But it was really more of an eyebrow-raising "this is sexy?" kind of reaction than anything. What can I say? I'm jaded to "shocking porn.")

To quote from this illuminating article/blogpost:"As if all of those details weren’t scary enough, the jurors were exempt from watching the entire DVD, and instead the prosecution selected scenes for viewing. This is the most distressing aspect of the case, because it violates the “taken as a whole” stipulation of the Miller test. The jurors didn’t see behind the scenes footage demonstrating affection between performers, female performers smiling and able-bodied after the shoot, how scenes are edited, etc; they just saw excerpts selected for maximum shock value."

[octi_stripe]

However, not all of the performers were smiling and able-bodied after wards. I know that some of the performers were into it, but not all of them were. Some of them tried to stop the scenes, and weren't allowed to. If you can find THOSE performers affectionate afterwords, I'll be convinced. Otherwise, I think he was taken down on a bullshit charge, but he got what he deserved.

[travisezell]

Well I can't speak to that claim, to its validity as more than hearsay or to the frequency of its occurrence, but if that's enough to justify puritanical witch trials, flagrant moralistic abuses of the federal justice system, and a major legal blow against the safety and liberty of Americans' sexual rights (not to mention that of sex workers of all types), then I'm concerned that we have all our priorities out of whack

[octi_stripe]

I totally agree that his charge was bullshit. I found references to actresses running away and appealing to the camera and screaming stop in a description of his cannon, if you will. Along with the pictures I saw, and the accounts of a few performers who never performed again after their experience with Max, I think there are serious breech of contract/consent issues and I am really angry that those were not addressed. Cause yeah, censorship is fucked up, rape fantasies are so much more complicated that contract laws and even displays of affection to the abuser (ahem, Stockholm syndrome... not that I'm saying they shouldn't be allowed to enact these things, but it's complicated) There are a whole ton of nuances our legal system can't even begin to address because it's stuck in outdated moral codes based on notions of good and evil. That said, my reaction is still that Max Hardcore got what he deserved, even if he got it for all the wrong reasons.

[travisezell]

What's important isn't whether or not Max Hardcore deserves four years in prison, or four hundred. What's important is what this case is going to lead to in the next ten years in terms of sexual freedom, sex worker rights, and censorship laws in America

[octi_stripe]

Yeah, I just can't get mad about it because I really feel like he deserved it, and even though it has all these nasty implications, I just feel like some sort of social subconscious is holding his responsible for what the conscious can't. (sorry that's kind of flaky sounding) In any case, I can only hope it pushes the conversation forward cause I do think what he did was wrong. Not just that I don't like it (cause a part of me kind of does) but because rape fantasies are really really complicated and I think there should be a license for them, or something.

[travisezell]

No single person's actions are wrong enough to tear down a system and thrust us toward a totalitarian thoughtpolice state.

[octi_stripe]

I don't know. After reading how many people worshiped this man's work, I'm glad something happened. This is not a healthy way to address the part of the human psyche that desires to see this. If it means that people have to fight it out for their right to make porn, whatevs. I don't think this is going to take down the sex industry or have really broad legal implications. It's one county in Florida. I'm pretty sure that the legal precedent set by this case only counts in that county since that's the level of the case. Am i wrong?

[octi_stripe]

Actually, I will take this the next step and say that I think his actions were so wrong, that I don't care to save the system that allows him to be rewarded for that. I can see that you're making the parallel statement to back-alley abortions, and life would be truly tragic if it goes that way, but there should be some sort of oversight for porn producers, and they should have to jump through some hoops to make the disturbing stuff to make sure everyone is safe. I'm being optimistic and hoping that this is a clumsy step in that direction.

[travisezell]

Those systems did exist in what form they could. Almost no pornography distributor would touch Hardcore or his ilk, and there will always be SOMEONE who's willing to overstep decency bounds. That's not for federal moral mandates to dictate, though.

The systems obviously allowed for it, though you're taking it more personally than I am (not that I blame you, I'm a dude and can't help but view this differently than you, even when I'm being sympathetic to both sides), but the system was actually set up to prevent or at least control these things to an extent. This was a blow AGAINST that system, because it takes the power out of any (loosely) unified front of pornographers and puts the power directly into the hands of Bible Belt/Florida Backwater Porn-Haters.

I'm sorry, but this is nothing short of McCarthyan Justice, and I'm not okay with it.

[travisezell]

Holy shit.

This is the FOURTH time I'm about to type this, so if it's curt, don't take it personally. Guh. Computers!

This isn't local. This is federal. This was MOVED ACROSS THE COUNTRY based on the notion that "If it's on the internet it's a crime everywhere." They literally shopped the case around until they found a DA and local jury likely to convict, based on prejudices against the nature of the material.

They did not even follow federal mandates regarding obscenity charges (see above, the Miller Test).

This is a Federal precedent, not a local one. If one kind of porn is illegal, all kinds can be called illegal.

The very idea of obscenity being a crime is exactly thoughtcrime. It leads to this kind of a case, a witch hunt, nothing short of McCarthyan Justice, and maybe for you the ends justified the means, but not for me. By a freaking long shot.