Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Don't waste a lot of your sympathy on this guy. He beats and pisses in the mouths of naive 18 year old girls who, as I think most of us can agree, are not terribly sophisticated and able to protect their own rights.
As always, we get to the heart of the matter -- adult women can't make good decisions for themselves and need to Sutungpo's of the world to interfere in their lives, using the force of law, to override their will and tell them what they really want for themselves. -- GlennGreenwald
1) Sutungpo, get the web links or citations. I have no reason to disbelieve you, likewise no reason to believe you. I'm an old feminazi from way back in the 80s and my personal tendency when thinking about guys like this one is to daydream about the 'best practice' method of extra-judicial execution.
2) Glenn -- best point in your article to refute any contrarians is the title of this comment.
If "degrading and humiliating" is the new standard, my guess is that they will start going after more mainstream porn producers than this specialty S&M porn. My guess is that they could argue all sorts of sex acts performed in your basic porn movie are degrading or humiliating.
The prosecution was moved to Florida because the authorities were unable to get a conviction in California.
Yes, and you find that alright? Glenn did mention that the trial was taken to Florida with flimsy arguments about probable customers and the locale of hardware used just because what Mr Little did was not illegal under the laws of the state in which he lives and works.
The whole point of Mr Greenwald's blog entry is exactly that: double standards and hypocrisy prevail over fair and sensible conduct.
The curious complement to the comparison is that whatever Congress and White House do to get away after January 2009 the next administration can just choose any place of trial they find fit - including London, Paris, Berlin, The Hague or Baghdad.
http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=3635
"A couple of the comments that follow the article are written by a woman calling herself “Neesa” who says quite graphically that she was raped and abused by Hardcore.–Ann Bartow"
(Neesa is an unverified source)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Hardcore
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Max_Hardcore
Maybe if Little had included scenes wherein the porn actors were questioned about their possible ties to terrorist activities (I'm sure one of them knows someone who knows someone who is a Muslim--that's all it takes to be considered a terrorist these days, right?), then this film would have gone from being punished to being used as a how-to guide at Gitmo.
The criminals in the government are in a self destruct mode. Evil cannot ever win in the end. Their evil will destroy themselves.Many people will be damaged through the increasing evil being enacted by our glorious leaders but in the end "the evil loses" it just happens that way, i.e. see history.
Let's grant that this porn guy is evil scum. So then, our US government torturers also are evil scum who deserve jail at best.
and I will stipulate that he is, this is still an incredibly dangerous preceedent. If this guy is actually committing physical/sexual assault, then by all means go after him for these crimes. But to give into the temptation to "get this guy" at a cost of trashing teh First Amenment, and to decide that something filmed 3,000 miles away is obscene and put it's creator in prison?
I'll bet there are communities where you could get the same conviction against Bill Maher for his new film... here in Cincinnati for one...
Rather, these "feminists" believe that women should be free to do as they please, unless they choose to play roles they perceive as submissive or degrading.
I support the right of people to sell themselves as indentured labor or even as slaves. Maybe we can amend the bankruptcy law that you get to keep your primary residence if you go for seven years indenture.
(snark).
Someone freely wanting to do something doesn't necessarily mean that that something is right.
As to whether someone is coerced or not, maybe you don't know until that someone is in a witness protection program.
And what is coercion? Would you agree that the third world villager is not coerced into working 80 hour weeks in a poorly lit and ventilated sweatshop in the city; after all the villager had the choice of semi-starvation in the sunlight and unpolluted air of his village. There was no "coercion" to go to the city.
------
Let's put it yet another way. If some corporation had asked for volunteers among its employees to shoot such a film, I do not know a leftist who would not be outraged.
------
Fortunately, we don't have to approve of the porn producer in any way, shape or form to get Glenn's point - which is that if make-believe sadomasochism merits three years in Federal Prison, then why are the Administration's torturers walking free?
some links- he really is a scumbag- not that that gives us the right to torture prisoners of war.
We don't imprison people for being "scumbags." We imprison them for breaking the law.
Lots of people justify what happens at Guantanamo and what happened at Abu Grahib based on the fact -- surely true -- that some of them are "scumbags." That doesn't justify the treatment.
Lots of people -- neo-Nazis and racists, to begin with -- express political views that make them "scumbags." Are you going to cheer if they're prosecuted for their views based on the fact that they're "scumbags" and don't deserve sympathy?
http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=3635"A couple of the comments that follow the article are written by a woman calling herself “Neesa” who says quite graphically that she was raped and abused by Hardcore.–Ann Bartow"
So someone on the Internet claims anonymously to have been raped and now you believe it? Fine - if that claim is true - then he should be prosecuted for rape and, if convicted, imprisoned for a long time. But that's not the crime he's been accused of committing.
Cheering someone's conviction based on extremely precarious constitutional grounds because someone on the Internet anonymously accused him of committing some unrelated crime is pretty dangerous and irrational, for obvious reasons.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
