2001 channel 4 documentary on porn

The last director of abuse porn featured in rhe documentary, the one who refused to show his face on film (because in his other life he was a "pillar of the community" ) described what he was doing as "romantic" and depicting "romance"

ffs

Maybe that's where the creepy Andre gets his ideas from..

If Ron Jeremy doesnt like that must say something

I think the title 'Devil in the Flesh' says it all really...

interesting article also here

Max Hardcore is particularly notorious, the insistance in starring in all his own films ,the manner of the costumes the girls wear got him into trouble before pissing, choking women until the throw up there are vids on youtube describing his rapes and stuff so as a producer he is considered shocking for the porn industry.and of course the rape etc.

I wonder what creates a man like that. Anyway

Andre, I missed your posts before.I'm wondering what part of that you describe as love?? Like I said earlier she may be a 25 year old woman but mentally and emotionally shes about 15/16 and doesn't look much older tbh. Any real man would find a childish,vulnerable woman with lowered boundaries offputting because It wouldn't feel right to exploit that. Max Hardcore seemed to like that aspect of her and richard & so on

Do actually think what he did was right??

I find it very disturbing that a porn film would be included in this category of mainstream influential films.

Ok, made myself watch the documentary. Just one word at the moment as a reaction - predation.

The predatory nature of the men in the film is very very obvious and very disturbing. You can see it in them physically and most of them admit it in one way or another.

I hope that poor woman is doing ok now. I wish all the men in the film were in jail.

God, no, neither do I. I was just pointing out the fact that they didn't say it was a good film, merely that it opened a door. As the artlcle says, the reason for inclusion on this list is that "their influence is still felt".

Even amongst people who never watch porn, if you asked them to name one film, I reckon they'd either say "deep throat" or "debbie does dallas"

I don't think making films of rape and prostitution should be celebrated in any way.

'Deep Throat' played a role in moving the filmed degradation and abuse of women into the mainstream.

Beachcomber- to be fair, the criteria was films that "moved the goalposts" rather than were "good films", and in a way. "Deep Throat" did move the goalposts, in an extremely disturbing way.

What about this?

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/5410268.stm

Linda Lovelace was raped during this film - and yet you can't get much more mainstream than being listed as a 'landmark film' (excuse me while I vomit at this notion for a porn film).

But mainstream porn has become more and more extreme in recent times. Stuff that was considered hardcore before, is mainstream now. Stuff that would have been considered unacceptable is considered hardcore now.

Where will it end? What will the porn users of tomorrow require in order to get their rocks off?

'Not sure how men being treated badly on film somehow justifies women being treated badly on film.'

I didn't say it justified it, just that it exists. Both are at the extreme end of pornography and not representative of mainstream porn.

I don't believe gay male porn is equivalent to straight porn. Where have you got the statistic from that most porn is gay porn? I have not heard the proportion of gay to straight porn being lower than 1:30. There is far more discussion, debate and exposure of problematic production companies within the gay community, despite them actually having a genuine reason to believe that such debate could be used to limit their sexual identity outside of porn use, which straight men don't have to worry about.

The issue of Eastern European twink porn being hugely exploitative has been widely debated within the gay community, with people looking at ways of addressing that, despite the content of the porn itself being vanilla and not particularly controversial.

It is a complete red herring to attempt to get feminists to deal with the problems in gay male porn, when it is already being addressed better by the gay community than straight porn is being dealt with by its users. Straight porn is obviously a bigger problem, both numerically and in terms of a refusal by its users to even vaguely address the ethical issues beyond a handful of people.

'Men In Pain' sounds utterly foul too from a glance at the website.

Not sure how men being treated badly on film somehow justifies women being treated badly on film.

Anyway - we all know that porn does not happen within a social and political vacuum, so men/women comparisons are pretty unhelpful really.

charts largely relate to US government expenditure and tax rates- racy stuff!

just googled porn chart. Not sure whether to be happy or disturbed that top 3 hits were sites dedicated to charts and fanatics thereof - i.e. chart porn

No, he really isn't. What porn charts are you referring to? Not all modern porn is abusive to women, some is. But then some is abusive to men to (Men in Pain for example). Gay male porn makes up over half of all porn and doesn't feature women at all.

I support porn but I despise Max Hardcore. Like all things, the porn industry isn't all the same. Saying this documentary (which I watched and found sickening) is representative of all porn is like saying the extreme Christians Lois Theroux visited are representative of all Christians.

Big joke and a hoot

I hope more people get to see it. There has been so little work on the disgusting and exploitative nature of the porn industry. It is all a bit joke on a hoot with the empowered belle de jour fantasy which has worked in affecting young peoples perceptions.

That thing about fathers - don't forget Belle du Jour/Brooke M (?) was introduced to her father's 'escorts' as a kid. Her later career was a free choice, though....(!) Loving the libertarians with thei tireless fight for freedom.It's been an unalloyed triumph