Freakin' disturbing. Seriously, anyone who would continue sending money to that man's corporation needs professional help.
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Joe Francis is the epitomy of much that is wrong with the porn industry. If you have to get your starlet drunk to get her to perform, you're a bad, bad pornographer.
-------------------- Officially Heartless Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ugh, I feel dirty just reading that. The "look at me, look at me, I have tits" attitude is bad enough, but this Francis character's sense of misplaced entitlement is beyond disturbing.
-------------------- Last year's goat was burned down by vandals dressed up as Santa Claus and the Gingerbread Man. They were never caught. My blog. The Adventures of the Fish O'Thwacking. Countdown: 177 days (or less!) Posts: 4926 | From: NW Ohio | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you, Ryda. This seems to be a case of "Girls Gone Wild" as an unsavory by-product of "Freedon Gone Wild". I really, really dislike this stuff and hate that it's out there, but how do you limit it, short of limiting freedom of speech? Ideally it would happen by cutting off the demand - but it seems like a lot of people want it....
Sick and sad.
-------------------- Uncle Rico
"We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn, and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive." C.S. Lewis Posts: 273 | From: Dallas, Texas | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rico, your post brings up an interesting thought process I have often encountered in the pro-porn vs. anti-porn debate. Condemning a certain type of porn, or all porn, does not necessitate calling for its ban. A ban, especially in a country with consititutionally protected speech, would be just as distasteful as the porn itself. Ideally what would happen is that there would no longer be a market for it.
How do we do that? We promote the idea that sex is something that should happen between two equals, not a power struggle or an assertion of dominance. Most of the porn that people object to involves someone (usually a man) asserting dominance over someone else (usually a woman, often a young woman) via sex acts.
It's hard to talk about without getting everyone to agree that symbology in film is meaningful. After all, not everyone finds the same things degrading, and many people do enjoy things like being spit on. But if we can step back and examine porn as a text rife with meaning instead of thinking about it as an unedited documentary of a sexual encounter, we can begin to dissect it and determine what is so off-putting about it to many.
-------------------- Officially Heartless Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Uncle Rico: I agree with you, Ryda. This seems to be a case of "Girls Gone Wild" as an unsavory by-product of "Freedon Gone Wild". I really, really dislike this stuff and hate that it's out there, but how do you limit it, short of limiting freedom of speech? Ideally it would happen by cutting off the demand - but it seems like a lot of people want it....
Sick and sad.
Well, you don't have just two choices A) Ban it
or
B) live with it.
In a situation like this, it's pretty clear that this man needs to be charged with several serious crimes, preferably split between civil and criminal courts. Put him, his photographers, and any staff aware of his tactics away for a long, long time, and get all of their money.
Make it public, messy, and painful, with as much testimony about the crappiness of his actions as is possible. Make it not about "It's harmless fun! Boys just being boys! There's nothing wrong with consuming this!" and make it clear that your decisions in consumption do affect people's lives, and that deriving sexual kicks from this isn't the best way to make sure your activities are all SS&C (personally, I'd love to see the vanillas adopt and live by this part of the scene. I think it would fix a whole load of issues).
I'd like to think that would work. I just don't know that it would.
Personally, the vindictive, mean, irrational part of me would love to sue every person who has ever purchased a product from this company. But that's just me bein' an ogre.
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow. Another entry in my own personal "Least surprising news of the day" category:
The guy responsible for "Girls Gone Wild" is a douchebag.
LikeHey"I really thought he'd be a kind, giving humanitarian"Scoob
-------------------- Support you local community newspaper! CNN.com probably won't be covering your child's spelling bee. Posts: 609 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yecch. I can't believe I read the whole thing. That creep is despicable. I hope he gets what he deserves, maybe penis-rot. Not a rapist? Yeah, right.
But I have to ask - Who forced the girls/women to go to those places and get drunk? Nobody can "get me drunk" but me. The "but I was drunk" defense is, to me, kind of like the entrapment defense. I don't see how entrapment is possible. An approached person can always say "no" and simply not do it. Unless, of course, there is a gun, either literal or figurative, being held against his/her head. Please understand that I am not saying any of those seemingly naive girls/women deserved what they got. The "but I was drunk" defense is just as invalid for a male, as in the case of a rapist or of a wife-beater. YMM, and probably does, V.
Kudos to the reporter. Brave woman.
-------------------- "This air we're breathing. Oxygen, isn't it?"~I’mNotDedalus, impersonating Vincent D’Onofrio.|"Sometimes trying to communicate can be like walking through a minefield."~wanderwoman "Give people a break. It's not easy doing a life."~Joshua Halberstam Posts: 4020 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thing that shocked me was how it's taken so long to really expose this guy- his intimidation practices were the kind that make you think, "this wanker is super-rich and I'm not?" He was astoundingly dumb.
I was just having this discussion with my boss, about the prevalence of parties centered around this in New York. I can't believe girls allow this to happen to them. I feel for them though, I was a complete moron at 18,19,20. It's sad.
-------------------- My great grandfather planted that tree! Posts: 4862 | From: Brooklyn | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LikeHeyScoob: Wow. Another entry in my own personal "Least surprising news of the day" category:
The guy responsible for "Girls Gone Wild" is a douchebag.
LikeHey"I really thought he'd be a kind, giving humanitarian"Scoob
I knew he'd be a bit unsavory. I had no idea he would be such a complete a-hole.
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the article describes events accurately, then Joe Francis has committed crimes (but ones he knows he can get away with; he may be bad-tempered but he's not stupid). However, I don't see how his personal immorality makes the genre of porn that he produces immoral (although I understand why someone would boycott his particular company).
-------------------- Fools! You've over-estimated me! Posts: 3745 | From: New York City | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
... make it clear that your decisions in consumption do affect people's lives, and that deriving sexual kicks from this isn't the best way to make sure your activities are all SS&C (personally, I'd love to see the vanillas adopt and live by this part of the scene. I think it would fix a whole load of issues).
[/QB][/QUOTE]
Simply quoted for truth.
-------------------- "There is a race between mankind and the universe. Mankind is trying to build bigger, better, faster, and more foolproof machines. The universe is trying to build bigger, better, and faster fools. So far the universe is winning." -Albert Einstein Posts: 1058 | From: Yakima, WA | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troodon: If the article describes events accurately, then Joe Francis has committed crimes (but ones he knows he can get away with; he may be bad-tempered but he's not stupid). However, I don't see how his personal immorality makes the genre of porn that he produces immoral (although I understand why someone would boycott his particular company).
]
Because the genre of porn he produces is dependent on taking advantage of situations and of people in altered states of consciesness. That, in my book, isn't kosher.
Then again, that's one of the reasons that I'm always leary when it comes to sex work. As a consumer, it's nearly impossible to tell when something is SS&C.
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Signora Del Drago: But I have to ask - Who forced the girls/women to go to those places and get drunk? Nobody can "get me drunk" but me. The "but I was drunk" defense is, to me, kind of like the entrapment defense. I don't see how entrapment is possible. An approached person can always say "no" and simply not do it.
Becuase getting drunk isn't illegal? Because the illegality of action isn't on the part of the "girls"? We, as a society, have a right to get drunk. We SHOULD have a resonable expectiation that people are going to NOT rape us when we are drunk. Certainly, this is an expectation for nearly half of the population. Why not for the other half?
quote:Originally posted by Signora Del Drago: The "but I was drunk" defense is just as invalid for a male, as in the case of a rapist or of a wife-beater. YMM, and probably does, V.
But, in the case of a drunk rapist or drunk wife-beater, the criminal is committing a crime. In the case of a drunk girl being raped, the girl is not committing a crime.
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read this yesterday. I was going to post it here but... didn't for some reason.
I didn't really see the appeal of Girls Gone Wild to begin with anyway, although I suppose it's mostly because of the "party" atmosphere which I'm not a fan of. Yeah, I'm a dull person will be doomed of no social life.
Eh.
-------------------- Okay, just to make it clear, there is a real world out there. No really, there is. I checked. Posts: 886 | From: Suffolk, VA | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ryda, I'm sorry. I should have quoted what ThistleS said to clarify my meaning.
quote:Joe Francis is the epitomy of much that is wrong with the porn industry. If you have to get your starlet drunk to get her to perform, you're a bad, bad pornographer.
I do agree that Joe Francis is the epitome of much that is wrong, and that he is scum. It's the concept of a person's getting someone else drunk that puzzled me. I still say that nobody can get me drunk but me. I agree that a person should have a right to get drunk and should have a right to expect not to be raped when they are drunk. My point had nothing to do with being raped. I was raped, and I definitely wasn't drunk. My point was that if you* are going to get drunk, then your* judgment is going to be impaired, and you* are likely to do things you* would not do if you* were not drunk. Since you* are likely to realize that this judgment impairment will occur, then I don't see how you* can excuse your* actions, such as appearing in a GGW video (not getting raped since that is not an action by you* but is the action of another), by saying, "but I was drunk." Your misunderstanding of what I meant probably was because I used the word "defense" in the earlier post instead of "excuse." Sorry. The girls/women certainly needed no defense as would a criminal, and I didn't mean to imply that they were criminals. I only mentioned "but I was drunk" was invalid for males, as well, so you wouldn't say, "Well, what about men? They get drunk too." As usual, I didn't express my meaning very well. If I could do that, then this post wouldn't be nearly as long.
*generic you, your
ETA: Please see the third quote in my sig. Thanks, wanderwoman.
-------------------- "This air we're breathing. Oxygen, isn't it?"~I’mNotDedalus, impersonating Vincent D’Onofrio.|"Sometimes trying to communicate can be like walking through a minefield."~wanderwoman "Give people a break. It's not easy doing a life."~Joshua Halberstam Posts: 4020 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Signora- while I agree that no one else can make you get drunk under normal circumstances, what I am objecting to is not Joe Francis "getting" these girls drunk but rather relying entirely on drunk performers for his pornography.
I'm not sure if you're familiar with GGW, but the idea is that these girls are really drunk and they will do anything. That should not be sexy. I subscribe to the belief that pornography does not just cater to sexual tastes, but influence them, and I think the Francis and his brand of exploitation-porn have made the "I'm so drunk I won't remember licking whipped cream off a stranger's thong tomorrow" genre more appealing to many. The fact that in order to get them to ditch their inhibitions/ good judgement, the girls have to be plied with alcohol, makes this type of porn morally reprehensible. Not to mention the many legal complexities of signing contracts while inebriated, under-21s drinking in the first place, and some performers not signing any contract at all.
No, no one was forced to get drunk. But that's hardly the point of my argument. I'm not defending the girls actions- I'm condemning Joe Francis for making money from a genre of porn that involves commanding inebriated women to do things they wouldn't normally do. Hence, "if you have to get your performers drunk (or seek out already drunk performers) in order to complete the scene, you are a bad pornographer." Porn performers should be comfortable with their actions drunk or sober, and their directors/ producers should not encourage their using drugs or alcohol to remove their inhibitions.
-------------------- Officially Heartless Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
ThistleS, thanks for clarifying. All I know about GGW is what I see on television when I'm flipping channels, and it disgusts me. You are definitely right, there's nothing sexy about it at all, but then, I don't think any "over-the-top" sex scenes are sexy. I prefer low key, romantic ones. But, that's just me. After reading that 5-page article, I am even more disgusted and hope the creep is punished as much as is possible. I'm as angry about the way he treated the reporter as I am about his treatment of the teenagers, and I hope she and they make him pay.
I think we're in agreement here. Sorry for misreading your post.
-------------------- "This air we're breathing. Oxygen, isn't it?"~I’mNotDedalus, impersonating Vincent D’Onofrio.|"Sometimes trying to communicate can be like walking through a minefield."~wanderwoman "Give people a break. It's not easy doing a life."~Joshua Halberstam Posts: 4020 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
GGW is the horrible porn and isn't worth watching? Truth. Joe Francis is an a**hole? Truth. Because he is an a**hole and the porn is not to most of our tastes we should ban it or condemn it in some other way and tell other people not to watch it? I disagree heartily here. Now this guy should certainly pay for his crimes, but the girls who decide to flash on TV (and from what I unerstand have to sign a consent form anyways?) are not exactly victims, here.
quote:Originally posted by Midgard_Dragon: GGW is the horrible porn and isn't worth watching? Truth. Joe Francis is an a**hole? Truth. Because he is an a**hole and the porn is not to most of our tastes we should ban it or condemn it in some other way and tell other people not to watch it? I disagree heartily here. Now this guy should certainly pay for his crimes, but the girls who decide to flash on TV (and from what I unerstand have to sign a consent form anyways?) are not exactly victims, here.
I for one am not advocating banning anything, or even trying to condemn people for watching it. What I am advocating is changing our cultural view of sex so that powerlessness or helplessness is not seen as sexy in a female. I think if that paradigm shift could occur then there would no longer be a market for this type of porn.
I don't think these girls are victims on the same order as, say, rape victims, but I do think that Francis is taking advantage of their youth and inexperience. Why are they always drunk? Is it perhaps because they would not be comfortable with their actions if they were sober? Why does Francis provide so much alcohol for them, and encourage them to drink? Could it be because he knows he would not be able to successfully convince them to take their clothes off if they were sober?
Also I think you're glossing over the myriad consent issues here. At various times Francis has been accused of 1) filming minors 2) providing alcohol for minors 3) not having people sign consent forms 4) having people sign consent forms when they were too drunk to be able to consent to anything.
-------------------- Officially Heartless Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not one mention of the story about him I read a while back about someone who made Joe Francis say humiliating things on camera...I don't know if it's a true story or not, but I remember reading about a person who filmed him being forced to say sexual things about himself that were potentially humiliating. If it's true, find that person who did that to him and make him do it again.
Posts: 105 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Zoidberg: Not one mention of the story about him I read a while back about someone who made Joe Francis say humiliating things on camera...I don't know if it's a true story or not, but I remember reading about a person who filmed him being forced to say sexual things about himself that were potentially humiliating. If it's true, find that person who did that to him and make him do it again.
The article does bring up the assault on Francis. It was a filmed occurence, in which francis was forced to use a dildo to penetrate himself. The person who committed it is serving eight years, I think. Apparently, he did it in retaliation for Francis' behavior with a young woman. Seems to have served to just make him more dickwadish.
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't get that far in the article; I only read the first page...I just remembered reading about that a while back somewhere else...
Posts: 105 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Zoidberg: I didn't get that far in the article; I only read the first page...I just remembered reading about that a while back somewhere else...
Not trying to be a jerk, but it's a bit odd to say there's "not one mention" of something in an article of which you only read the first page. You know?
-------------------- Officially Heartless Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Zoidberg: I didn't get that far in the article; I only read the first page...I just remembered reading about that a while back somewhere else...
Not trying to be a jerk, but it's a bit odd to say there's "not one mention" of something in an article of which you only read the first page. You know?
Yeah, yeah, yeah...frankly I thought the event I was referring to was made up and people were more likely to look at me like I had three heads for mentioning it at all, so I almost didn't.
Posts: 105 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
quote:The entertainment company that produces the "Girls Gone Wild" films and its founder pleaded guilty Tuesday to charges they failed to document the ages of female performers in sexually oriented productions.
Mantra Films of Santa Monica, California, entered a plea agreement in a federal court in Panama City, Florida, the Justice Department said.
Authorities said Joseph Francis, founder of Mantra Films and a related company, MRA Holdings, also agreed to plead guilty to charges to be filed later in Los Angeles, and to pay fines and restitution totaling $2.1 million.
-------------------- People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril) Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yay. That slimy excuse for a thinking person deserves....
Hmmm. Sorry. Ummm. That was my mean tenticled side emerging.
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Smoak believed the fine that the government agreed to was insufficient (it represents less than 3 percent of Mantra films” profits since 2002 and 12 percent of Mantra’s 2005 profits, and Francis himself makes about $40 million a year). So he went beyond the plea agreement and added several other conditions to Francis’ punishment. He’s still not going to jail, but they will hit him where it hurts worse than in his wallet: his pride.
The judge required Francis to perform from eight to 16 hours of community service here each month until mid-2009. That means the Southern California big-shot will have to fly across the country many times to humble himself doing scut work for local charitable organizations.
A local radio news feature reported that several charitable groups have stated that they will not accept Francis's community service. The Humane Society did say they always have openings for people to shovel out their pens.
posted
I saw that. I'm thinking time in the elephant pens might work out.....
-------------------- So many spankings! It feels so good! But at the same time, I don't care about meeting your family! - I'mNotDedalus: Posts: 3216 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree the guy sounds like an ass according to that article but I'm not so sure the girls he films are all innocent victims like everyone is portraying them
On the second page of the cite provided it says
quote:Club promoters pay Mantra up to $10,000 a night for the privilege of hosting Francis' film crews, sure to draw big crowds.
I doubt very much these promoters are just throwing their money away without advertising the bejesus out of a GGW film crew coming to their club
This means that most of these girls(if not all of them) knew weeks in advance he was showing up with his film crew and they made a sober conscious decision to come to that specific club on that specific night in the hope of being filmed doing outrageous things
So how can you say he is taking advantage of them? In the beginning he'd show up at random clubs and filmed girls who at least claimed to have been drunk(I don't detect any difference in those girl's behavior and the ones now who know in advance he will be filming them)
Lower down on the same page of the article it says
quote:Now that the brand is so pervasive, the women who participate increasingly appear to be calculating exhibitionists, hoping that an appearance on a video might catapult them to Paris Hilton-like fame.
Still once everyone knew what he was doing he certainly doesn’t have any trouble finding new girls who were just as willing to be filmed
Since this will probably come up…no I have never purchased nor have I ever seen one of his videos…I have however seen some of his infomercials(who hasn’t?) I’ve even seen the ones where he(I’m not sure if it really was one of the GGW videos or someone else copying him) takes a bunch of girls to an island and they do goofy competitions that are supposed to be sexy…I doubt very much all these women are kept continually drunk from the time he meets them until he takes them back home so at some point they are capable of deciding for themselves if they want to do these stunts and they apparently do
Posts: 100 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
These girls were both underage and intoxicated, ertceps.
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ryda Wong: We, as a society, have a right to get drunk.
We have a legal right, but I'm not 100% convinced that we have a moral right to get drunk. And it isn't at all like sleeping, if anyone feels tempted to make that argument, as sleep is required. To me, getting drunk to the extent that you cannot control your actions is morally wrong. This is not to say that raping a drunk person is okay -- clearly its not. Any reasonable person wouldn't want to be raped whilst they were drunk, rape is obviously wrong, but that does not mean that the act of choosing to get drunk is some-how morally permissible.
-------------------- Obi Wan: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes!" Anakin: "Um, isn't your last statement an absolute?" Posts: 166 | From: San Antonio, Texas | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
I have watched a couple of his early videos. Back then he had women that were at every party to encourage rowdy behavior. It was boring and repetitive. But, it was not anything that people weren't already doing. I've seen my share of home video boobage. He was just the genius that decided to sell the footage for $20. I think the biggest problem is that people in general will do any crazy thing if it is going to be video taped. And some people don't even need to be bribed with a crappy t-shirt.
I don't know how to stop something like this. Chicks have probably been flashing boobs since clothes were invented. Hedonism and crazy behavior is part of why people go to some of these places. Some people want to be so drunk that they will lick a stranger's thong, and have it be on tape because then they can look back and remember a time where they were brave enough to act crazy.
-------------------- I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[lol]](graemlins/lol.gif)
As usual, I didn't express my meaning very well. If I could do that, then this post wouldn't be nearly as long. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
