What I find troubling is that it's so often badly done. Maybe there are only so many ways you can pose naked people on camera, but most of this stuff is about as subtle and imaginative as a freshman biology textbook.

In the still of this video, the guy kind of looks like Erik Estrada of his CHiPs days.

Seems a bit of a stretch to conflate DH Lawrence with Stagliano. "Chatterley" was a story to which the description of sex were a part, milk nymphos is ... OK, I haven't actually "screened" those works but I'm guessing that there's not much story to hang the sex on.
Then again, I'm not in favor of the prosecutions either. It's the equivalence between the two that disgusts me.

+1 on old rpm daddy's comment.

You can also give him my number if you want.

He does look like Eric Estrada.

It's an ugly ugly business, as I've gotten to know rather well, with one of my friends starting out as a male porn "star," then filming his own movies, and now, running his own websites. He's making a lot of money for someone barely 30, but how he treats these women like commodities, and seeing how messed up most of them are, is pretty sickening.

Still, like prostitution or stripping, it shouldn't be illegal. It would only send the business underground anyway. My friend runs his websites from Thailand now, so there's no way to effectively clamp down on porn.

"Like me, you may have never purchased a porn DVD in your life..."

Yeah, right.

Excellent post though Amy. I can't believe in an era when most people know about "Two girls and a cup" that anything between consenting and compensated adults could be prosecuted. That this man can spend the rest of his existence in prison is obscene.

On the other hand....

I had no idea what a "milk nympho" is, so I followed your advice Amy and googled it. Google directed me to a few sites (tnaflix, tube8, etc) where anyone, including young people, can access these films for free with no proof of age.

http://www.tnaflix.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ff59d3f5a1861e431d58

Now, if a bunch of adults get off by pooping milk and whipped cream all over each other's faces, who am I to take their freedom away? To me it's a John Water's type of carnival. But I would not mind seeing the owners of these websites prosecuted for allowing obviously prurient material to be passed into the minds of children and teenagers who have free, unlimited access to such material. There really needs to be proof of age or some form of prohibition before entering these sites.

He never said he never WATCHED or RENTED porn, only that he never BOUGHT a dvd

Eric:
They're called responsible and informed parents, and they're the best form of child-proofing available. The answer is to keep the computer in the family room where mom and dad can see what their kids are looking at. Sadly, fewer parents seem to care about what their kids are doing these days.

Just as when I was growing up there was always a kid that knew where his Dad's stach of playboys was, I guarantee you every kid in America who is 12 has a friend with an I-phone or laptop. You can't monitor a child 100%. You can legislate the distribution of pornography while preserving an adults right to view it.

I wrote about an example here on Amy's blog around Christmas time. In Washington state there was a guy who got busted for having a farm in which he and his buddies would film themselves having sex with different animals. When I told the parents there was a link to a link on our local news station that showed a guy getting reamed by a horse, all the other parents called bullshit. There was no way a responsible news network station would allow such a thing, and even if there was, their kids would be protected through nanny software or other controls. I showed them they were incorrect. This instituted a discussion with the teenagers about what they had or had not seen on the internet- they had all seen "two girls and a cup", while the parents didn't even have a clue what it meant.

My point being that even the most responsible parent today can't reasonably control what their teenaged children have access to. For those of you with teenagers- just ask them tonight, and you may be shocked.

No image, video or audio loads for me. :(

It finally loaded.

How in the world is it up to anybody other than the viewer, or reader or listener, of any non-harmful media to decide what is "serious" or "legitimate". I like what I like, and I should be able to decide to read, watch, eat, drink, or listen to whatever gives me enjoyment, as long as it isn't harming any innocent individuals.

Eric is right. Unless you're going to forbid your teen from going out the door, visiting friends, or going to school, you can't control what they see 24/7. It is shocking how easily accessed these sites are. You only have to click that you are "over 21". Nobody checks. No proof needs to be offered.

One other thing: Why is it people are so frightened that, because of President Obama's health care reform, the United States will somehow to convert to some sort of pseudo-Socialism, yet no one makes a stink over this sort of honestly frightening government interference?

I think the government should stay out of it for multiple reasons. Other than freedom of speech issues, it is impractical to prosecute purveyors of internet porn because, as lovelysoul referenced, you can just set up your website outside of the country and out of reach anyway.

>>My point being that even the most responsible parent today can't reasonably control what their teenaged children have access to. For those of you with teenagers- just ask them tonight, and you may be shocked.

Yup. (And god knows we've tried...)

>>The answer is to keep the computer in the family room where mom and dad can see what their kids are looking at.

Lauren,
That's just quaint!

Err, no its not. My parents did it with me and my sister (less than 5 years ago, for a rough timeline) and you can bet we weren't looking at porn on the family computer. I'm not saying parents can keep kids from always seeing this sort of stuff, but it is their job to do so at home, which is where most kids are probably looking at porn anyway (at home or a friend's house), since computers at schools, libraries, and other public places have filters for this sort of stuff. Block the Internet on the kids cell phone, limit the Internet to the family room, know who your kids' friends are and who their parents are (do they supervise their child's Internet time?) and you've done all you can as a responsible parent to keep your child from viewing porn.

The fact is, kids will always find a way to view it (see Eric's example), its only the method of getting it that's changed, and very, very few kids will be damaged for life as a result of looking a porn as a teen.

Eric, thank you for your reference to "two girls and a cup". I had never heard of it. In my day, we just used the term "scat video". Gosh, I feel old. Now I feel a little more with it. Thanks.

> I had never heard of it.

Yeah, Eric. Thanks.... Thanks oodles.

Seriously, y'know, I'm not prude, and I hate sanctimony in all contexts. But the point of public life is not to give everyone a hard time and make everyone feel as uncomfortable and base as possible. If you're a person who thinks pornography is degrading to women, or if you're truly concerned about about the coke-addicted daughters of divorce who might be involved in it, then there's no reason the culture should rub your nose in it.

That's not just about being an uptight Christian or Muslim. No matter how much you like fucking, you can't credit Hollywood or any commercial source as a source of sexual nobility. Apparently deep exposure to porn can scramble a young child's head, and I sympathize with parents who want to protect kids.

But there's always been nasty stuff out there... Painful scenes in movies or saucy passages in books or whatever, and teenagers aren't instantly corrupted by these things, especially when they come from good homes. Sensible parents don't teach their kids to pretend there's no Dark Side of the Force, they teach them to thrive in their better nature anyway. Jody and I have passed this topic once before.

I don't have kids. M'kay? Zero expertise. But I gotta think the way to keep them from going off the rails when exposed to weird and emotionally challenging materials has be to raise them to have steady heads in all the other contexts of life. There are corners of our hearts that are just not our parent's business, at least not directly, and erotic feeling is one of them.

>>The fact is, kids will always find a way to view it (see Eric's example), its only the method of getting it that's changed, and very, very few kids will be damaged for life as a result of looking a porn as a teen.

Lauren,
I do agree with that.

(Just had a look at the thread Crid linked. Quite a sweet exchange!)

Thanks, Jody.

I'm not saying parents have to be superheros, but I do get annoyed when people suggest more government regulation for stuff like this. To me, the damage to constitutional freedom done by the regulation is greater than any damage that might be afflicted on a teenager who sees porn on a friend's phone once in awhile. That's where my idea of parents controlling their teen's habits inside the home comes from. Them seeing porn once in awhile on someone else's computer or cell phone is probably not dangerous, as long as they have a good home life (as Crid said), but to keep them from becoming addicted, parents must monitor what teens are doing on their own computers and cell phones.

Yes, but as a parent, I worry almost as much about other people's kids and what they are being exposed to and how that affects the general discourse and how they relate to my own kids. Our teens live in a highly sexualized environment, whether we closely monitor them or not.

Crid is right that there have long been saucy novels and girlie magazines, but they seem...well, almost innocent, coming of age explorations compared to what teens can access today. Rape and beastiality? Young minds do not need to see those kinds of images. Today's porn is much more hard-core than your dad's Playboy's.

I'm not for more government regulation either. If adults want porn, fine. It just seems like access to minors could be better restricted, and that might be a reasonable trade-off or compromise for these companies to voluntarily make in order to avoid more regulation. After all, they're not making money on the minors anyway.

Many moons ago (early-mid 90's) I was helping on a tech support type site. The college professor was trying to find a way to segregate his high speed access from his sons. He didn't care that his 16 yr. old son might download porn. He was just worried it might splash on him.

This is kind of relevant. Parents probably also think it's everyone else's kids that look at porn:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36918121/ns/health-sexual_health

Am I the only one to read the headline wrong the first time and think it said "Trouble finding porn?"

If only "badly done" were enough.

I am troubled that, with all this talk of preventing the publication of things that are tasteless, have no redeeming artistic value, and clearly offend the community, the government still cannot appear to stop the very worst of it, like those last three Star Wars films. Where are the priorities?

I did raise kids. Still not sure if all were successful.

But, one thing I learned is role modeling is the most important parental task. You can talk until your mouth wears out with no good coming from it if you don't walk the walk.

If you smoke and booze, don't whine when your kid tries pot or other illegal drugs.

If you boast about cheating on your income taxes, or speeding, don't whine when your kids shoplift.

Some years ago, PRETTY WOMAN was popular. The plot was explained to me, and I decreed it would not be seen in my house. The concept of true love coming from an encounter with a hooker was and is preposterous. With all the talk, I wanted to see it out of curiosity, but realized that would be hypocritical.

Over time, as some of you indicated, the entire family saw it at one place or another.

I asked my daughter if she thought it was foolish to keep prohibiting it in my house, since everyone had seen it.

She thought a minute and said, more or less, "NO, DAD. SEEING THE MOVIE IS NOT THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS YOU HAVE MADE A MORAL STAND AND EXPLAINED WHY TO US. WE GET THE MESSAGE THAT AT TIMES GOOD PARENTS WILL MAKE A MORAL STAND, AND THAT IS IMPORTANT TRAINING TO US FOR WHEN WE ARE PARENTS."

The attitude so many express overlooks that, and takes a nihilist approach that since kids might be exposed to something anyway is a reason to avoid all moral standards. Then, wonder why we have a society with no standards.

>>he government still cannot appear to stop the very worst of it, like those last three Star Wars films.

Funny!!!