Greenguy's Board

Greenguy's Board (http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/index.php)
-   General Business Knowledge (http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Anybody remember this thread? (http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/showthread.php?t=23057)

deleuze 2005-08-15 05:04 PM

Anybody remember this thread?
 
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...highlight=rape

or this one

http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...highlight=rape

?

I wonder if their reception would be different if they skinned the board?

Linkster 2005-08-15 06:26 PM

I remember both of those quite well - its interesting however though to see what would happen if you come out and actually question the justification this time - Im not going to because Ive already heard it and Ive already made my decisions to not promote them.

Extreme John 2005-08-15 06:30 PM

Im sure Airek will be in here shortly to respond. Im curious Linkster your choosing not to promote the entire portfolio of sites because you personally are uncofortable with 1 of the sites out of 7?

Linkster 2005-08-15 06:49 PM

John - no offense meant at all - I'm not "comfortable" with two of the sites - and yes that will make my decision as to whether I promote a sponsor - a third site includes those two as "additional content" and without seeing inside the members area but knowing the standard practices today of most programs - I would imagine those sites are also included on the inside of all of the other sites.

Believe me its not a comfort issue - to me its a justification issue for me to deal with between me and my surfers - while there is one site that I would love to promote and would probably be doing a couple sales a day - the others keep me from adding it to my portfolio.

Ive also already heard a bunch of justifications this morning which some I agree with, some I disagree with and unfortunately the weighting right now is is the disagree column.

The funny part of the whole thing to me was (and the real reason I even responded to this thread) that the justifications used to me this morning were the same ones that the people in these threads posted here were using - and yet the people defending and giving the justifications this morning were the same people yelling BS at these other peoples justifications in the old threads.

ponyman 2005-08-15 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linkster
Ive also already heard a bunch of justifications this morning which some I agree with, some I disagree with and unfortunately the weighting right now is is the disagree column.

Did you hear these justifications on a board somewhere? I'd like to read them, too.

Extreme John 2005-08-15 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linkster
John - no offense meant at all - I'm not "comfortable" with two of the sites - and yes that will make my decision as to whether I promote a sponsor - a third site includes those two as "additional content" and without seeing inside the members area but knowing the standard practices today of most programs - I would imagine those sites are also included on the inside of all of the other sites.

Believe me its not a comfort issue - to me its a justification issue for me to deal with between me and my surfers - while there is one site that I would love to promote and would probably be doing a couple sales a day - the others keep me from adding it to my portfolio.

Ive also already heard a bunch of justifications this morning which some I agree with, some I disagree with and unfortunately the weighting right now is is the disagree column.

The funny part of the whole thing to me was (and the real reason I even responded to this thread) that the justifications used to me this morning were the same ones that the people in these threads posted here were using - and yet the people defending and giving the justifications this morning were the same people yelling BS at these other peoples justifications in the old threads.

Oh please understand, I am not offended, Ive always had a strict rule about how I do business or how I view how others do business. Im not here to judge anyone, nor would I ever take any judgments on me to heart, the only person I have to deal with on that level is my wife, children and family, beyond that anything I do follows those rules Business is Business not personal.

I respect your views, and by all means you have a right to do business in whatever fashion you choose, and I respect whatever fashion that might be.

Linkster 2005-08-15 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponyman
Did you hear these justifications on a board somewhere? I'd like to read them, too.

ponyman - no they were discussions with some other LL owners - not posted anywhere.

John - We've known each other for a long time and I kinda expected that you and I wouldnt have a problem with this :)

XPorn 2005-08-15 07:29 PM

I'm in the same boat with ya Linkster...

XPorn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linkster
John - no offense meant at all - I'm not "comfortable" with two of the sites - and yes that will make my decision as to whether I promote a sponsor - a third site includes those two as "additional content" and without seeing inside the members area but knowing the standard practices today of most programs - I would imagine those sites are also included on the inside of all of the other sites.

Believe me its not a comfort issue - to me its a justification issue for me to deal with between me and my surfers - while there is one site that I would love to promote and would probably be doing a couple sales a day - the others keep me from adding it to my portfolio.

Ive also already heard a bunch of justifications this morning which some I agree with, some I disagree with and unfortunately the weighting right now is is the disagree column.

The funny part of the whole thing to me was (and the real reason I even responded to this thread) that the justifications used to me this morning were the same ones that the people in these threads posted here were using - and yet the people defending and giving the justifications this morning were the same people yelling BS at these other peoples justifications in the old threads.


Extreme John 2005-08-15 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linkster
ponyman - no they were discussions with some other LL owners - not posted anywhere.

John - We've known each other for a long time and I kinda expected that you and I wouldnt have a problem with this :)

Nope even if I didnt know you there wouldnt be a need for a problem, business is business, as much as you want to sleep with me you cant have me, which means we dont have to be like that with each other |boobies| |pink |badidea|

Linkster 2005-08-15 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Extreme John
, as much as you want to sleep with me you cant have me, which means we dont have to be like that with each other |boobies| |pink |badidea|

Can we still at least share the same tanning bed |dizzy|

MrYum 2005-08-15 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linkster
John - no offense meant at all - I'm not "comfortable" with two of the sites - and yes that will make my decision as to whether I promote a sponsor - a third site includes those two as "additional content" and without seeing inside the members area but knowing the standard practices today of most programs - I would imagine those sites are also included on the inside of all of the other sites.

Believe me its not a comfort issue - to me its a justification issue for me to deal with between me and my surfers - while there is one site that I would love to promote and would probably be doing a couple sales a day - the others keep me from adding it to my portfolio.

Ive also already heard a bunch of justifications this morning which some I agree with, some I disagree with and unfortunately the weighting right now is is the disagree column.

The funny part of the whole thing to me was (and the real reason I even responded to this thread) that the justifications used to me this morning were the same ones that the people in these threads posted here were using - and yet the people defending and giving the justifications this morning were the same people yelling BS at these other peoples justifications in the old threads.

Apparently, this boat has at least 3 oarsman.

A couple of the sites look pretty good...a couple I wouldn't touch. Certainly not the first sponsor to push the edge too far...imo. No doubt, not the last either :(

Certainly doesn't do us any good as an industry when we portray the women as little more than cum receptacles.

susanna 2005-08-15 11:42 PM

I am out-raged!
 
Am I the only one questioning the "sleep assault" content? I am by far niave to the kinks of this world but kink is not assault. Where is the consentualism? How can it possibly pass the visa test? Wasn't Visa going nuts on stuff like this?

This on the same day that there is a thread/story out there on how Bush plans to attack rape and torture sites with the same tactics that they went after cp.

I find it hard to believe that gg and jim have chosen money over ethics on this one.

Useless 2005-08-15 11:47 PM

I merged the two threads. No point in multiple threads.

-UW

susanna 2005-08-16 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior
I merged the two threads. No point in multiple threads.

-UW


thanks UW I thought it was removed for a duplication and I started a more interesting thread (instead of copying it over).

Chop Smith 2005-08-16 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susanna
I find it hard to believe that gg and jim have chosen money over ethics on this one.

So is it the responsibility of Greenguy and Jim to censor sponsor content?

Ms Naughty 2005-08-16 12:21 AM

I'm going to stick my head above the battlements and say this:

The board look nice blue.
and
I will not be promoting RageCash due to the nature of the Sleep Assault site. I do not promote reality sites at the best of time and this particular site steps well over a line as far as I'm concerned. Anything that uses the word "assault" when it comes to sex is not promoting consensual sex.

The rest of you may do whatever you wish according to your own consciences.

Thank you, over and out.

SirMoby 2005-08-16 12:22 AM

I never liked the forced sites, drunk sites, tricked sites, skat and I don't like sex with animals. I know all that makes good money but I don’t like it and I don’t promote it. However, there are a lot of people that probably think I’m a sick bastard for profiting on naked women that obviously enjoy being naked for money.

For me to criticize the choice of others would be a bit hypocritical so I figure to each his own. There’s countless webmasters so no one needs me to make a buck and there’s also countless sponsors. I have a great deal of respect for GG, Jim and Extreme John and there’s nothing about Rage Cash that’s going to affect that.

susanna 2005-08-16 12:37 AM

I believe that there is way too many webmasters that blindly follow what trusted people like gg and jim do. They make it their business to have people following them and trusting their judgement. Dont fool yourselves, this board doesnt exist for the mindless posts of everyone that wants to say their morning hello's.

This board exists as a forum that attracts many people, most of which come here to hear industry news, to hear what others are up too and to learn from those trusted old timers (and at times newcomers).

When gg a jim condone something I feel is wrong I speak to them about it. Of course they do as they please but they are gracious enough to let me post to the contrary in the hopes that most of you out there will atleast think about what you are about to get yourself into. When I say gg and jim sold out for money, I also mean those of you out there marketing that site are also throwing ethics aside for money.

I always end posts like these (getting really tired of having to post about rape sites) with the question.....how would you like it if your wife/girlfriend/lover/sister/mother was fucked in her sleep because some guy thought that it was her fantasy?

Give me a break... there is only one type of person with that fantasy... the type is the person who likes NON-consentual sex.

When someone profits from a non-consentual rape site, even if its disguised as a reality fantasy site, I do not approve and I speak out.

You do what your own conscience says you should do.

babymaker 2005-08-16 08:11 AM

i don't believe in censorship or judging other's too much lol( if i hate a mutherfucker i hate them lol) but i too had a problem with that site when i saw the board change and checked it out just casually, i went again after all the controversy and watched the first free sample clip??? isin't that considered rape and illegal in most if not all states?? an unconcious girl being fucked against her will??? i understand it's fantasy but i can't promote that, i understand also that what i promote creampie can be considered by some to be immororal, but it is consensual, i don't want to be hated or blacklisted and i am not judging anyone, but to me it seemed not approriate. so while it seems as if we are voting here in a way, i put my vote for no, i am sorry, not like anyone needs my traffic :D but the line has to be drawn somewhere and while we are under extreme media scrutinty(while that should not be the reason!) it would seem this is an even worse time for a site such as this, not that i would believe that there ever would be one.

SirMoby 2005-08-16 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susanna
When I say gg and jim sold out for money, I also mean those of you out there marketing that site are also throwing ethics aside for money.

It always amazes me when people use the words "ethics" since it means so many different things. Is promoting a Couples Sex site where most of the models are NOT couples and they'll fuck any one for money ethical?

Does the same statement apply to you site as well?

Keep in mind I will not promote Rage Cash in any way but I see no reason to judge others for doing so. Aren't we all living in glass houses?

susanna 2005-08-16 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby
It always amazes me when people use the words "ethics" since it means so many different things. Is promoting a Couples Sex site where most of the models are NOT couples and they'll fuck any one for money ethical?

Does the same statement apply to you site as well?

Keep in mind I will not promote Rage Cash in any way but I see no reason to judge others for doing so. Aren't we all living in glass houses?


The reason to judge others for doing so is that its illegal. Do you promote rape sites? do you promote cp sites? all the same thing.

Is there any proof that the couples on my couples sex site are not couples? how do you know by looking at them that they are not? With regard to turning that statement around to the sleeping rape site, can you say the same thing?

My couples sex site is not hurting the industry anymore then the fake lesbian sites or the huge insertion or anal fuck sites....all done for money to apease someone elses kink. I draw the line at appeasing rapists kink.

Its against the law for good reason.


Whats next? reality porn that says its a great kink to fuck unsuspecting mentally retared people? There is a line, there has to be a line and its drawn BEFORE RAPE AND BEFORE CHILDREN OR INFIRM ADULTS. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

I am Canadian...the land of not judging anyone of anything but Canadians are not stupid...

ArtWilliams 2005-08-16 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susanna

I am Canadian...the land of not judging anyone of anything but Canadians are not stupid...

Both the sites would be considered illegal in Canada. The Sleep Assault would get the most attention because of the implied violence. -- art

SirMoby 2005-08-16 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susanna
The reason to judge others for doing so is that its illegal. Do you promote rape sites? do you promote cp sites? all the same thing.

Is there any proof that the couples on my couples sex site are not couples? how do you know by looking at them that they are not? With regard to turning that statement around to the sleeping rape site, can you say the same thing?

My couples sex site is not hurting the industry anymore then the fake lesbian sites or the huge insertion or anal fuck sites....all done for money to apease someone elses kink. I draw the line at appeasing rapists kink.

Its against the law for good reason.


Whats next? reality porn that says its a great kink to fuck unsuspecting mentally retared people? There is a line, there has to be a line and its drawn BEFORE RAPE AND BEFORE CHILDREN OR INFIRM ADULTS. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

I am Canadian...the land of not judging anyone of anything but Canadians are not stupid...

I noticed that you refused to answer the question about your own ethics. It's not very comfortable is it?

"Is promoting a Couples Sex site where most of the models are NOT couples and they'll fuck any one for money ethical?"

I'm continuing this discussion because I find it fascinating how people justify putting thier own values on others. I find myself sitting here wondering about Hilary Swank and everyone that was involved with the movie "Boys Don't Cry". I won't watch the thing because it's not my taste in movies but I don't think poorly of the people that did see it or created it. I'm thinking about your opinions on that movie.

BTW - I'm a professional. I own some of the same content that you do and I know some of the models that performed in it.

Greenguy 2005-08-16 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby
...I'm continuing this discussion because I find it fascinating how people justify putting thier own values on others....

Two words: Republican Cocksuckers :D

deleuze 2005-08-16 10:32 AM

A few points:

1) The site in question is not illegal;
2) Many if not the majority of people who get off on rape fantasies are women;
3) The site in question unlike some others that have been discussed here before does a very poor job at appealing to those with rape fantasies as there is no confrontation, no struggle, and no realized violation. The only people who I can see it appealing to are misogynists with no active fantasy life.
4) Still nobody has answered the question why a person or company promoting something controversial will be either blindly ostracized or accepted into the community based on what the gods deem worthy. I came here for some lunch-time drama yesterday expecting everyone to tell this newest rage to fuck off and putting their sites on an elite blacklist. This was based on how I've seen you devour other people with similar sites. Insitead I discover people here have just a short of memory as all the idiots at other boards they love to disparage. Boring.

Useless 2005-08-16 10:32 AM

Fuck it - I didn't want to engage in this discussion because I see it going exactly no where. There are those who view Sleep Assault as fantasy, those who don't like it, but aren't going to lose sleep over it, and those who are going start mini-crusades over it. Not a single cocksucker reading any post of this thread is going change their mind. This thread is ass-fodder.

Read the first thread attached to the very first post of this thread and you'll see my feelings about rape and it's promotion through porn. Even the dumbest fuck out there will know that I will not promote any site that I feel is rape-related or insinuates rape. Hence - for those of you who need it spelled out - I will not promote (or link to) the site in question. Does this mean that I will abandon Rage Cash's complete portfolio? Hell no. If you feel that by promoting any of their sites, I'm promoting rape by default, well...fuck you. That's my opinion. Fuck you and fuck your mother and fuck your mother's mother AND your mother's father too.

Let me toss this sticky load in your freshly washed faces. Most teens cannot legally consent to sex. Thusly, we (the U.S.) have laws in place to protect teens from their own horrible libidos. I feel pretty strongly about the presence of certain teen content in this industry. I hate seeing teens in braces and teens holding teddy bears and typically won't accept galleries or sites which contain such content. I also don't accept the word 'young' used on a teen site. Why? Because a young teen is not a legal teen. I understand the fantasy, but don't wish to feed it. Does that mean that I've abandoned all sponsors who promote teens with braces? Fuck no.

Look at the laws those wacky-ass Canadians have created to protect those filthy BDSM kinksters from fucking each other while bound. Canandians cannot legally use content where anything is inserted into a bound person. It is viewed as non-concentual. The bound gimp could be screaming "Fuck my hairy ass you evil bitch", but in Canada it's illegal to fuck his hairy ass with your freshly lubed strap-on because he's bound. Does this mean that Canadian webmasters don't promote BDSM sites at all? No. They simply use content that doesn't have insertion. But wait - the paysite they're promoting most definately contains other pics and videos which would be deemed illegal in their hockey playing country. Hmmm...what could they be thinking? They're thinking about getting paid, just like the rest of filthy fucking no-good porn peddlers.

What am I attempting to convey through my nearly meaningless ramblings? I don't know. I lost track when I got the ugly vision of a bound dude getting banged from behind with a 12 inch rubber cock.

Anyway, discuss this all you want since some of you really like the sound of your own voice, or at least the appearance of your own words. Just be smart about who you are calling unethical sell-outs. Maybe a few of you could get together and pay the board's expenses so that advertising wouldn't be a necessity.

Lemmy 2005-08-16 10:33 AM

A fantasy is a fantasy is a fantasy. Comparing the site in question to rape sites and cp sites is way over the line IMO. The site doesn't condone or promote non-consensual sex, but a fantasy, and according to the experts it's a fantasy that's fairly common.

From http://mentalhelp.net/psyhelp/chap10/chap10r.htm
Quote:

It comes as a surprise to some people that rape fantasies occur to about 24% of men and 36% of women (Knox, 1984, p. 283). Over 10% of women report that being forced to have sex is their favorite sexual fantasy (Doskoch, 1995). Remember, fantasies are not wishes! The rape fantasies of women may reflect a desire, not to be hurt, but to be attractive, to be passive, and to avoid the responsible for the sexual act.
Any healthy individual understands the difference between fantasy and reality, and while there are many fantasies that I personally find distaseful I'm not about to start policing peoples' thoughts. Suffice it to say that there are many - many - sites out there that I find far more objectionable than the site in question and I will make my choices on whom to promote based on my personal feelings in any given case.

On a final note; just because someone's ethics differs from yours, it doesn't mean they're unethical.

Jan Barnes 2005-08-16 11:02 AM

Lemmy,

I agree with some of what you are saying. However, I feel that a poor name was picked for the site.

By default, an assault involves physical contact with another person without their consent. Therefore, rape and assault are often used interchangeably.

I believe the sponsor should rethink the naming of the site and remove the reference to assault. By changing the name, the site could keep its focus on people who enjoy having sex while sleeping.

deleuze 2005-08-16 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior
Anyway, discuss this all you want since some of you really like the sound of your own voice, or at least the appearance of your own words.

You're talking to yourself again. Since you became a mod you've gone from a useless warrior to a useless lemming. Again this has nothing to do with ethics or personal tastes; it has to do with the way link list owners treat "outsiders." Will an advertiser and "friend of the family" be welcomed differently than a nobody? Did GG threaten to call the Florida State Troopers to report RageCash for running a rape site when he saw their portfolio? Did Jim say, sure you can advertise here but "You are truly the type of person that gives this business a bad name"? And finally we have the useless lemming who seems to have switched sides. For now he is asking for board members' silence and complacence when not too long ago it was the person with the "disgusting" content who was told to get lost; "But if you insist on attempting to defend your indefensble content, this could go on forever. You've nothing to gain here . . . if you want this discussion to go away, then you must go away." So it seems like the solution is for RageCash to disappear . . . but oh the advertising money . . . but that's not the issue . . . it's something deeper . . . have linklist owners proven to be commoners? . . . have they fallen off their high horse?

Useless 2005-08-16 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan Barnes
Lemmy,

I agree with some of what you are saying. However, I feel that a poor name was picked for the site.

By default, an assault involves physical contact with another person without their consent. Therefore, rape and assault are often used interchangeably.

:) In my private conversations with various unnamed webmasters, that was my point exactly. Very, very, very, very bad name. Drop the assaut and you have something very different.

I'm not sure how you could actually get your cock into a sleeping person, since my wife wakes up and pushes me away if just rub her ass when she's trying to sleep. That doesn't keep me from pestering her of course.

On the other hand, I've been with women who may as well have been asleep during the act because I could get more reaction from a blow-up doll with a slow leak. I always assumed it was just me. |huh

Useless 2005-08-16 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deleuze
You're talking to yourself again. Since you became a mod you've gone from a useless warrior to a useless lemming.

Wrong again dipshit. I've always been this useless and I have considered GG&Jim as friends long before being given the massive power of resetting sigs.

If you'd like to come after me, attack my opinions and statements instead of staying on issue - bring it on cocksucker. My dick is big enough to stretch even something as gaping as your asshole. |blowkiss|

Greenguy 2005-08-16 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deleuze
...Did GG threaten to call the Florida State Troopers to report RageCash for running a rape site when he saw their portfolio?...

I think there is a HUGE difference between the Sleep Assault site & a site that promoted drugging a girl & then molesting her. And yes, I did post about calling his local police about his portfolio of sites, some of which included some wonderful CP domains. I never did follow up on that threat, but I did report a couple of his CP sites to ASACP |thumb

Jan Barnes 2005-08-16 11:37 AM

Useless Warrior,

Agreed. If a man can have sex with his girlfriend without her waking up, either he is very poorly equipped or lacking in some very basic skills. Alternatively, he might want to check his girlfriend for a pulse.

However, back to the main issue. If a sexual activity is done on a purely voluntary basis between adult individuals, I do not care if the fetish involves baloons, shoes, or sleeping people. However, it is only natural to object to any reference to assualt, rape, or other illegal activities.

There have been similar debates in the past with regard to teen sites, and I remember that Flashcash changed the name of one of their sites to remove a contentious reference from the title (apparently, this board does not even allow me to type this word, but the title of Nabokov's famous book may give you a good hint).

Lemmy 2005-08-16 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan Barnes
Lemmy,

I agree with some of what you are saying. However, I feel that a poor name was picked for the site.

By default, an assault involves physical contact with another person without their consent. Therefore, rape and assault are often used interchangeably.

I believe the sponsor should rethink the naming of the site and remove the reference to assault. By changing the name, the site could keep its focus on people who enjoy having sex while sleeping.

I agree. The name gives associations that the content of the site doesn't.

deleuze 2005-08-16 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greenguy
I think there is a HUGE difference between the Sleep Assault site & a site that promoted drugging a girl & then molesting her.

I just don't see it. If one can rape a girl without drugging her then there would be no need for drugs. The intent and result are the same.

"Alexa has been up for hours studying for some tests she will be taking in college, up for almost 36 hours straight Alexa ends up falling asleep. When she does her roomate comes in and does what he has always wanted to do to Anabelle"

"Amaera is out when this clown jumps through her bedroom window and really has his way with her"

"Tuesday wanted to catch a quick work out after talking on the phone, she's a little tired from her workout and ends up falling asleep. Than our joker enters the room, he goes through some of Tuesday's stuff than realizes he might be able to tough her without her knowing, when he realizes she is in a deep sleep he dicides to go for broke and screw her. Excellent fucking on unsuspecting Tuesday"

Greenguy 2005-08-16 12:17 PM

deluze - so the entire argument that they wake up & enjoy the sex OR that it's a dream the girl is having is not good enough for you?

Greenguy 2005-08-16 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deleuze
A few points:

1) The site in question is not illegal;...

I was gonna try a different angle, but I just realized something. You don't have a problem with Rage Cash, do you?

You're problem is with Jim & me, correct?

deleuze 2005-08-16 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greenguy
You're problem is with Jim & me, correct?

Not necessarily Jim & you but the way the board in general in the past has treated people affiliated with these types of sites. I really fail to see the difference between what RageCash is offering and other rape sites that have been around forever. The adult community and this board in particular has always gone out of their way to place the owners of these sites in the same class as pedophiles and now RageCash comes along and everyone is backing off saying well so long as it's legal to each his own . . . I'm not here to judge.

sue-fl 2005-08-16 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susanna
I believe that there is way too many webmasters that blindly follow what trusted people like gg and jim do. They make it their business to have people following them and trusting their judgement. Dont fool yourselves, this board doesnt exist for the mindless posts of everyone that wants to say their morning hello's.

I take offense to that statement! I have no friends or family that do what I do. To have a place to come and talk to other people in the porn business in great to me. Do I do every thing gg&jim suggest on the board? I say fuck you for even implying I would, I do have a brain and know how to use it.

Of course this board is here to make money!! Nothing wrong with that. People do take the time here to help and offer advice, they care about things going on in others lives. So money is NOT the only reason this board is so successful.

As far as comparing this new site with the old thread, that is wrong. No where on this site does it mention any one being drugged or passed out drunk. It's females that have fallen asleep. Think about that for a minute. I have gone to bed damn tired many a nights. There is no way in hell my husband could get me totally aroused and have sex with me without me waking up!!! This site does not imply that any girl wakes up and freaks out and says no and he continues to fuck her. Excuse me if I offend anyone by saying what I'm about to say. There has been hundreds of times in my 28 years of marriage that I have been woken to his tongue or cock in various places. Rape?? Damn I say wake me up like that anytime you want to!!

No drugs, no passed out drunks, no one waking up terrified and fighting off an assault. No issue as far as I'm concerned!!

Useless 2005-08-16 01:46 PM

Maybe it's my lack of beauty sleep, but I'm just now seeing the issue here. It appears that vast majority of use agree that Sleep Assault is a rape site. The text quotes from the site itself are pretty damning, there's no denying that. So the main argument must be the lack of reaction or criticism towards its owners. Some of you would like to see a complete outcry against Rage Cash for conceiving the site in the first place, perhaps a total ban of their program. I think you realize that that just isn't going to happen. Even if they were'nt a board sponsor, I doubt that everyone would be going nuts right now.

If it was a site that was peddling true assault pics instead of staged bullshit, yes - we would be screaming foul and contacting the police and tearing the program apart. But it's not. It's fake. It's twisted, but it's fake. I think there are some who don't perceive it as rape because the girls aren't struggling against it, but I disagree. Again, the site's own text says it all. Like I've said, I won't promote anything or accept listings to anything like that.

I more than understand why people would be pissed and outraged. I really do. The first time I saw it I too referred to it as a rape site. I showed it to my wife and she agreed, though she appeared to think the whole premise was cheesey.

I truly hope that the site owners reconsider the site now that they see the reactions to it, but if I abandoned every program that did things that nauseate me, I'd been broke a long time ago.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Greenguy Marketing Inc