First shot fired in the War on Porn

[Boogie]

Suicidegirls is the first person to take a bullet, as they say, for the war on porn. take a look a their article :
http://suicidegirls.com/boards/Every...G/81705/page1/

Sep 24, 2005 07:44 PMHello,

I just wanted to let you know that, thanks to the "War on Porn," SG will be taking down a bunch of photosets and individual photos today.

Even the FBI agents paid to surf for porn find this ridiculous, but apparently sending people to jail for pictures of two consenting adults enjoying a little rope bondage is more fucking important than.... I dunno, pick any one of the million of better causes out there that the government could be focusing on.

So, I apologise heartily for having to do this, both to the SuicideGirls whose art is being fucked over and the members who are being treated like babies, but we really don't want to get shut down and sent to jail. As soon as legally possible, the photosets and pictures about to be taken down will come back. Until then, bid a fond farewell to your favourite blood-bathing beauties, rope-bound babes, and handcuffed honeys. Apparently they've no place in today's society.

If you want to help stop this stupidity, feel free join SG in donating to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Free Speech Coalition. If you live in the US, you can also send a letter to your representative in Congress.

in Summary, the US gov is upset about some consentual rope bondage. :/

[msanchez]

so are they getting hit by 2257 or is it some sort of other obscenity law regarding the bondage and blood and such?

[Preacher]

Interesting. Well SG is well known enough, normally tame enough and female run, so this might actually get some main stream press.

-Preacher

[babymaker]

it sounds as if they decided to not take a risk not that they were contacted or am i missing something?? that is a post not a news article??

[Boogie]

General FBI protocall

1) contact the offender and let them know that they are considering an investigation on a particular topic

2) inform them how terrible and lengthy a investigation can be, how much money it can cost them, etc.

3) convince them removing the offending material is better than an investigation.

i cant say for sure that's what happened here but i got a real good idea that's what went down.

[RawAlex]

I will say this:

I went and read the thread. They do not make it clear that they got "the call", maybe just some friendly advice or whatever.

Here is what I noticed: "pictures of two consenting adults enjoying a little rope bondage" - I am wondering if this might not be a bound person having sex? That would portray a "non consentual act", and might be considered obscene as a result.

I am not pre-judging anything here, but I am not shocked that a bondage site got the call.

Alex

[babymaker]

they really calll first???? i never heard that tho they just came and stuck it up your ass lol it's good to know, so at least i can just kill something if they don't like it.

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by babymaker

they really calll first???? i never heard that tho they just came and stuck it up your ass lol it's good to know, so at least i can just kill something if they don't like it.

It depends but if they want someone shut down and they're not sure they can win a legal case then they just explain that it will take years fighting it in court.

Many people are proven innocent in the courts after spending all thier savings on lawyers and being either totally broke or deeply in debt when it's over.

[furrygirl]

SG is hardly the first site to take down content.

And by the way SG is not owned by a woman or "progressive" in any way. It's all just smoke and mirrors, the owner is a right wing Bush-votin' racist zealot who verbally berates models into tears, and uses lawsuits against other punk porn sites and forces them into signing non-compete agreements. I could go on and on, but they are basically one of the most unethical companies in adult, ripped off tons of other adult webmasters who helped them start their site, and pay their models in spare change while bringing in tons themselves. (I mean that literally, the models earn *pennies* an hour, as the new hopefuls scramble and beg and plead for the chance to be cool enough to be on the site.)

About 30 models have left this month because they were tired of being treated like shit, or spoke out in defense of models who were kicked off. Many many of their models have left in protest of the company's "real self" over the years, but the last month has seen some serious upheaval in regards to models talking about the shit they went through, and possibly violating confidentiality agreements and risking civil suits. It's a group of women who are mad as hell, and not going to take it any more.

There's a group on LJ devoted to SG-oriented chat. Some it is is stupid drama, but it's worth reading for anyone with any illusions about "the pink site": http://www.livejournal.com/community/sgirls/

[Boogie]

furrygirl,

thanks for all that info. helps put things into perspective

[Lemmy]

NPR did a story on the DoJ's war on porn this morning. Oddly enough it was fairly balanced.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4865348

[RawAlex]

Mainstream "humorists" have caught onto this already. Millions of illegal aliens coming into the US each year, terrorist cells, drug smuggling, murders... so let's form a special squad to check out porn pictures.

The situation is so absurd... this is certainly one of those things that makes the public shake their heads.

Alex

[Preacher]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

this is certainly one of those things that makes the public shake their heads.

Is that a pun?

-Preacher

[Dr Bizzaro]

"As we all know, SG is removing pictures as a pre-emptive response to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his new front in the "War on Porn". "

[2msacras]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

NPR did a story on the DoJ's war on porn this morning. Oddly enough it was fairly balanced.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4865348

Thanks that was the story I heard this morning but wasn't awake enough to fully listen to it.

[RawAlex]

Jay Leno said something today about "the war on porn... thankfully we have enough porn in the strategic national supply".

He was joking with the band guy about his collection of porn... it's a pretty mainstream idea these days. Not quite water cooler stuff, but close.

Bush has declared war on his own people.

Alex

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by Dr Bizzaro

"As we all know, SG is removing pictures as a pre-emptive response to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his new front in the "War on Porn". "

Why wait to be a target when you can make yourself a martyr? I wonder if these people know they guy that owns perfect 10s? They would probably go well together.

Alex

[Tubey]

We all know that they are looking for violations to pump up the whole reason for the new 2257 law changes. Most sites that are clearly violating have been changed, removed or are hosted and operated in another country. So why not put up a couple of questionable photos and get some press time in all the boards and media. Get a few hundred thousand hits and make the story of how you had to take them down turn into a huge payday.

[furrygirl]

There's an absolutely brilliant response to this Suicide Girls nonsense over at BMEzine: http://iam.bmezine.com/?glider

There's no permanent link, so you'll have to scroll down a few entries to "SuicideGirls vs. the FBI?"

I agree with the poster, BMEzine is a site we can all tip our hats to when it comes tothe issue of freedom of pornographic speech. (Or at worst, be glad there there are always lower hanging fruit than your own site.)