Rep. Foley resigns over e-mails

Trixie · 2006-09-30, 02:21 AM

What I think is fucked is the way abc has the transcripts of the chat sessions on their site. The double standard when porn is acceptable drive me nuts. NOT okay for pornographers to make money on porn, but perfectly acceptable for ABC to do it.

The chat is very explicit with Foley asking the kid how he masturbates, where he shoots it, how often, blah blah blah and the kid talking about how he humps his bed on his knees, etc.

On fucking ABC's website.

Pretty soon the only place it will be legal to publish porn is on "news" sites and media venues when they report on the lurid details of someone else who actually has the sex or makes the porn and gets in trouble or arrested for it.

ecchi · 2006-09-30, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trixie

Pretty soon the only place it will be legal to publish porn is on "news" sites and media venues when they report on the lurid details of someone else who actually has the sex or makes the porn and gets in trouble or arrested for it.

Over here (England) we have a daily newspaper published by a company part owned by a 'top shelf' magazine publisher, and part owned by a guy who runs Europe's largest chain of sex shops. It is sold as a 'proper' newspaper, and does have the main 'proper' news stories, but most of it's articles are of sex related news written to look like 'exposes' but actually just to titillate. It also prints photos of topless women to illustrate it's articles where possible, and used to print the 'nipple count' (the number of naked nipples in the issue) on the cover as a selling point. But it still considers itself as a 'proper' newspaper, and sells itself as such.

The most annoying aspect of the publication is that it uses it's articles to sell its owner's products. For example there was a two page article on a "sex cruise", condemning the fact that a filmmaker "lured" women into a two week cruise, then once at sea had sex with all the women and filmed it. The article made it clear that this was "disgusting" and condemned it. It also condemned the fact that the guy was selling the film on video. Then the article finished by saying that the journalist had seen the video and it was the most obscene film he had ever see. "But you can judge for yourself, send £19.99 plus £2.99 postage for the video, or £29.99 for the DVD to...... (publisher's address)". Oh, and the article failed to mention that the film's production company/distributor owned a 50% share of the paper.

2006-09-30, 02:21 AM	#1
Trixie Hey, can you take the wheel for a second, I have to scratch my self in two places at once Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: near Seattle WA Posts: 183	What I think is fucked is the way abc has the transcripts of the chat sessions on their site. The double standard when porn is acceptable drive me nuts. NOT okay for pornographers to make money on porn, but perfectly acceptable for ABC to do it. The chat is very explicit with Foley asking the kid how he masturbates, where he shoots it, how often, blah blah blah and the kid talking about how he humps his bed on his knees, etc. On fucking ABC's website. Pretty soon the only place it will be legal to publish porn is on "news" sites and media venues when they report on the lurid details of someone else who actually has the sex or makes the porn and gets in trouble or arrested for it. __________________ A Girl, a Guy, and a Tranny - Unique Indie Porn!