Still looking for that sexy Halloween costume? If you’ve been dreaming of dressing as former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, except naked and horny for other high-profile female politicians, you are so in luck!

Hustler has produced a promotional cardboard mask in the likeness of Lisa Ann, the adult film star who portrayed everyone’s favorite VILF in the Hustler-produced picture “Who’s Nailin’ Paylin?” (featuring porny Hilary Clinton and porny Condoleezza Rice) and its spell-checked follow-up, “You’re Nailin’ Palin: Interactive!” (co-starring porny Carrie Prejean).

Ladies, I’d really love to tell you to strap on Hustler’s “Parody Mask of Lisa Ann” this Halloween. But according to the instructions on the back, the mask is actually produced for men to slap on to you. Presumably in the boudoir. It reads:

PLACE ON FACE OF:

• Wife
• Girlfriend
• Mistress
• Significant Other

Doesn’t every man deserve to pretend to fuck a dead-eyed porn star who is pretending to be an absurd Republican politician? Just shut up and take the mask, Mistress.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments over a law banning video depictions of animal cruelty. The law was party inspired by the sensationalized “crush porn” craze. In crush porn, women stomp on small animals, in bare feet or in heels, in order for crush porn fetishists to get off.

Crushing puppies and kitties to death in the name of sexual arousal obviously ain’t legal. The question posed to the Court was whether disseminating video evidence of these crimes constituted a crime in itself—even if the evidence was being used to educate people not to hurt animals.

The Supreme Court will likely overturn the ban on “crush porn” and other filmed animal cruelties. I support upholding the First Amendment position on this one, but I’d rather I had never, ever become aware of the fact that there are people out there who actually get off on killing widdle aminals beneath their scary feets.

Luckily, a completely safe, totally adorable—and porn-inspired!—kitty video has surfaced to wash all those crush-porn thoughts away. It’s called “3 Cats, 1 Steak,” and I’ve watched it twice already. Enjoy.

“What’s up guys?” writes the “very masculine” bisexual white male, before getting down to business:

“[I'm] looking for other masculine buds out there who wear jockstraps,” this Baltimore Craigslist poster writes (warning: possibly NSFW photos of dudes posing in jockstraps). The poster, who runs an amateur jockstrap photo blog, is looking for any guy “into showing-off and taking pics in their jocks,” including:

* “Ex HS/college jocks”

* “military jocks”

* “guys who get jocked up for a weekend softball game or a trip to the gym”

* “lean/muscular/beefy” jocks

* “straight/bi/gay” jocks

* “any age” jock

* “doesn’t really matter, just look good in your jockstrap” jocks.

I have noted the parallels between the term “jock” (a person) and “jockstrap” (an accessory for that person’s genitalia) before. Perhaps the association has caused this blog administrator to conflate “guys who wear jockstraps” with “guys into wearing jockstraps” here. Because if self-identifying as a “high school jock” actually signals one’s interest in strapping on a jock for some Internet photography dude, I wildly misunderstood the social dynamics at my high school. Let’s just call jockstrap porn jockstrap porn, shall we? This amateur jockstrap pornographer ain’t looking for guys who like to jock up for a weekend softball game. He’s looking for jocks willing to jock up for him.

Recently, the problem of consent arose in two porn-inspired real-life incidents. In one, a teenage girl claims she was coerced into having drunken videotaped group sex with four men in her dorm. In another, a teenage girl apparently consented to drunken videotaped group sex with four men in her dorm, then instantly regretted it. Scenarios where four men have sex with one woman carry obvious challenges for establishing consent. Each sex partner must establish consent with every other partner. Each sex partner must be able to listen to every other partner to establish that each new sex act is OK. And each sex partner must realize that a group power dynamic can be a seriously coercive sexual environment for everyone involved, and discuss the act accordingly.

I don’t blame porn for these incidents, but I do think that if enthusiastic, informed, and sober consent were featured in pornography to the extent that gang-bangs are, it might help teenagers clear up consent issues before sex begins—not in the press, through the student judicial process, or in the courtroom.

But how do we make consent porn-ready? Let’s start at the beginning: Punny consent porn titles! Here are mine:

ID Check XVIII: Girls Your Own Age

The Mile High Club: Consent From Above

Consenting Adults II: Double Checking

Doggy Style: Consensual Seduction

Safe Word III: When “No” Doesn’t Have to Mean “No”

Totally and Completely Legal

Night of Refusal: No Anal Sex This Time, But Maybe Next Week

Sex, Extended Consultation Over Each Party’s Feelings, and Videotape

Backseat Bangin’: The Honda Accord

Suggestions?

I was pleased to read Jessica Wakeman’s interview with Diablo Cody this morning, because it features Hollywood’s most hated woman talking about Hollywood’s other most hated woman—Megan Fox. The talking, incidentally, is a major source of the Cody-Fox hate fest. People hate Diablo Cody for talking about being an ex-stripper (above), a big part of her unlikely success story; people hate Megan Fox for talking about being a hot girl in movies. Cody has been talking a lot lately to promote her latest film, Jennifer’s Body, which stars Fox as a hot high school girl who eats boys. Let the hate-fest begin.

How have Cody and Fox become so successful while inspiring such vitriol from the general population? Because both have found that success by acting like objects, and objects aren’t supposed to talk about being objects (they’re not supposed to win Oscars, either).

Men tolerate women who take off their clothes for money (or in Fox’s case, almost all of her clothes), because men like to watch naked ladies. Feminists tolerate women who take off their clothes for money because they know that the patriarchy encourages women to make a living objectifying themselves for men. But neither group really likes to hear women talk about taking off their clothes for money. Why? Because men don’t like their objects to be people, and feminists don’t like men’s objects to be feminists. Naked women who can speak for themselves don’t help dudes get an erection. But they also don’t help feminists argue that the lives of naked women are being destroyed by the men who like lookin’ at ‘em.

Granted, Cody generally catches the hate of the objectifiers, while Fox courts hatred from feminists. But it’s the same shit: Cody rose above her stripper past to win a trophy, while Fox is still working as a hot girl. Neither women ought to be considered better fit to talk about what that’s like.

Which is exactly why it’s interesting to hear people like Diablo Cody and Megan Fox run their mouths. One, because we never hear enough from the stripper perspective, the professional hot-girl perspective, the sex-worker perspective, or the porn-star perspective (the insanity of the Fox/Cody backlash is a perfect example of why that’s the case). And two, because those are exactly the women that feminism intends to represent—those that have been objectified for the benefit of men. Of course, Megan Fox doesn’t speak for every hot girl and Diablo Cody doesn’t speak for every ex-stripper, just as Sasha Grey doesn’t speak for every female in the porn industry. But it’s a hell of a lot better than people who aren’t strippers, sex workers, and professional hot girls insisting on speaking for them. We may not always like (or understand) what they have to say. But when these women talk, the worst thing we can do is tell them to keep their traps shut. After all, both Cody and Fox identify as feminists, even though we tend not do them any favors. Since we know that they don’t speak for all feminists, everywhere, what are we so worried about?

That being said! Here’s Cody on feminism:

K, here’s a problem that is holding back feminism and you see it on the blogs. We all hold each other up to an incredibly high standard in a way that men do not. Let’s say a woman directs a movie that’s not very good—everybody piles up on her. It’s, like, “No! You’re representing us! It has to be perfect!” And that’s not how it works! Women should be allowed to make bad movies. Good movies. Porno movies. Terrible made-for-TV movies. Women just need to be out there directing as many movies as men do. We don’t all have to be the model woman—what we need is to be more visible. We really, really are tough on each other.

And Cody on Megan Fox:

She really makes people angry! Girls hate her, don’t they? . . . I appreciate [her sense of humor]. I do not know her very well. Even having worked with her to this extent, I don’t know her very well because she’s very private and mysterious. But I’ve [heard] these things come out of her mouth. I’ve been present for some of these interviews and she is totally fearless. What she is saying is completely genuine. It is not a front. I think people think she’s trying to create some kind of image for herself that she’s not, but she’s a really, truly eccentric person. . . . I don’t think people know how to process her at all. I think it’s one of those things where she does not fit the mold in any way and it freaks people out!

Listen up, teens: Guess what happens when you get teen pregnant, you’re not allowed to have a smushmortion, and you can’t figure out how to secretly swap your fetus into your mother’s aging but willing womb. Umm . . . you get rewarded with an eccentric celebrity handler and sexy undies shots in Vanity Fair? Oh ho no, honey, that’s what’s happens to the dude. What happens to you is you get to hold the dang thing throughout a couple of tortured appearances on a crazy middle-aged lady’s FOX News program, and then everyone makes fun of you for being a hypocrite because GOD, YOU WISH YOU HAD NEVER EVEN HAD SEX. And then you have to raise it.

Did I mention your babby’s daddy got to do Tyra?

In this edition of Sexist Beatdown: Why Sady of Tiger Beatdown and I think that’s kind of fucked up, actually? BONUS: what to expect next in the SARAH PALYN SNOMOBLOWJOB TODD PALYN BAREBACK LEVI JOHNSON porn saga of the Palin family story, after the jump.

AMANDA: Hi!

SADY: WHY HELLO. are you ready to discuss THE TERRIBLE REVELATIONS OF LEVI JOHNSTON???? because there are a few, apparently.

AMANDA: Yeah. Apparently Sarah Palin attempted to engineer the EXACT SAME LEFT-WING BABY-SWITCHING CONSPIRACY that liberal bloggers speculated about after photos of pregnant Bristol surfaced during the campaign.

SADY: ha ha, yes. but the version of Sarah Palin in this article is capable of all trickery.

AMANDA: but not of cooking.

SADY: yes. it’s the intimate revelations of terribleness that are really special. she apparently often walked in on Levi and Tripp (?) and tried to trade him for Trig (??) saying, “I don’t want the retarded baby — I want the other one.” did you get a chance to read the full article?

AMANDA: No! That’s fucking insane! I just watched a video of Levi Johnston posing in men’s formalwear. I think I missed the good stuff.

SADY: well: one gets the sense that mr. johnston may be, let us say, playing up the anti-palinry a bit. it is a really, really anti-palin article. also, there’s some thing in there with meghan mccain throwing a fit because no-one will do her hair, which her rep calls a “naive mischaracterization.” NO-ONE COMES OFF WELL, i am telling you. only LEVI JOHNSTON, sole bastion of integrity among the corrupt palin clan. which: i kind of doubt it. but speaking of poses, you may soon have the opportunity to see levi himself in his underthings!

AMANDA: Yes, but at the same time, I think that Levi Johnston may be the only person who really gets it. First of all, Levi Johnston is hot. Like Sarah Palin

SADY: Ah, true. They have so much in common! Like Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker, really. But with more snowmobiling involved.

AMANDA: yeah, but Levi Johnston is willing to settle for that. By which I mean hot photo-shoots and tabloid-y tell alls, and a personal handler named Tank. And from my perspective, that’s a pretty good life!

SADY: Right? There was Trip and Trig and Tank… lots of T-names. I’m surprised he can keep them all straight. I can’t, really.

AMANDA: yeah. but the point is, he’s not trying to ruin the lives of a whole country of humans! i know: low standard

SADY: it’s true, it’s true! Sarah Palin does set an imposing standard for any young douchebucket. like, i guess i’m fine with the whole self-serving tabloid expose thingy as long as he’s not trying to make Jurassic Park illegal for promoting evolution. or something.

AMANDA: yeah. Also, if he keeps along this path, my election season prediction of him becoming a porn performer may come true!

SADY: ah, so now we see what this is about. your GAMBLING ADDICTION. i plan to tell all to vanity fair.

AMANDA: yeah. I wonder how easy it is, though, just to make up an absurd lie about sarah palin’s home life? Because at this point, i think people will really believe anything, they hate her so much. still, I wonder: could any mind have invented the “I don’t want the retarded baby” story?

SADY: it’s true! that is kind of unmatchable, all things considered. i automatically distrust anyone who tells these kinds of “and then I stood around and was awesome and watched everyone else in the world suck” stories. but, on the other hand, the idea that sarah palin, at home, “would literally say things that did not make any sense.” that is sensical.

AMANDA: I don’t know. I can’t hate him. he doesn’t seem like a liar to me, and any overblown statements i just have to attribute to him enduring media scrutiny for having the grandson of a famous crazy lady while in high school. i didn’t have to endure any of that shit in high school, and i was still kinda bratty

SADY: yeah, exactly. he does, all things told, come across as a regular dumb dude that you’d maybe make out with in high school. who is maybe still a little bitter that sarah palin made him cut off his mullet (the mullet plays a crucial role!) and threatened to spray-tan him.

AMANDA: dude, NO

SADY: i don’t MIND levi johnston so much as i mind the media creation of “Levi Johnston: Totally Admirable Guy! Who is Cute! And Also Sexy!” like, one thing i have learned from the levi johnston thing, as a whole, is that if you accidentally get someone pregnant in high school you can end up a sex symbol. and if you accidentally GET pregnant in high school, you end up a tragedy.

AMANDA: bummer. you’re totally right. imagine a bristol palin interview treatment that was super fun and sexy like this one!

SADY: I KNOWWWWWWWW.

AMANDA: i think the closest bristol could get to that would be doing an US Weekly How I Got My Body Back.

SADY: and yet? i think if one could give bristol a year or two and get her away from the whole family dynamic? she would be a far better storyteller. SHE WAS FORCED TO MARRY THE GENTLEMAN WHO STOLE HER VIRTUE. AS IN YE OLDEN DAYS. if you want dirt, that lady is the one to get dirt from. should she ever be in a position to reveal it.

AMANDA: and her options were: have the baby, or have the baby and have your mom steal your baby. although i would bet that bristol and levi’s porn performance options are roughly equal.

SADY: um, yeah. i’m kind of surprised that there’s no bristol “paylin” porn on the market already. maybe they’re waiting until they can get levi?

AMANDA: oh man—mind went slightly insane imagining all the creepy options available. “trig palin isn’t the only thing sarah wanted to trade”

SADY: you know. every now and again i realize what life would be like if i had no scruples. and i imagine myself rolling around on a bed of pure gold with a mattress stuffed with $1,000 bills.

AMANDA: and a handler named Tank!

SADY: and all i would have to do is to invent some scenario whereby levi “johnson” and todd “paylin” bond – WITH TANK, TANK’S NAME COULD STAY – over snowmobiles and enthusiastic outdoor sexual escapades.

AMANDA: what does it say about society that one political family’s story translates so easily to pornographic storylines?

SADY: power corrupts. and power within a tiny little town in the middle of nowhere where the kids have nothing to do but make out to conserve their bodily heat and their mom is better suited to image-making than rational thought corrupts absolutely. or something.

Aww, I miss the ’80s, when the media pumped a veritable sea of licentiousness into American ears through the radio waves instead of this half-assed T-Pain shit. Also: He’s talking about Prince, right?

“Through another picture series I want to take a view on the more sexy side of the pageboy,” wrote Hair Porn Dude, as the tone switched from style advice to sexy time. “As this WWW pages do and will not contain any nudity, the pictures do not show it, but you can imagine where they came from. ”

He then goes on to say that if you cut your hair into a bob, you will likely be associated with prostitution (it’s a good thing): “There are so many erotic aspects of this haircut—a lot of men love it and some women already know that. The professionals seem to know even better than the usual ones—they know how to attract and they dare to look that way, where so many others are still too afraid to try. (don’t you also associate a prostitute with a pageboy cut, and don`t many films show one with that haircut?)”

What’s creepier: the smiley emoticon, or the sorting of women into”prostitutes” and “usual ones”? But on to the sexy photos:

“Isn’t she lovely?” hair porn dude opines. “She’s called Joanne Guest, and she’s a famous model—I know why.”

Pssst: Here’s why:

Hair Porn Dude, it seems, ain’t the only one crushing on the erotic bob. The men who lurk on the “Bob Haircut Message Board” are just waiting for a bobbed girl to  join them in their private MSN chat-rooms (send them your pics!).

Back in 2006, bob wearer Claire fell into their midst. Claire wanted to talk about bobs:

I’m a girl from Holland and I am a really bob lover. I like to talk with other girls/boys about this haircut. If you also like this, we can shear our intrest!

And Tom wanted to talk about bobs, privately:

Hi Claire, i’m Tom from France. Have u got msn ? we can speak together about bob haircuts … & share our pics …

Claire edged the conversation back toward salon-friendly:

Hi Tom. Sorry I don’t have msn. How nice that a man like the bob haircut. 10 Years ago, I was a girls with long hair. Than I moved and decide that is was time for a makeover. That was the beginning of my love for the bob. Now 10 years later I still have a bob, and i still love it! I try to convince other girls to cut a bob and 2 colleaques did it, they look fantastic. So the wirld looks much better!

But by that point, the fetish could not be tamed. Tom replied:

Lol very good …!!! and have you got any pics of your own bob ?  for me i love it since a few years & i don’t know why but i find this cut very sexy. it makes the women so beautiful and so “fatal”…  My e-mail is Halflight@hotmail.fr if u want to have this discussion just between us!

conway29 offered up his resources:

Hi clare, i like the bob cut too. I have a vast amount of bob cut pics on my hard drive, would love to share pics with u if u want.

Dave S. got explicit:

Hi Claire! I don’t think it is difficult to find men who like bobs…. for me its a very special thing and definitely the most erotic haircut… my girlfriend often says, that for me it seems to be some kind of fetish :-) Feel free to contact me, i would like to chat with a girl that loves bobs! my addy: mercer41hotmail.com. Cheers!

Mark joined in:

he Claire, i’m Mark and i live just west of London. I’ve been a huge fan of the bob for ages now and would love to know what women like about it. e-mail me at marktaylor843yahoo.co.uk—it would be great to chat to someone about bobs!

Newton piled on:

Hello bob lovers. I am male and therefore do not have this haircut but if I was a girl I would because I totally love it. The Pageboy is my favourite. I would like to make friends with other bob lovers (male or female). My address is neilcox85@yahoo.com.

And onL

Hi Claire.  Would you you not like to make friends with me Newton?  I am a true bob lover. I hope to hear soon.

When Claire returned, she didn’t have a bob anymore:

Hi everybody. I am happy that so many man like the bob. In the meantime my hair is something longer now, but I like to change, jaw line, shoulder, shaven nape, it doesn’t matter!

Newton was undeterred:

Hi Claire it’s me Newton again.  Did you want to be friends with me? I am a huge bob lover. My E-Mail address is neilcox85yahoo.com as my real name is Neil Cox. I hope to hear soon.

And finally, a guy showed up who Claire might actually be interested in speaking with:

hi claire i am david from england. i used to have long hair but recently i got my girlfriend to cut my hair into a bob and i love it. she undercut my hairline at the back and buzzed my neck. it feels wonderful. it just goes into a ponytail for work but when i come home i cant wait to show off my bob.i should of had the chop years ago !!! i would like to see more men bobbing their hair.love and bobs x

But by then, she was already gone.

But Wakeman errs in her either/or assumption about the sex act: that facials are either grounded in mutual respect, and elicit pleasure, or are grounded in degradation, and elicit humiliation. In fact, facials can imply all of these things, though we rarely analyze it all in the moment. Plenty of sex acts made popular in mainstream pornography, like facials, are based on achieving male pleasure. Under this model, the female’s pleasure is derived by successfully pleasing the male—and in the process, allowing herself to be degraded. As Amanda Marcotte writes, “our culture constructs sex as something women do for men, and men do for fun.” That model of sexuality is undoubtedly objectifying for women. But it nevertheless—voilà!—conjures up an idea of “pleasure” for both sex partners.

Interestingly, Wakeman concedes that the facial is an act loaded with objectification and subjugation—in porn. When this act is removed from the context of pornography and placed into the bedroom of a Man and Woman Who Love Each Other Very Much, however, those demeaning undertones disappear for Wakeman. I can understand that: actually thinking about the implications of why we like jizz on our face tends to put a damper on the whole mutual-attraction-to-degradation thing. So what do we do? We compartmentalize. When porn stars do it, it’s degrading; when we do it, it’s respectful:

I think leaving facials up to the porn stars—actors who are making the facial appear to humiliate the woman—is what keeps it looking demeaning. Certainly some facials are depicted in porn as humiliating or degrading, but not every man who wants to give a facial wants it to degrade and humiliate just like it looks onscreen. Many do love and respect their partners, and know, to varying degrees, that porn isn’t real. Likewise, some of those female partners enjoy the act as well.

When Wakeman liberates the facial from the demeaning clutches of the porn industry, she performs a useful little trick for us feminists—she separates her sex life from her personal philosophy. We all perform this function in our daily lives—detesting cruelty to animals while eating meat, denouncing philanderers while cheating on our wives, denouncing corporate America while smoking cigarettes. But it’s a particularly common move when it comes to sex. Why? Because getting off is very necessary, very much informed by a tradition of male dominance over women, and can be very, very hard to accomplish if you only allow yourself to get off progressively. Of course, that doesn’t mean that enjoying performing or receiving facials means that you hate women, or that you have no self-respect, or that you’re a bad feminist. It just means that the patriarchy affects a lot of the things that we perform and enjoy on a daily basis, and it’s good to remember that our attempts to recast these acts as “empowering” isn’t so much transgressive as it is convenient.

See, facials are like weddings. We all know that the institution of marriage is one of the patriarchy’s all-time greatest hits, in which women are sold into sexual slavery from father to husband in exchange for livestock. And yet, who derives the greatest joy from weddings? Women! It’s the craziest thing. But even though we all know that weddings were clearly institutionalized to facilitate the willing subjugation of women, feminists figure out a way to do it anyway. Why? Probably because even though we all know it’s sexist as fuck, weddings—like facial ejaculation—still make some people happy.  And feminists deserve to be happy, too. But that doesn’t mean we should forget about the sexist tropes that sometimes inform our happiness (and our sex lives).

MVC, pre-makeover

Until very recently, motorists traveling along Leesburg Pike in Falls Church and shoppers at MVC Late Night Video, a sex shop that sits on that road’s busiest stretch, were blissfully unaware of each other.

Thanks to thick black tint that darkened MVC’s large front windows, folks looking for the latest adult DVDs, magazines, and sex toys could browse without fear of someone they know driving by and seeing them. Drivers could chug right past the nondescript building and pretend the place was just a regular ol’ video store that happened to stay open very, very late.

But a couple of months ago, the tint came off, and all of that changed. Drive by MVC today, and you’ll see a clear window filled with mannequins dressed in lingerie, as well as rows and rows of DVDs. The store is separated from the street by a small service road, so you won’t get close enough to get a good look at the cover of, say, Team Squirt #10, but you might be able to make out the face of the person thinking about buying it.

An employee who declined to give his name says the removal of the tint was a strategic move to make the sex shop seem less shady and “more friendly to couples and women.”

“With the tint, it made it look worse than what it is,” he explains. “So, we took it off and put the lingerie up front so women drive by and can see it’s like Victoria’s Secret.”

MVC isn’t exactly like Vickie’s. The lingerie at MVC is a bit more tawdry and, well, Victoria’s Secret doesn’t sell butt plugs the size of traffic cones. But the employee insists that more women visit now that they can see the place isn’t crowded with creepy guys in trenchcoats. He says a lady friend who lives in the area and never would’ve come in before is now a regular.

Still, what about the establishment’s base—the guys who like to sneak in on their lunch break and pick up a little porn without anyone knowing?

“Some guys may have preferred it, but this isn’t a porn store that needs tinted windows, it’s a sex shop for men, women, and couples,” the employee insists.

A survey of customers at the MVC today revealed that few of them had even noticed the change to the building. Most of them grunted some form of “didn’t see it ,” so either their attentions were, understandably, not on the building’s remodel during their visit, or they just didn’t feel like chatting up some woman standing outside of their favorite sex shop holding a notebook.

Only one man, a staunch opponent of the new look, stopped to express his outrage…on his way inside.

“They’ve gotta put the tint back—people wanna keep their business on the low-low,” he says. “And you don’t want a co-worker driving by like, ‘I know that person,’ and then saying, “Hey I saw you at MVC on your lunch break!’ They gotta put the tint back.”

The anonymous employee says the store has gotten a few more community complaints than usual since the curtain came down (“Don’t you know there’s a school nearby,” is a typical one, he says), but the store’s neighboring businesses don’t really seem upset by the change.

Sam, a manager at City Diner, across the street, says the new look is “nicer.” “You can see the girls, the mannequins, with their stuff on—it’s nice, you should be able to see that,” he says. So no complaints from families who frequent his eatery and now have a pretty clear view of MVC’s interior? “No way—what’s better than sitting down and having a hamburger and seeing some nice lingerie?” he says.

“Movies,” he parrots back to me without inflection.

I look from him to the other bike guy, who’s suddenly very interested in stripping the wheel in his hands. I introduce myself as a writer from the City Paper and ask him about the movies again.

“Ugh, god,” he says after he realizes I’m not only here for the movies, but I’m here to write about the movies. He cradles his face in his hands and mumbles something incoherent into his palms.

The shop is silent for a second.

“Yes,” the man finally says. “This is the bike shop with the porn in the back.”

But that’s all he’ll say. Clearly, bikes are his thing, not smut. Before going back to what he’s doing, he points out that technically–technically–the porn is a separate business from Rollin Cycles. Hence the dirty white banner over the entrance that reads Video 2000. That’s also why the movie section at the back of the store is cordoned off from the rest of the operation  by a graveyard of bike frames and tire carcasses. The man behind the counter (who won’t give me his name) demands delineation.

But Charles–the heavyset man with the glasses who’s currently cataloging DVDs and nonchalantly listening to our conversation–Charles “wouldn’t be a business man” if he wasn’t willing to talk about his video operation with a journalist.

“Hear that guys?” I say to the mechanics. “No such thing as bad press.”

“Yeah. Right,” says the guy behind the counter, aware, perhaps, that this is not an entirely accurate translation of what Charles just said. On cue, the other mechanic ignores me. (Later, as I’m leaving the shop, the mute mechanic will confide that he doesn’t actually work at Rollin Cycles, and is there to use the shop’s bike stand to replace his tire.)

“Exactly,” Charles says, staring into the back of the mechanic’s head before turning to me. “What would you like to know?”

Turns out, the shop sells and rents both adult and general release cinema. Some really good general release cinema, at that: Dawn of the Dead. Silence of the Lambs. A lot of Michael Douglas movies.

There are movies here that I would probably rent if I lived near Logan Circle and weren’t in the 21st century and addicted to the convenience of Blockbuster Online. I look around a little more. An orange and black Ruskin Sport leans against what looks like the family section. A blue Iro frame with no wheels is propped up against the lower dramas. A Schwinn obscures a small portion of the extensive horror section.

Charles apologizes for the mess and explains that up until a year ago, Video 2000 was the only business in the building. But the market for in-store rentals, especially porn, which is cheaper and more accessible online, is disappearing. So he decided to let the surly mechanic out front, a friend of his, try running a bike repair store. The decision was a success, and they added sales after Fuji cut them a deal.

Then he shows me the porn room, which is respectfully separated from the two walls of general audience by a cheap red curtain. Inside the alcove are several racks of every-day porn: Pretty boys with pretty girls, pretty girls with pretty girls.

But there’s a real drought of weird. Nothing for dwarf fetishists. No porn with pregnant actors. Maybe it’s there, but I don’t see anything for shitters, pissers, or frotteurs, either. Even the closest-but-not-quite thing to mainstream in the porn community–watchers of gay porn–get the short-shrift here. There’s only a handful–literally, there are only 5 or 6 gay movies–of dudes on dudes. And you can just forget about chicks with dicks.

“Our customers are more heterosexual,” Charles says, and adds that the few customers who buy gay porn normally buy a lot at a time, though he has no idea why. Also, gay porn costs him twice as much as straight porn, which means he has to rent a gay DVD twice as many times as a straight one to make his money back.

As we return to the front of the shop, Charles, who has been in the movie business for years, confesses that he doesn’t think Video 2000 will be around much longer.

“It’s dying,” he says.

The surly mechanic looks relieved.

Last week, the Maryland state legislature threatened to withdraw $424 million dollars in funding to the University of Maryland if its College Park campus proceeded with its plan to screen the satirical hard-core porn “Pirates II: Stagnetti’s Revenge.”

University officials nixed the screening, but allowed a campus student group to show portions of the film “in an educational context”—with ACLU reps speaking on free speech issues.

Now, Republican state senator Andrew P. Harris, who led the anti-porn charge, is moving to ensure that, in the future, hard-core pirate sex will be contextualized in an educational setting that will address more than simply his own ass-hattery:

Mr. Harris said Monday he plans to insert language in the state’s capital budget that would require the university to come up with a plan that will address the health and social concerns that are attributed to pornography, in the event an adult film is ever showcased on campus again.

Photo by St3ve

Earlier this week, I explained, ever-so-respectfully, why I thought sex-positive feminism was boring and dumb. In this edition of Sexist Beatdown, a chatty-thing, Tiger Beatdown’s Sady kindly explains how she came to personally identify as a “sex positive feminist” by being the only employee in a sex shop who didn’t know her anal nerve endings from the ones in her “cooter,” and I realize that a preponderance of rope restraints may be the only thing keeping me from the dark “sex-positive” side. Enjoy!

AMANDA: ok. so. sex sex sex sex feminism sex

SADY: Indeed! I have, at times – many, many, MANY times – identified as a “sex-positive” feminist. Yet your article demonstrated for me some of the reasons why that can be annoying even to my very own ears!

AMANDA: yeah, and the issue is actually a lot more interesting than the form it was presented in my post (”rant”)

SADY: Well, I feel like “sex-positive” is kind of a necessary construction, or was, at a certain point, when people were arguing with each other over whether porn, or heterosexual intercourse, was inherently oppressive to the ladies because of The Sexism. I even feel like right now we need to talk about ladies having sex drives and bodies that can enjoy sex and how that is not just necessarily some thing women inexplicably do to gratify man boners!

AMANDA: incidentally, i identify as a man boner gratifying feminist. i definitely agree with you, and i think the history of “sex positivity” and “feminist” is part of the reason it sort of nonsexually rubs me the wrong way. i just think at this point it’s so obvious that feminists are not sex-negative. but i am a young female feminist-identifying person, so maybe it’s not as obvious to, say, feminist-hating middle aged men.

SADY: RIGHT? They probably think you are out luring the man boners into wood chippers or something. OR marrying dudes so you can then divorce them, which I hear is quite popular. OR, you are a big old slutty slut slut boner slut. ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE TRUE, in the mind of the Middle-Aged-Feminist-Fearing-Dude.

While in Mexico over the weekend, I happened across a bargain bin full of over-the-border delicacies: Mexican porn comics selling at 8 pesos each. Behold: Thinking penises! Dialogue I do not quite understand! Women who look like they’re not wearing shirts even when they’re wearing shirts! This week, I review the copies I picked up. De nada, guys.

Previously: “Colegialas Ardientes,” reviewed; “Golosas del Sexo,”reviewed.

Title: “Historias Eroticas: Lujuriosos apretones ¡de CHICHES!”
["Erotic Histories: Lusters squeezing the BREASTS!"]

Distributor: “Seductora Sexual”
["Sexual Seducer"]

Plot: A married couple celebrates its eighth anniversary by doing it in the car. Then, the husband goes on a business trip, gets drunk with some lady, gets a boner, has sex with her. At some point, a gun is brandished and the lady passes out, but that part lost me.

Sample Dialogue:

José Miguel y Linda tenían ocho años de casados.
[José Miguel and Linda had been married eight years].

Precisamente, venian de festejar aquel acontecimiento con una cena.
[Indeed, they had come to celebrate the event with dinner].

JOSE MIGUEL: Wait. Wait a minute.
[JOSE MIGUEL: Espera, déjate tantito].

LINDA: ¡Que no, Chihuahua! Para eso tenemos nuestra casa.
[LINDA: No way, Chihuahua! For this, we have our house].

JOSE MIGUEL: Anda, dámelo como regalo de aniversario de bodas.
[JOSE MIGUEL: Come on, give it to me for an anniversary present].

LINDA: Humm … Está bien, Puedes mandarte en poco.
[LINDA: Humm ... Okay, you can take me a little bit].

JOSE MIGUEL: Gracias.
[JOSE MIGUEL: Thanks].

He does.

—

SPANISH LESSON: “Chihuahua”: invoke it.

BIEN: Ummm . . . now I know what “chiches” means.

MAL: Boring as hell. Seemingly nothing to do with chiches. Plus, no penis thought bubbles.

DETERMINING FACTOR: Overly long.

RATING: A big cero.

Uncovered in the tourist shops of the Yucatán: cartoon Mayans, glibly fucking each other afront the great architectural acheivement of their civilization, Chichen Itza, exquisitely rendered on a set of collectible shotglasses with the script, “Maya Sutra.”

So, is this kitschy Mexican representation of the nation’s native culture more or less offensive than one you might find in the United states?

The scenario reminded us of our own nation’s history. “Would we sell shot-glasses of Native American chiefs having sex with each other with full headdresses on, outside Indian reservations?” one of my travel companions asked.

I don’t know. Would we?

Native Americans selling conservationism

Native Americans selling American pastimes

Native Americans selling popcorn

Actually, yes, we probably would do that.

“Perhaps,” my travel companion posited, “It is more acceptable to mock the Mayans in Mexico than it would be in the U.S. The civilization is lost. Few direct descendants of the Mayans remain.” She paused. “Well, I guess that’s because the Spanish killed all of them and took over their land.”

Sound familiar?

Perhaps, in actuality, the Mexican native sex shotglass artists and distributors of the world learned to commercialize their oppression from the best—their neighbors to the North. After all, they’re only selling ‘em because we buy ‘em.

While in Mexico over the weekend, I happened across a bargain bin full of over-the-border delicacies: Mexican porn comics selling at 8 pesos each. Behold: Thinking penises! Dialogue I do not quite understand! Women who look like they’re not wearing shirts even when they’re wearing shirts! This week, I’m be reviewing the three titles I picked up. [Read the first installment here]. De nada, guys.

Title: “Golosas del Sexo: ¡Revienta mis pelotas a sentones!”
["Sweet-tooths of Sex: Burst my balls to (dirty word not in the dictionary)!"]

Distributor: “Textos de Lujuria Y Pasión”
["Texts of Lust and Passion."]

Plot: Sexy tennis player shows the guys at the club her sentones, or whatever. Plus some bisexual sub-plot, or maybe they’re just friends.

Sample Dialogue:

Sin dejar de moverse, se metió un par de dedos en la verija. Los metió y los sacó para volver a meterlos y volver a sacarlos
[Without stopping moving, she put a pair of fingers in (what I think is the vagina). She put them in, then removed them, in order to return to put them in again and remove them again].

MUJER: Pobres, me comen con los ojos.
[LADY: Poor men, you eat me with your eyes].

POBRE UNO: Es buena para calentar pitos
POOR MAN ONE: It is good to warm up whistles.

POBRE DOS: Buena no, ¡excelente! Fui . . .
POOR MAN TWO: Good? No. Excellent!

En seguida, se los dio a oler a uno
[Then, she gave it to one to smell].

POBRE UNO: Humm.
POOR MAN ONE: Humm.

Luego, al otra.
[Then, the other].

MUJER: Les gusta?
[LADY: You like it?]

POBRE DOS: ¿Bromeas? Por supueso . . . Humm.
POOR MAN TWO: Are you joking? Of course . . . Humm].

En seguida, paro el culo retadoramente.
[Then, she backed up her ass challengingly].

—

SPANISH LESSON: “Pitos,” or “whistles,” doubles for “penis.” (I think).

BIEN: She backs up her ass challengingly.

MAL: ¿Bromeas? Dialogue leaves something to be desired. Plus, no penis thought bubbles.

DETERMINING FACTOR: Too much sex.

RATING: 1/4 ass cheeks slapped with a tennis racquet.

While in Mexico over the weekend, I happened across a bargain bin full of over-the-border delicacies: Mexican porn comics selling at 8 pesos each. Behold: Thinking penises! Dialogue I do not quite understand! Women who look like they’re not wearing shirts even when they’re wearing shirts! From today until Friday, I’ll be reviewing the three titles I picked up. De nada, guys.

Title: “Colegialas Ardientes: ¡Orgasmos Anales!”
["Hot Schoolgirls: Anal Orgasms!"]

Distributor: “Aventuras de la Vagina”
["Adventures of the Vagina"]

Plot: Hot schoolgirls gone wild. Lots of boobs.

Sample Dialogue:

Pero la colegiala ardiente, no sólo quería una rebanda del pastel. Se lo quería comer todo completo.
[ But the hot schoolgirl didn't just want a piece of the pie. She wanted to eat the whole thing.]

COLEGIALA: ¡Caray, qué bien dotado estás!
[SCHOOLGIRL: Gee, how well-equipped you are!]

Se lo apretó como queriéndoselo romper.
She took hold of it like she wanted to break it.

COLEGIALA: Sí, Fernando. Qué linda tranca tienes, te lo juro.
[SCHOOLGIRL: Yes, Fernando. What a pretty pole you have, I swear].

FERNANDO: Espera, vamos a hacer las cosas bien.
[FERNANDO: Wait, we're gonna do the good stuff].

El cuarto ardía . . .
[The next room . . .]

FERNANDO: Y sin ropa, las vamos a hacer mejor.
[FERNANDO: And without clothes, we're going to do it better].

COLEGIALA: Tú eres el sabelotodo y eres el que ordena.
[SCHOOLGIRL: You're the know-it-all, you give the orders].

Ya desnudos, se tallaban sus partes con agresiva, pero dulce, libidinosidad. Tremblando de deseo se masturban una ala otra.
[Now naked, they played their parts aggressively, but sweetly, libidinously. Trembling with desire, they masturbated each other].

BURBUJA DEL PENSAMIENTO DEL PENE DE FERNANDO:: Me cae que nunca sentí una vagina tan aterciopelada.
[THOUGHT BUBBLE FROM FERNANDO'S PENIS: It occurs to me that I have never felt so velvety a vagina].

—

SPANISH LESSON: “Tranca” has applications beyond the construction site.

BIEN: Fernando’s penis has thoughts.

MAL: Where the anal orgasms at?

DECIDING FACTOR: At the beginning of the comic, “Aventuras de la Vagina” covers its ass by writing, “Todas las historias y sus personajes de esta revista son ficticios,” as if this illustrated dirty-old-man fantasy could ever have been based on actual events. Awesome.

GRADE: 3/4 hot schoolgirls. Or “ardent” schoolgirls, depending on your translation.

Recently, a study was released by the Harvard Business School showing that “culturally conservative states are America’s biggest purchasers of Internet pornography.” The revelation gave D.C.’s liberal bloggers an opportunity to descend on their Republican prey like ruthless, moral vultures. Observe:

First, Paul Fidalgo, the “DC Secularism Examiner,” weighed in with his requisite gloating commentary, calling the news “delightful” and “hilarious,” and informing readers that “it’s okay to love every minute of this.” What’s so funny? “It turns out that the ultra-red Utah was #1 in online porn subscriptions,” he writes, “and eight of the top ten porn-loving states voted for John McCain in 2008.” He then cites his favorite “schadenfreude” moment in the report: “In states where more people agree that ‘Even today miracles are performed by the power of God’ and ‘I never doubt the existence of God,’ there are more subscriptions to this service,” because, apparently, people who believe in God aren’t allowed to watch porn or they’re mean awful hypocrites.

Then, “DC Ethical Issues Examiner” Laura Harrison McBride chimes in and blows the secularist out of the water with her own gloating gloaty gloat. McBride, for her part, paints conservatives as Puritanical overlords who are districted from their mission of preventing Laura Harrison McBride from politely drinking her martinis only by the prospect of hypocritically jacking off in the privacy of their darkened home offices.

So, has this study proved once and for all that conservatives are horrible hypocrites worthy of a good smiting from the liberal bloggers of the world? Or perhaps something else can account for the amount of Internet pornography consumed in these great Republican centers?

a) People in Utah have to get their porn on the Internet because it’s, like, kind of hard to buy it anywhere else, DUH.

b) Conservatives don’t care about the war on porn anymore, they’re on to more important things like shunning abortionists and preventing the gays from devaluing their marriages.

c) Actually, NOBODY CARES ABOUT THE WAR ON PORN ANYMORE, except for the “experts” who blog for the Examiner’s peanuts and write long, ranting blog posts thoroughly shaming anyone who watches it, making them, actually, yes, the sole brave warriors left in the moral crusade against pornography.

d) People who actually buy porn on the Internet are total Internet n00bs: Of course they voted for John McCain. While these red staters are busy plunking credit card numbers into pay-for porn sites, tech-saavy Obama voters are downloading teh pron free of charge because they’ve been navigating this series of tubes long enough to know that you don’t pay for this shit.

Photo by bella731.

For Your Consideration: “Bonobos—Let’s Talk About Sex”

Plot: Bonobos, of various shapes, sizes, and genders, have sex in a variety of positions, to the tune of Salt ‘N Peppa’s “Let’s Talk About Sex”

Production Value: Superb editing; luxurious addition of high-quality audio track (as Chivers notes, bonobo sex sounds are not inately stimulating). But the song’s lyrics—”Let’s talk about sex, baby / Let’s talk about you and me / Let’s talk about all the good things / And the bad things that may be / Let’s talk about sex / Let’s talk about sex”—are a strange choice for a lust that dare not speak its name. The song serves as an unsettling mockery of the sex acts, limiting the clip’s arousal potential.

Highlight: This video, while deficient in length, nevertheless presents a variety of bonobo sex scenarios to satisfy even the most peculiar bonobo sex enthusiast.

—

For Your Consideration: “Lesbian Monkey Love”

Plot: A human family peers down upon a group of bonobos and provides a running commentary of their sexual activities (perhaps, in a wildlife refuge). While the bonobos’ most intimate acts are exposed through the camera lens, the humans remain unseen.

Production Value: While the high-quality camera work keeps the focus on the bonobo sex despite the human distractions, the post-production work here leves something to be desired. The writers, who title the clip “Lesbian Monkey Love,” appear ignorant to bonobo taxonomy, and fail to contextualize human sexual categories as applied to apes.

Highlight:

Child: “Eew, look what he’s rubbing! Why is he rubbing that!”
Adult: “Don’t you get itchy? He’s scratching.”

—

For Your Consideration: “Bonobo Mating Activity Face to Face”

Plot: A cliffhanger. This relic, filmed in 2001, opens with the excited face of a bonobo who appears to be engaged in masturbation. From there, the post-masturbatory bonobo and his habitat-mates spend a full minute coyly avoiding sexual contact until the finale: One bonobo grabs hold of a mounted metal bar, grabs hold of another bonobo with its feet, and commences copulation.

Production Value: Shaky camerawork and lack of soundtrack lends an art-house feel.

Highlight: Probably the metal bar fucking at the end.

—

For Your Consideration: “Monkey Love”

Plot: A voyeuristic group of tourists happens upon a bonobo couple fucking near a majestic waterfall. Later, a little one gets in on the action.

Production Value: Soothing rush of waterfall soon begins to sound like broken television, while unscripted human commentary fails to truly illuminate bonobo sexual life—watch this one on mute. Also, please—again with the “monkey”?

Highlight: One bonobo eats something while another bonobo bends over, approaches from the rear, and bounces its butt on the other bonobo’s butt. Trust me on this one.

WORST: Washington City Paper’s The Sexist: “Blow job!”

UGH: Creative Loafing: “I’m all for it. Because like it or not, all tax payers watch porn. Think about it, how can so many people protest it if they have never seen it?”

AWFUL: CNN’s Campbell Brown: “I have to mention tonight the headline that caught my eye on the CNN Ticker earlier today: ‘Porn Industry Seeks Federal Bailout.’ Yeah, you heard me. The porn industry wants a bailout.”

STILL PRETTY BAD: MSNBC: “So get ready to party, wild girls. Francis plans to bring the request to D.C. in person.”

GOOD TRY: TMZ: “Joe Francis and Larry Flynt claim the economy has made America’s sexual appetite go limp, so they’re going to the one place where sex is always rampant—Congress.

TEE HEE—USE OF “GROW” POSSIBLY UNINTENTIONAL: CNN Political Ticker: “Flynt and Francis concede the industry itself is in no financial danger — DVD sales have slipped over the past year, but Web traffic has continued to grow.”

WINNER! Philadelphia City Paper: “Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt and Joe Francis, the man who singlehandedly (sorry about that) revived cinéma vérité with his series of Girls Gone Wild documentaries, have written to congressmen Henry Waxman and Barney Frank (who oversees the House’s Financial Services Committee) asking for a $5 billion bailout of the porn industry. . . . Rejected title: People No Longer As Interested in Hummers.” Bonus: posted by “Rodney Anonymous”

Photo by anarchosyn

Return to Sender: Hustler Video Group’s “Not the Bradys XXX: Marcia, Marcia Marcia!” an upcoming DVD porn spoof of the 1970s television program—and sequel to “Not the Bradys XXX.”

Promotional Material I’m Not Interested In [crossed out]: “’Not the Bradys XXX: Marcia, Marcia, Marcia!’ is a parody of the popular Brady Bunch television show. This sequel features Marcia doing anything and everything to meet pop idol Danny Jones. Things turn sticky when TeenPop Magazine informs Marcia’s parents that she sent the rock star a dirty letter and her panties in the mail. Marcia gets grounded and fears her life is ruined before Danny pays a visit to her school and comes to her rescue. Wild BJs, nasty pussy eating, multiple 3-ways and crazy banging make this one hell of a hilarious XXX spoof of the classic 1970s TV show.” Also includes full-size poster (bequeathed to City Paper staffer Mike Riggs).

Exhibit A: Not swayed by absurd qualifiers: “This movie gloriously brings back most of the original cast.”

Exhibit B: Ditto long-form character development: “The legend Ron Jeremy revisits the role of Sam the Butcher.”

I Rest My Case: You have been warned.

* Advanced Style, a street-style blog for the older set. Adorable, inspirational, and regularly updated, this elderly fashion watch is curated by three respectful whippersnappers.

* Jezebel asks if being a successful woman means staying single:

maybe if a woman’s got guts and determination, she “intimidates” men. So she either doesn’t get attached to a guy, or finds one who is content to live in her shadow. Oprah doesn’t have a husband, per se, but when’s the last time we heard anything about that Stedman guy? Anna Wintour? Divorced. Condoleezza Rice? Not married. Tyra? Single and looking to mingle. Angela Merkel? Wikipedia says, “Her second husband is quantum chemist and professor Joachim Sauer. He remains out of the spotlight” . . . While many men have careers in which they shine and the wife is content to stay in the background, it seems that women who live an ambitious life in the limelight rarely have a “quiet” husband at home.

Jezebel’s expounding, of course, on Madonna’s just-announced divorce from filmmaker Guy Ritchie. I wouldn’t assume that the end of this seven-and-a-half year marriage is a result of Ritchie not being able to “handle” Madonna—you probably know what you’re getting into with Madonna. Similarly, I would suggest that Tyra Banks‘ relationship status might not be wholly attributed to her “success.” A lot of marriages fail, successful, famous, or not. Still, I fully intend to co-opt the Stars: They’re just like us! treatment here and assert that by virtue of being a single woman, I am successful. It’s that easy!

* In the wake of Joe Wurzelbacher-gate, Radar imagines the inevitable “Joe Plumber” porn spoof:

Layin’ Pipe will feature five hard-core scenes, including a threeway with other pander-worthy icons, namely Mother of Iraqi Solider Against the War and Teacher In Tennessee Who Can’t Afford Her Parents’ Nursing Home. Bob Schieffer will also be spoofed as the announcer who dishes the sex action that will take place during the film.

Yeah, well, as long as he isn’t portrayed by the lame, pathetically in-shape dude who hangs around the smoothie/tanning salon, I may be interested.

* Plus, what else might “Joe the Plumber” be hiding from the American People? Josh Levin for Slate has your non-pornographic predictions.

* Okay, one reason to have kids:

Photo from Advanced Style.

That Sarah Palin adult film that was searching for its star earlier this month has confirmed its nominee: Palin will be portrayed by Lisa Anne, a brunette porn actress who “has glasses.” The film has already entered production, TMZ says. The paparazzi site describes the plot as “two drunk Russians are driving their tank when it runs out of gas in front of Paylin’s home. You can take it from there.”

A video on TMZ’s Web site shows Lisa Anne rehearsing with the two “Russians,” offering them drinks and offering up your standard porn double entendres. Also in the script is this favorite line of Lisa Anne’s: “Joe Six Pack? Joe Lincoln? Your average hockey mom? That’s what America’s all about, coming together and saying, ‘Gosh darnit. Slavery might be fine for some, but you know what, it’s just not fine where I’m from.’”

What the fuck?

TMZ has the full script, which refers to a “Serra Paylin.” Really, you ought to just click over to TMZ for everything you didn’t want to know about the Sarah Palin porn.

Update: Huffington Post reports that the role of Hillary Clinton in the film (sigh) will be filled by Nina Hartley, 49.

Promotional Info I’m Not Interested In [crossed out]: iPorn.com is very pleased to announce they have acquired the domain name handjob.com in a private sale. iPorn Executive Producer Porno Dan Leal had this to say, “When I heard that we were going to buy handjob.com I was ecstatic. We have already shot nearly 40 exclusive hand job scenes and I can’t wait to shoot hundreds more.”

Exhibit A: Also not interested in: Calls for contributors. “Leal further stated that both performers and fans have already begun submitting applications to perform with their favorite stars. ‘Handjob.com is a fun filled way for fans to have the chance to win something they will always remember. We anticipate launching the new handjob.com in early 2009 with over 100 exclusive scenes.’”

Exhibit B: Note to iPorn/handjob: Please refrain from reminding me that porn actors are creepily under same demands as overworked journos. Says Leal, “When I told (iPorn Director) Rick Shameless we were going to be shooting a hand job a day, he shook his head and said, ‘Even one an hour is not nearly enough to cover the demand!’”

I Rest My Case: Fwded to The Onion.

[Hardcore's films depict] ”actresses” who hold themselves out to be 12 years old vomiting after being orally raped, followed by the rapist urinating on them, or being forced to drink urine and vomit. . . . [In one], Hardcore tells an “actress” on film, “You look better with puke on your face,” after having apparently raped her until she vomited.

Well he sounds simply darling!

Little, based in California, was prosecuted in Florida, where some of his films had been distributed through the Internet and mail. According to Salon’s Glenn Greenwald, who objected to the ruling in the case based on first amendment arguments (and also something about Bush Guantanamo Bay prisoner waterboarding blah blah dee blah):

Because the films which Little produced included scenes involving sadomasochism, the Bush DOJ alleged, and the federal court found, that the films were not merely pornographic, but also “obscene,” and thus illegal (Little’s lawyers argued, unsuccessfully, they were intended primarily for distribution in Europe, where such films are legal).

Indeed, most of the titles listed in the Max Hardcore indictment, retrieved by The Smoking Gun, specify that they are “Euro promos” or “Euro versions.” The indictment named the following Max Hardcore titles:

- MAX HARDCORE EXTREME, Volume Number 20, Euro Edition
- PURE MAX 19—Euro Edition:
- MAX HARDCORE Golden Guzzlers 7—Euro Edition
- Fists of Fury 4—Euro Edition
- PLANET MAX 16—Euro Edition

What makes the “euro editions” more obscene than the U.S. ones? I could only find reviews for U.S. versions of two of the films: “Golden Guzzlers” (”Includes: Pissing on/in girls’ mouths and faces, some rough fucking, hair pulling, pigtails”) and “PURE MAX 19″ (”These girls get every hole abused by the Max Treatment. They also are in the teenie outfits with plenty of makeup, which for me is kind of a downer”). The Euro versions I can’t find (and I assume that will stay that way). Anyone know how Hardcore’s European versions stack up to his U.S. ones?

The video is a compilation of totally NSFW porn clips made “safe for work” by superimposing cartoon drawings over the porn actors’ naughty bits. The cartoon animation cover-ups include a koala clinging to a woman’s naked body, a harmonica placed in a woman’s mouth as she performs oral sex, and a giant, firing bazooka placed in a man’s hands in place of a naked woman.

Whether or not the video is actually SFW depends on where you work. Word to the wise: Might want to plug in the headphones on this one. Watch it after the jump.