Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Feds Valiantly Fighting to Protect You from Porn

Posted by Susie Bright at 3:59 PM on May 2, 2008.


Somewhere in Washington a U.S. Attorney is hard at work watching porn. Pun intended.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Sex and Relationships in your
mailbox!

 

Deep in the bowels of Washington, a federal U.S. Attorney is watching porn videos. Lots of porn videos. They are looking for crime, they're looking for a cause, a way to bring back integrity to the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Now they've found one: filing an obscenity case against porn legend John Stagliano, and his company Evil Angel -- for "squirting fetish" footage.

You remember what happened to the federal prosecutors under the Bush admin, right? Everyone who was interested in white collar crime, corruption, extortion, and child-kidnapping was told to fly right and start focussing on porno:

Two of the fired U.S. attorneys, Dan Bogden of Nevada and Paul Charlton of Arizona, were pressured by a top Justice Department official last fall to commit resources to adult obscenity cases, even though both of their offices faced serious shortages of manpower. Each of them warned top officials that pursuing the obscenity cases would force them to pull prosecutors away from other significant criminal investigations.

In Nevada, ongoing cases included gang violence and racketeering, corporate healthcare fraud, and the prosecution of a Republican official on corruption charges. In Arizona, they included multiple investigations of child exploitation, including "traveler" cases in which pedophiles arrive from elsewhere to meet children they've targeted online.

Anyone who didn't toe the line, was fired and replaced with one of the Bible College grads who could follow simple instructions.

Yes, but this is old news. What's interesting is that the screening room hasn't shut down. The feds are watching more porn than ever. The ones that freak them out the most aren't the hard cocks, the interracial sex, the homosexual taboos that so often frequented past federal investigations. That's so 80s.

No, the movies they're going after this time, are a milestone in obscenity trials. No one ever used to pay attention to female orgasm in porn tapes before ... it was like Queen Victoria dismissing lesbianism. It just didn't count for them. Dick was all that mattered.

In Milk Nymphos, Storm Squirters, and Fetish Fanatic 5 , the one common element is women simulating orgasm, and demonstrating such by squirting up a storm. The scenes are surreal, they're so inauthentic, but what's remarkable, in legal history, is that the ostensible pleasure on screen is depicting the thrill of female orgasm.

I think we have a breakthrough here. The feds want to make visible female excitement an obscenity.


Jon Stewart: Mark Sanford, Shut the F**ck Up
Why does Sanford insist on treating us like his own private confessional?
Post by Staff. July 3, 2009.
Sanford Drops Pledge To Release Travel Records
The only possibility of the records staying private -- at least while he remains in office -- is if he resigns.
Post by Jed Lewison. July 1, 2009.
It's Time to Drop "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" -- End of Story
Robert Gates said he wants to make DADT more humane; the only way to do that is 86 the policy altogether.
Post by Melissa McEwan. July 1, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Storm Squirters!!!
Posted by: xvictor on May 3, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've seen those videos. Nice. erotic. exciting. harmless. I like to smoke pot and drink beer while watching 'em. It enhances the viewing pleasure. Lesbian porn is good to watch also.

So when are they going after men with double penises????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Frankly someone elses horsing around (and it harms no one) is not my fornicating business!
Posted by: Nightstallion on May 3, 2008 12:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, first lets get past this hurdle: AND IT HARMS NO ONE! , means just what it says. My sibs are not complaining, my children are not complaining my spouse or I are not complaining. In fact till you cops showed up NO ONE WAS COMPLAINING; don't use your supercilious, prurient, know it all, filter on me; that just manages to remind me why I dislike humans so much.

I realize you can’t help it, you have been brought up to grab hold of someone else’s privates without fear of reprisal. You always wave the law under our noses as proof of some declared wrongdoing you do not even have evidence to support. Your surprised look of wonder when I kick your ass for intrusion will be my most titular reward!

Here is what I mean by example, if my son wishes to date a girl two years younger than him when he is 17, it is his business. If they decide to have sex, (as long as they are not obstructing traffic) it is their business. He knows the penalties for unplanned pregnancies, as does his consort. So it is none of my affair! If my wife should decide to screw the Preacher it is her business she knows I may object enough to divorce her scrawny butt. If my daughter chooses to date her female high school physics teacher, it is none of my prurient business. If I like boys on the side, it is my how do you do. Leave your hands out of my weird family affairs do you understand? We are pursuing our happiness as we understand it.

In my case or my family’s case however, be forewarned! If you as an individual disregarding your supposed authority, touch me or mine in a pre-emptive exculpatory way; assuming some pre-defined legal superiority of the same me or mine; I will do my utmost best to kill your interfering subhuman ass is that clear enough for you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Can one already harmed... Posted by: Pirate1
I still say it is a little strange
Posted by: thealltheone on May 3, 2008 12:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that that Washington Madam hung herself. yea, right....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WE CAN ALL SLEEP BETTER
Posted by: VZEQICVA on May 3, 2008 2:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Knowing that we have an official "Porn Gatekeeper". I can't imagine having that job on my resume. Where do you go from there? ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WE CAN ALL SLEEP BETTER Posted by: culheath
Nice title; good pun
Posted by: willymack on May 3, 2008 7:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if tapes or DVDs of Jeff (gay military stud) Gannon (John Guckert), the phony journalist's visits to the white House are hiding somewhere. Those are the ones our intrepid watchdogs ought to be watching, if they can stomach them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Precisely why rich people and Xtian fundamonsterists should NOT be in charge
Posted by: DaBear on May 4, 2008 1:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Enough of this shite already.

We need a House that is 51% female and a Senate that is 48% female - minimum. Then this kind of bullshit will stop.

(oh if you're one of those who fears, as I would, that get enough conservofems and were all in deep shite, consider that fine PhD in Australia who figured out the critical feminine mass to overcome conservashite)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

liam99
Posted by: liam99 on May 4, 2008 10:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't try to protect me from porn, i like porn. My collection is to say the least, prodigious. Fourty plus years of collecting and still going strong. Yes, i live alone ,but so do 50% of American women these days. How do they compensate?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Torbis5661
Posted by: torbis5661 on May 5, 2008 4:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I and my wife look at in the privitcy of our home,is none of their concern,as long we are not hurtting or disturbing anyone.
They say they are protecting us,Iask from what??
I wonder are they going to set up spy camers in the bedrooms,to see if we the people are haveing / doing sex the bibical way?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The fed is what ! yeah right
Posted by: Andrew_S on May 14, 2008 8:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just like the fed is going to declare tabacco a health hazard, this is a minimal 22 billion dollar industry, not including the hard stuff, and all the ancilliary offshoots. Get a clue folks, this isn't about any moral or legal issue. But it is about making sure that there is more legislative lucre to be scoped in our ever increasing arsenal of citizen deviancy taxes and revenue streams. Seems that our intrepid pro vimmen need a little more educational material for archival purposes. Let's start hoarding our playboy mags boy's, since they too will surely come under that same legal scope, can't have you thinking deviant thoughts, can we. I look forward to the revival of speekezzee's and bootleg porn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]