????

[bliss_eternal]

On edit--I am apparently the only person on the planet that didn't know any of the stuff below.

No longer need anyone to confirm (see my edited update at end of message, below).


This is sincerely the first time I'm reading in depth about Flynt's work and how it relates to children in pornography. Words fail me right now. Suffice to say disturbed comes to mind.

Criticisms of Larry Flynt
Flynt has been the subject of much criticism, especially from feminists. In a Hustler feature called "Dirty Pool" on January 1983, he depicted a woman being gang-raped on a pool table. A few months after these pictures were published, a woman was gang-raped on a pool table in New Bedford, Mass. Mr. Flynt's response to the crime was to publish a postcard of another nude woman on a pool table, this time with the inscription, "Greetings from New Bedford, Mass. The Portuguese Gang-Rape Capital of America."

December 1978, Hustler published photographs of naked children as young as three-years of age in sex scenes alongside an article, "Children, Sex and Society," advocating an end to age of consent, calling for acceptance of adult-child sex, and legalization of incest. In February 1975 in an article entitled "Adolescent Fantasy" an uncle is photographed sexually with his niece.

October 1976 a naked girl scout is photographed soliciting sex in August 1981, a nude young girl, photographed with her dollies, saying to the viewer; "You would be surprised what a 'little girl can do. ..."

Flynt published a reoccurring cartoon called Chester the Molester, written by Hustler editorial cartoon director Dwaine Tinsley, which depicted molestation of children. In May 1984 Tinsley was found guilty of sexually abusing his daughter in 1989. She claim that he gave her birth control pills at age thirteen, drugged her and sexually abused her until age eighteen, when she became a suicidal drug addict. During her testimony, when asked how many times she was aggressed she responded 100 000. Tinsley had contributed 145 Hustler cartoons of violent child kidnapping and rape. <8> Upon his release from prison, Tinsley was rehired at Hustler.

:wtf:

****update--I originally was asking if anyone could confirm this information for me. I found a link which showed me, yes--much if not all of it is true.

http://www.feminist.com/resources/artspeech/media/flynt.htm

I feel sick. Yet another Hollywood glamourization that is nothing more than a myth.

[lightningandsnow]

1. Eww. Just...eww.

That is just so beyond sick.

Children should not be the object of sexual "attraction". Ever.

[bliss_eternal]

8. Agreed.

Sick, sad and wrong. I wonder how many of the people that regularly "defend" F as "this great guy" know any of this. Somehow I doubt it.

Then again, maybe they do. :eyes: I've had people on this board pm me to tell me I'm "shrill" for saying a 14 year old is a child and can't consent to sex. They also sent me an "age of consent" link to show me how it's fine and dandy all over the world to "have sex with kids. :puke:

[lightningandsnow]

10. That being said...

I have a problem with age of consent law when there's no close-in-age exemption: when it's used to criminalize teenagers or very young adults who have sex with other teenagers (i.e. a 15 year old and a 17 year old, or a 17 year old and a 20 year old).

Still, 14 is too young, at least for having sex with someone who's over 18.

[noamnety]

2. This is why I was SO angry

when we had threads on the greatest page proclaiming him to be some kind of saint, and wanting to send him flowers and shit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1363696#1368863

I knew the first and fourth of what you posted, but not the second and third. Next time he's being hailed as the champion of human rights, I'll add that to my fuel.

[gaspee]

3. Silly girl

"Human" rights. Exactly.

Men like Flynt don't consider women to be human beings. If they did, they could never produce and consume what they do.

[bliss_eternal]

7. Women or children, apparently.

:grr::mad:

[bliss_eternal]

5. I understood your anger....

...in terms of what he does. For example, I was aware of the awful "meat grinder" cover. But I had NO IDEA at the time of ALL of this.(Please keep in mind, I got this from the website that is open to editing, so I can't attest to the validity of every claim).

When I initially posted this, I did so asking if anyone here could confirm the information I'd found. I was really upset after finding this crap and reading it. I was concerned about "googling" for the information and ending up with seemingly innocuous links that were exploitatiive of children. :puke: It's happened when I'm NOT researching a pornographer, so...

Thankfully, I figured out a way to dig a bit deeper and found the link to Steinem's words, which seems to confirm a good portion of it.

When I saw that pos film (People vs. LF), I was so damned clueless. I really feel like an idiot that I bought into the idea that he was some great champion of first amendment rights.

In the past, the lines tended to blur for me when talking about adults(that can choose to participate). I once made a lot of the arguments I see so frequently about women and that industry. I can't now. The more I learn about it, the more I question it all.

There is no blurring for me where children are concerned. It's sick. Even if they used women that were "of age" and made to look like children--they implied they were children and it's ok to "get it on" with a child. It makes me feel like vomiting.

[ThomCat]

4. I knew about the "Chester the Molester" cartoons.

I didn't know the rest. :puke:

[bliss_eternal]

6. I'd heard of the Chester cartoons, too...

I didn't know the creator was a pedophile, molesting his daughter--or that he did time for it.
:scared:

[bliss_eternal]

9. Another link:

not sure how much of this is hyperbole (based in hating all that F stand's for), and how much is reality, but thought I'd share, as it is an interesting read:

THE PEOPLE VS LARRY FLYNT:
A FEMINIST CRITIQUE AND PROTEST
by Diana E. H. Russell, Ph.D.
Copyright © 1998. All Rights Reserved.

The People vs. Larry Flynt is a highly manipulative movie designed by Director Milos Forman and Producer Oliver Stone to make a hero out of Larry Flynt, thereby fostering approval for pornography in general and Hustler magazine in particular. Following are some examples of the manipulative techniques used by these men.

A. Forman's Manipulative Techniques

1) Minimizing the Kind of Pornography in Hustler

The pornography that is shown in the movie -- mostly brief glimpses of Hustler covers and large pictures on the walls -- doesn't show the extremely abusive, misogynist, and often violent material that is characteristic of Hustler magazine. If the movie had shown as few as ten examples of pornographic pictures selected by feminists and published in this hardcore magazine, I believe that the reactions of audiences -- particularly the women -- would have been extremely different. The vast majority of women have no idea about the kind of pictures and contemptuous woman-hating texts that appear on virtually every page of Hustler. Milos Forman and Oliver Stone may justify these omissions by saying that they wanted their movie to get an R-rating, but I suspect that they were fully aware of the fact that showing the real Hustler magazine would have sabotaged their goal of heroizing Flynt.

-------------------------snip-----------------------------------------------------

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/Porn/rusflynt.html

[ThomCat]

11. That is an excellent link to pass around.

It's very clear and concise, and it makes a lot of devastating points about Flynt and "The People vs Larry Flynt."

[BlueIris]

12. That's insane. (For the record, I didn't know any of that shit either.)

Sickening.

[femrap]

13. Is he in a wheelchair?

Karma.

[bliss_eternal]

14. The shooter was never discovered.

.

[ismnotwasm]

15. He's a sick one

Other than a very few exceptions, I find that porn defenders don't know what the fuck they're talking about. (No pun intended)

Yesterday morning, my husband got a media picture on his cell phone. He looked at it, and sent it to our computer, because he wasn't sure what he was seeing.

It was a girl, age indeterminate, but with blond pigtails, "school girl" clothes, and reasonabley, looked about 12. He called me in our computer room. "Is THIS KIDDIE porn?!"

Let me describe the rest of the scene. The young girl was sitting on the floor in a pool of reddish fluid, fully dressed, performing fellatio on a dog. The penis on the dog was either photo shoped or part of the original shoot, because other than the red color, the penis looked human

He called the sender, who laughed is off, "It's doggie porn" The dude didn't even SEE that the girl, if not actually underage, was intended to look that way. We found who he got it from. (That confrontation will be later) My husband was so upset he showed it to two different police, who told him that the girl was "probably not" underage, and the photo was probably not child pornagraphy. Like it matters.

We're going to pursue it further. There are thousands of child pornagraphy images handled in my area alone. It's not good enough to assume a child wasn't been used.

To your original subject, we can thank that asshole Flint for introducing the ultimate in mainstream violent, explotative porn. It's always been underground, but Flint brought it right out and made it "acceptable"

[bliss_eternal]

16. We dealt with this recently---here's some other options:

My husband was getting text messages inviting him to "sexay partays." :eyes:
I won't give you details, but thankfully no visuals included. We reported it to our cell provider. They credited our account for the messages (as they were unsolicited). We also attempted to block them from future contact. When the block didn't work, the cell provider changed our number (for free).

In the process of researching this, I found out it's ILLEGAL for people to send spam to your account (porn is under spam), unsolicited. The FCC takes this seriously, even if local law enforcement does not. The dude that thought it was so hilarious could be prosecuted.

Check this out (includes a link to report it and/or a phone number):

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/lifestyle/320279_consumer19.html

Also, you may want to contact an animal rights agency or group in your area, and get them in on it. ;) They tend to frown on the use of animals in such imagery.

I caught a report on A&E (I think--it's vague, as I was disturbed and turned the channel before the end of the show). Anyway, it discussed special task forces set up to investigate this sort of thing. I wish I'd watched it all, or at least recalled, but I think they were with FBI. Local groups just don't have the manpower or time to dedicate, sadly.

Please keep me posted how it goes--here or through pm. I'm interested. :hug: So sorry you went through this, but glad the scum sent it to someone willing to report it. They'll be sorry. lol.

Pm-ing you about porn defense. :hi:

[seabeyond]

17. ok, .... this shit. i am so fed up with this shit. i had to come in this forum

to try and get a handle on my anger at males that i have had lately. cause i hear this kinda shit all the time, or men just gotta have it all the time, or they just think of sex all the time, or the rapes in iraq are cause there are no prostitutes and they think about it all the time and gotta have it all the time.

and i am just going mad

cause i have a wonderful husband.... but then i say, is he for real, or just not saying anything to me cause on the net, on this board, geeeez

anyway

dont think it was a good idea at all me reading the op