Quote:

As to buying it, fork over $149 to ABA and it's yours.

As to the quality, these are old 70s loops rescued from God knows where, some have no sound and are all probably shot on 16mm. Some have stood the test of time better than others.

I'm not talking about whores getting fucked in the ass when the only signed up to get fucked in the mouth. These loops are all depictions of women being sodmoized and killed, obviously against their will. There have been plenty of well-known rape and rape/murder scenes in film over the years, no one is questioning anyone's right to produce it. Just about all of Wes Craven's Last House on the Left is about rape and torture. The Linda Blair toilet plunger rape scene in Born Innocent is a ::cough cough:: classic.

The only justification I can see for this is as a cinematic study. "Look what smutty shit we smutty smutpeddlers dreamt up in the 70s." Calling this porn is like calling Addio Zio Tom a documentary. IMHO.





I never heard of Wes Craven, maybe he's more my speed - thanks for the tip.

Well Shirley, it looks like we're in somewhat of an agreement. I don't get off by watching murder, simulated or otherwise, definately not when it's in porn. I still have issue with using terms like "cinematic study" as justification, as loosely used as it might be. IMHO, that's defining an unwarranted classification on what others might deem as art. I don't want to over-analyze this, I'm just making the point that as long as it's within the law, I try to keep my mind as open as possible. Maybe I'm speaking selfishly, fearful that "those" that are classified as such might somehow become ligislated - against my favor.


As fucked as loopnode's response is, somehow I have to agree.


Good topic.

_________________________
"Quah quah, quah quah."