Joanna Krupa Tickled Pink in Fetish Video

[Soda83pop]

Some people in this thread are being obtuse. Did the story have a high risk of getting out eventually? Of course.

But what some here are overlooking for whatever reasons is that the story didn't have to have pictures. And that makes a world of difference.

I keep going back to the Traci Lords example. She was able to have a mainstream career because her porn pictures were NOT plastered all over TV, newspapers and magazines (no internet back then either).

Let's be honest. These stories about Sarah and Joanna wouldn't be getting a tenth of the coverage they have if there were no vidcaps and vidclips to adorn them. The mainstream media knows that, and deep down so does everybody else, including people posting in this thread how all the "blame" falls on Sarah and Joanna. So no responsibility for FMC that refuses to safeguard their own copyright, and no responsibility for the mainstream media that rushes to post what is allegedly adult material for all the world to see and doing so (allegedly) without permission from the copyright owner.

I had no idea we had so many corporatist apologists in this forum.

There is someone in this thread being obtuse.

We have already established at this point the following:

-you are unhappy this happened, and would like to blame everyone from the company doing the shoots to members of an online message board for these atrocities...everyone but the girls

-2 people with a background in the field (one who worked for the company in question) has explained in numerous different ways how all of the blame cannot be placed solely on the shoulders of FMC or a member here because THE GIRLS SIGNED A CONSENT FORM AND WERE COMPENSATED, WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT REDISTRIBUTION OF BOTH THE LEGAL AND NON LEGAL KINDS WERE REAL AND POSSIBLE.

-I was not going to indulge your Traci Lords example before because again, with all due respect...you are not familiar with the facts in regards to adult entertainment from the business point of view. However, since you wish to bring it up again, I will counter your "Traci had a mainstream career because her footage couldnt be aired" with a "no one would have known who she was without her porn career so in retrospect she had a mainstream career not only in spite of porn but because of porn."

Sometimes its ok to just agree to disagree, friend. However, your fighting a war the two girls in question wouldnt even join your side for. I think its admirable actually.

 

[Oddjob0226]

I keep going back to the Traci Lords example. She was able to have a mainstream career because her porn pictures were NOT plastered all over TV, newspapers and magazines (no internet back then either).

She was actually more nefarious because of it, and had trouble finding work when she tried using her real name. She eventualy "took back" her noteriety and made it work for her. She will always have to be, in some way, the former underage porn star no matter how mainstream she becomes.

Her videos are still out there for the getting if you know where to look - funny that they were completely fine and legal up until her real age was discovered on her driver's license during a traffic stop (as I heard it told). I guess the makeup was convincing. A piece of paper sure got folks worked up. She even did a video after she was of legal age which can still be had.

 

[Oddjob0226]

It appears that some in our community want to place all responsibility on the models and none at all on the outers.

Or the producers of the material, it seems. The ones that reap the immidate financial benefit but don't suffer the potential personal harm later down the road.

If FMC is outing their own models, then they are to blame. I seriously doubt that they are. And if FMC is not suing websites like TMZ for posting their material without permission, then future models should be warned that FMC will do NOTHING to shield them from abuse by outsiders.

Well, now we're talking.

 

[jts963]

I keep going back to the Traci Lords example. She was able to have a mainstream career because her porn pictures were NOT plastered all over TV, newspapers and magazines (no internet back then either).

There are two good reasons why Traci Lords did not get her images plastered all over the mainstream media.

1) Much of what she did occured when she was underage and therefore was illegal and was summarily desoryed.

Yeah I already said that.

2) But even if they had clips from her body of work available, they still couldn't really show any of it. While certain things in mainstream media have loosened up since the days of Traci Lords, they still can't really show much from Traci Lords body of work beyond a posed photograph or a clip that does not show or imply much.

So that must be why all the other porn actresses have no problem finding mainstream work. Wait! Yes they do.

Did Traci have the type of mainstream career she hoped for? Maybe not, but she had one. Which is more than can be said for any other porn actress I'm aware of. And Traci wasn't typecast as a sex worker in most of her roles either.

And while the ticking fetish certainly is adult oriented to those of us who have it, if edited correctly it can be shown in mainstream media. While the sight of Sarah Kozer tickling Joanna Krupa's feet may send you or I into a tizzy, to the rest of the world, without the sexual context or for that matter nudity or bondage, it is just one woman tickling another woman's feet. Not pornography at all.

"But what some here are overlooking for whatever reasons is that the story didn't have to have pictures. And that makes a world of difference."

The videos, which were not edited in the least by the way, should not have been aired.

And try buying one of those videos from FMC without swearing you're 18 years or older.

By the way, a fully clothed adult tickling a fully clothed child is not pornography either, but if such were allowed to be posted HERE or if such was being sold by FMC or some other fetish vendor, how long do you think it would take the same mainstream media that revels in airing the Sarah/Joanna videos to start calling for our heads once they found out?

Let's be honest. These stories about Sarah and Joanna wouldn't be getting a tenth of the coverage they have if there were no vidcaps and vidclips to adorn them. The mainstream media knows that, and deep down so does everybody else, including people posting in this thread how all the "blame" falls on Sarah and Joanna. So no responsibility for FMC that refuses to safeguard their own copyright, and no responsibility for the mainstream media that rushes to post what is allegedly adult material for all the world to see and doing so (allegedly) without permission from the copyright owner.

These stories are getting coverage because they involve women in the mainstream media who are participating in the world of sexual fetishes. Even if they couldn't show anything it would still get coverage.

You do realize that less coverage is not the same as no coverage, right? I didn't say the story would get no coverage, I'm saying it would have gotten a lot less attention if there was no "film at eleven".

Not unlike a celebrity sextape such as the ones by Paris Hilton or Pamela Anderson. It is not as if they can just go ahead and air those on the evening news, yet those types of things always get coverage.

As a matter of fact, they do air pixelated vidcaps from those sextapes whenever they can get away with it. The media always wants photographs to go with a sex story if such is available.

including people posting in this thread how all the "blame" falls on Sarah and Joanna.

I am curious, do you think Sarah and Joanna bear any responsibility in this matter?

Already answered:

"Did the story have a high risk of getting out eventually? Of course. But what some here are overlooking for whatever reasons is that the story didn't have to have pictures. And that makes a world of difference."

I am curious, do you think FMC and a prurient mainstream media bear no responsibility in this matter?

 

[jts963]

Indeed, to suggest that Traci Lords was somehow able to leave her adult film past behind her is simply not true. Her name alone is synonymous with the adult film industry, even though she has not made an adult film in over two decades. If you were to ask the average person to name an adult film star, more often than not her name would come up.

No, I'd bet Jenna Jameson's name comes up more often.

I never said Traci left her adult film rep behind her. What I said was that she had the notoriety of being a porn star, which may well have been an advantage for certain types of mainstream work, without the disadvantage of actual sex videos that would allow the prudes to attack her appearances in mainstream work.

Traci was never going to compete against Meryl Streep for A movie roles, but she certainly had a shot against Linnea Quigley for B movie roles.