Porn prejudice - lily white (Part III)

The adult entertainment industry is more years behind than its procurers will ever admit. Its industry thrives on and perpetuates sexism and racism. Click here for Part 1.
Ever notice how you very, very, very, very rarely see a black in porn unless the colour is referenced in the title? Makers of porn find it unfathomable to cast black talent unless it constitutes a bankable niche; in other words, perpetuates a stereotype they have fostered.
Every reason given on the lack of colour in porno stinks of repressed racism. They claim: there are no black models (yeah right! In Iceland!); the females don't want to work with black guys (then ditch the barbies and hire some black girls...for a change); black models can't perform (huh?!); they're unclean or unclean-looking (the Jew, Ron Jeremy, anyone?!); blacks don't contact them for work; or blacks just don't sell.

Every one of these lines of bullshit were once de riguer in Hollywood; And we know the racist history of the silver screen the small screen, the stage, the Vaudeville stage, and Las Vegas spectaculars. In step with show biz fifty years ago, the porno industry maintains racist preferences. So why give them a free pass?
Look closer at the studios. Vivid, Vixen, Falcon, BrazzersNetwork, Sean Cody, Jake Cruise, Cocky Guyz, Perfect Guyz, Future Works, Lucas Entertainment, Corbin Fischer, Sensual Box, Dirk Yates, Adam & Eve, Metro, Jet Set to name a few.

Not eight token blacks between them. Lily white!

Lucas Entertainment works out of NYC. Surely there are black performers in the Big Apple, but, nope, its videos remain lily white...with a Latino butt thrown in for good (brown)measure. As far as Cocky Guyz or Perfect Guyz go, it's left unstated the casting couch only has room for cocky WHITE guys and perfect WHITE guys.
Black performer X could fuck just as well in "Sheepless In Montana" or "Space Balls" as he can in "Black Sheepless In Montana" or "Black Space Balls". If porn really wants to puff its chest about being mainstream and open-minded, then it needs to first take the, apparently, big step into the 21st Century and stop denigrating/relegating people of colour to gang-rape parts.

Porn prejudice - gay-for-pay (Part II)

The adult entertainment industry is more years behind than its procurers will ever admit. Its industry thrives on and perpetuates sexism and racism. Click here for Part 1
The sexism of the industry inclines many performers to do fag porn who otherwise would not ever consider it. In the parlance, this is called gay-for-pay. Just to further clarify, this means straight guys who perform in gay videos for money.

And compared to regular porn, fag porn truly does pay male performers substantially more money...in fact, beaucoup money. Here also, in gay porn, the male talent receives acknowledgement for his labor/contribution in the sense of name recognition, billing, a thank-you and other little niceties the straight side of the industry fails to apply to the 'b' side of the b/g (boy/girl) formula.

If you'd notice, straight porn has the nasty tendency of decapitating the cock of the tango

For all intents and purposes the woman could just as well be fucking a headless and flesh covered robot.
Many - nearly every, really - straight man attributes the inadequate pay of b/g porn or, just as common, lack of work, to his decision to try gay-for-pay.
Gay porn icon Jeff Stryker, in characteristic candor, admitted in a television interview that although he would prefer to do straight porn, "Tsk, tsk. I wouldn't take off my shoes for five hundred [dollars]!"

Remember the pay discrepancy of female to male salary is HUGE! Arguably, yes, there is more than just the financial gain that persuade a heterosexual man to perform gay relations on camera; otherwise many more men would be into, say, arms dealing, drug smuggling, human trafficking, politics or any other career move that places one far from the poor house. Notwithstanding,my point is that the sexism in the adult entertainment encourages -- via low pay, low consistency of work, zero recognition, shitty working conditions -- straight male talent to, well, reconsider gay-for-pay works.


But does he like it, you ask? What does it matter?
Do we question the females' sexualities in regards to their scenes? No, we do not. In response to such a query Jeff Strkyer answered, "Well, does it look like I enjoyed it?...Really that's all that matters" meaning, that his, like any actor's, personal gratification from completing a scene is, largely, irrelevant to the viewer's perception of the credibility, the believability of the scene.
Gay-for-pay will remain a viable option so long as the female sexism (and cronyism) in straight porn prevails.

Porn prejudice (Part I)

The adult entertainment industry is more years behind than its procurers will ever admit. Its industry thrives on and perpetuates sexism and racism.

On porn sets, which nowadays is any place where a perv has a video camera, "equal pay for equal labor" has never been imagined. Pay scale is weighed unfairly toward females and all because of the sexist notion that her sex is more virtuous than his ergo she needs to be compensated more than does he. Bah!

In porn everyone is a slut

In many cases, the stud goes without pay. This makes him a stupid slut. By their own admissions the female talent does not do as much as their male counterparts. The man carries the scene...but the camera (and box covers) focus on the woman. Wag the dog, anyone?

All that is required of female models is that they look hot---not be punctual or cooperative or even believeable on camera. Just hot. And for this paltry qualification the cunt typically earns at least 3x more than the cock.

This is sexism

To be accurate, workers should be reclassified as "female models" and "male performers" since it is the guys who are doing all of the action and the girls who are kind enough to be present.

Still some dickheads happily don't mind this unfairness. They work for nothing or next to nothing, blissfully joining the crop of labor historically associated with apprenticeship, slavery, junkie madness. And like its mindless brethren, the slave and junkie, the dickhead receives his cheap, quick fix and blissfully remains unappreciated.

I've not ceased to wonder why so many men sell themselves so short. Oh, right: Because her sex is more virtuous than his.

Mr Gay Competition...is lame

Forget a male beauty contest this is a gay competition. That's right: a competition of gayness. For sure it's all about the most physically attractive gayness so, no, no fat sissies will be in the running but the absurdity of the contest goes beyond that shallow note.

I am not making this up: The "International Mr Gay Competition" will have "delegates" from over a dozen countries all shamelessly strutting on a Hollywood stage later this month to win the crown of queerest boy with the most issues. Some of the sponsors include Starbucks Coffee and American Airlines.

Now, would Starbucks ever proudly sponsor a Mr Stupid Competition or a Mr Straight Competition or a Mr Small Business Owner Competition?

This international farce is another flaming example of the idiotic gay agenda: Let's make sexual preference the nucleus of everything...so folk will eventually believe gay sex is normal and equal to heterosexual coupling.

Of course, this begs the question of how will the judges prove the man is a gay man? Since it is about homosexualness it is safe to say the event will likely be free of witch-hunting, gossipmongers whose only mission in life, it seems, is to 'out' (good-looking)men who prefer not to tote the rainbow banner.

And the point of Mr Gay is...what exactly?

I'm Barack Hussein Obama...bitch!

They don't call 'em fruit flys for nothing!

Get this: too many sniffs of brandy turn flies into homo flies. University of Penn State scientists have demonstrated that when a fly is drunk it prefers to get it on with members of the same sex (http://www.newsweek.com/id/83086).

See, you can blame it on the drink. And here you were questioning yourself....

The abuse of gay

The gay movement is pathetic. The only relevant thing more pathetic is the celebration thereof.

The very name is grossly misleading because there is little inherently gay about homosexuality. Yes, there are children's rainbows and dancing and prancing, and lots of people playing dress-up but, my, the same goings-on can be found in an asylum. The word gay and its innocent connotations have been co-opted by a sexually promiscuous lot, who proudly identify themselves as a "community", to the point where it is rendered controversial or insulting if not in reference to a homosexual. That is the abuse of the word.

The misleading part comes in that gay is one of the farthest things the homosexual is, a point of fact their celebrations strive to obscure and suppress but which, it appears to me, merely serve to display underlying insecurities. Honestly, do people who are so secure with who they are make grand demonstrations to "prove" the point? No. Playboys or bullies or happily married husbands and wives do not organize themselves into a "community" to showcase their happy existence to society.

Any persons or groups who made such ruckus would be promptly taken to task for being insecure. Isn't this the proverbial stone fired at every Lothario and loud Christian. Yet, homosexuals are the only lot who live to do this and few voices take them to task.

"Look at me, look at me", they sing, like an attention-deprived child.

Can't think of other behaviours or personalities (or disorders) which merrily band together to flaunt said activity or emotion (or disorder). There are no celebratory farces by, for, or of, say, ADHD sufferers, alcoholics, wife-swappers, the manically-depressed, agoraphobics; or chronic masturbators, the lactose-intolerant, witty banters, smokers, or the intelligentsia; drunkards, tea drinkers, avowed celibates, mistresses or sweetbacks, book readers, voyeurs, drivers, faithful spouses, welfare recipients, illiterate persons, anal retentive people, heterosexuality.

We witness no attention seeking parades for the aforementioned because there is nothing to flaunt. What would be the purpose in parading about town Mensa membership or illiteracy or a mood disorder? None. The demonstration would be void of purpose because it would stand absent of sustenance. What, Look at us we have genius I.Q.s and you do not! Ha-ha! Pathetic.

Queer pride events are as equally purposeless yet escape well warranted criticism. The demonstrations glorify debauchery, pedophilia, unmanliness (save for butch dykes), fetishes and psychoses, hedonistic sex. And insecurities. The gay movement is lambasting society with its über pride because this is, according to first-hand declarations, how its members truly feel: Fairies, Bears, Cubs, Pigs, Ponies, Bitches, Boy lovers, Daddies, Cum sluts, Twinks, Queens. Ladies and gentlemen, this ain't normalcy or open-mindedness;

it's Narnia on crystal meth!

Throw in some Cheshire Cat pimps, Mad Hatter johns, and Huckleberry boy toys and you've got a circus reality that would make Rod Serling gag on his fag.

Just because one fancies hedonistic sex or piddling children is hardly cause for showcasing it. Just because one feels does not mean one should act out those feelings. And just because Reality, unfortunately, stops at the foot of the queer movement does not mean judgment should.

Why should it?