|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"Ethics in shooting wam videos"
Love you, too
I had been thinking about making a similar topic on here for a while, one that I feel wouldn't go over very well. Here's the question I was thinking of posing: is it ethical to link to non-fetish oriented content at all on here?
There has been several postings recently where various people have bemoaned the fact that some creepy people (or people with some form of social disorder) have been harassing the uninitiated who have happened to post something related to the WAM fetish on various innocuous websites. The general consensus seems to be that these people are making us look bad. When I try to put myself in the offended person's shoes, I can't help but be more creeped out by the massive silent majority that's getting off on the video, rather than the single strange person that's bringing it to their attention.
Am I way off base? Perhaps being too sensitive? Or does anyone else share my ethical concern.
There has been several postings recently where various people have bemoaned the fact that some creepy people (or people with some form of social disorder) have been harassing the uninitiated who have happened to post something related to the WAM fetish on various innocuous websites. The general consensus seems to be that these people are making us look bad. When I try to put myself in the offended person's shoes, I can't help but be more creeped out by the massive silent majority that's getting off on the video, rather than the single strange person that's bringing it to their attention.
Am I way off base? Perhaps being too sensitive? Or does anyone else share my ethical concern.
This ethics thread got me thinking about an incident that occurred with a particular producer, allegedly doing some really unethical things to his models. The situation was brought up in the forums by another producer who had worked with one of the models previously. Long story short, it was determined by the mods, the producer was still allowed to promote and sell his videos here legally.
Later, when the producer would post his new videos, often a small vocal few would often post in his threads reminding the community of the incident. However, several members of the community would come to the producer's defense. Telling people to move on and it only happened once, etc. The people being vocal about the incident were treated like they were the bad guys.
Its at the point now when ever this producer posts pics of his new vids, I constantly see nothing but comments praising his work.
SO PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME, HOW IS THIS ETHICAL BEHAVIOR TO SUPPORT SOMEONE LIKE THIS? I would really love to hear from those who constantly leave these work praising comments in his threads, and also from the producer himself. I noticed he's stayed clear of this thread.
Later, when the producer would post his new videos, often a small vocal few would often post in his threads reminding the community of the incident. However, several members of the community would come to the producer's defense. Telling people to move on and it only happened once, etc. The people being vocal about the incident were treated like they were the bad guys.
Its at the point now when ever this producer posts pics of his new vids, I constantly see nothing but comments praising his work.
SO PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME, HOW IS THIS ETHICAL BEHAVIOR TO SUPPORT SOMEONE LIKE THIS? I would really love to hear from those who constantly leave these work praising comments in his threads, and also from the producer himself. I noticed he's stayed clear of this thread.
@fullypied
It's predictable that he (and I'm not sure if he's worth protecting like this, but it wasn't that long ago and I'm sure most regulars know who you're referring to) would avoid this thread, why would someone who does shady things put themselves out there like that? I think the more interesting thing is that StrapOnPiegirls had the audacity to post, as if his whole 9/11-Muslim pieing post never happened. Disgusting.
It's predictable that he (and I'm not sure if he's worth protecting like this, but it wasn't that long ago and I'm sure most regulars know who you're referring to) would avoid this thread, why would someone who does shady things put themselves out there like that? I think the more interesting thing is that StrapOnPiegirls had the audacity to post, as if his whole 9/11-Muslim pieing post never happened. Disgusting.
If the producer is to scared to post in the thread, I would at least like to hear from the ones who praise his work everytime he posts a new video. Some of them have already posted in this thread, so feel free to reply on the subject.
As for StrapOnPiegirls, I too was suprise he posted in the thread. I would love to hear his explanation for constantly reposting a 9/11anti-Muslim religion pie video and hear how he justifies exploiting a tragedy that killed thousands to make a buck?
As for StrapOnPiegirls, I too was suprise he posted in the thread. I would love to hear his explanation for constantly reposting a 9/11anti-Muslim religion pie video and hear how he justifies exploiting a tragedy that killed thousands to make a buck?
LeilaHazlett said:
It is absolutely immoral to sexualize someone without their consent.
It is absolutely immoral to sexualize someone without their consent.
You mean it's absolutely immoral for a video producer to lie to the model about the intent of their video. Obviously. Absolutely agreed.
Obviously, anybody could be jacking off & sexualizing in their mind absolutely anything & anyone they want on the internet or on television or any media whatsoever, and are obviously not getting the consent of whomever is on television,
and there is absolutely nothing immoral about that. And there's nothing anyone can nor should do about that anyway. Since it is not physically hurting anyone else.
And it in no way physically stops you or anyone else from doing what they want.
Obviously, you were not referring to THAT situation.
And, again, provided they are not jacking off in public.
Sure, I don't want to hear or see it, but I know it exists.
Honesty is not the best policy. Honesty is the *ONLY* policy!
If you are going to shoot WAM fetish videos, then be upfront with the model as to what it is about. Tell her what WAM is and if she is okay with the implications of it. The worst thing that could happen would be an honest "Thanks, but I'll pass on it".
The guy who goes under the name of littlehill12 on YT as well as that jotoko guy are pretty much walking fine lines because the girls in their clips are not professional models as far as I know. They are just friends of theirs. But I'm sure that they might say eventually "Do you have to get EVERY girl friend of yours messy for posterity?" and that is where the trouble will start. I'm pretty sure that the girls know about the clips being on YouTube.
But what they most likely don't know is that somewhere some peeps are getting their rocks off on it, and when they do find out they'd most likely be angry and mortified. That was what happened to Laur (aka omgitskelsey31) when she first started posting her own WAM clips on YouTube. The last we saw she did a moderately raunchy clip with Ariel wearing a latex top and nothing has been seen or heard of her since then.
Girls and women are not stupid. They can sniff out dishonesty and inauthenticity in guys from a mile away, and guys who seek to make such clips to just exploit and sexualise them with no concern for their wellbeing or personal feelings don't deserve to have girl friends.
Period. :ahahah:
If you are going to shoot WAM fetish videos, then be upfront with the model as to what it is about. Tell her what WAM is and if she is okay with the implications of it. The worst thing that could happen would be an honest "Thanks, but I'll pass on it".
The guy who goes under the name of littlehill12 on YT as well as that jotoko guy are pretty much walking fine lines because the girls in their clips are not professional models as far as I know. They are just friends of theirs. But I'm sure that they might say eventually "Do you have to get EVERY girl friend of yours messy for posterity?" and that is where the trouble will start. I'm pretty sure that the girls know about the clips being on YouTube.
But what they most likely don't know is that somewhere some peeps are getting their rocks off on it, and when they do find out they'd most likely be angry and mortified. That was what happened to Laur (aka omgitskelsey31) when she first started posting her own WAM clips on YouTube. The last we saw she did a moderately raunchy clip with Ariel wearing a latex top and nothing has been seen or heard of her since then.
Girls and women are not stupid. They can sniff out dishonesty and inauthenticity in guys from a mile away, and guys who seek to make such clips to just exploit and sexualise them with no concern for their wellbeing or personal feelings don't deserve to have girl friends.
Period. :ahahah:
clownpies said: ... I think the more interesting thing is that StrapOnPiegirls had the audacity to post, as if his whole 9/11-Muslim pieing post never happened. Disgusting.
fullypied said: ... As for StrapOnPiegirls, I too was suprise he posted in the thread. I would love to hear his explanation for constantly reposting a 9/11anti-Muslim religion pie video and hear how he justifies exploiting a tragedy that killed thousands to make a buck?
I always thought that the motivation behind the "anti-Muslim" video as you call it was as a statement against the oppression of women in the fundamentalist Muslim sphere, particularly as regards to their freedom to express their sexuality. It was just a video of a lady getting pied in Muslim garb (a Burqa or Hijab, not sure). A provocative idea for a WAM video to be sure, but hate speech? Having said that, I noticed the other day that he deleted a recent post referencing that years-old video, and I don't know what was in that post.
smess said:
I always thought that the motivation behind the "anti-Muslim" video as you call it was as a statement against the oppression of women in the fundamentalist Muslim sphere, particularly as regards to their freedom to express their sexuality. It was just a video of a lady getting pied in Muslim garb (a Burqa or Hijab, not sure). A provocative idea for a WAM video to be sure, but hate speech? Having said that, I noticed the other day that he deleted a recent post referencing that years-old video, and I don't know what was in that post.
clownpies said: ... I think the more interesting thing is that StrapOnPiegirls had the audacity to post, as if his whole 9/11-Muslim pieing post never happened. Disgusting.
fullypied said: ... As for StrapOnPiegirls, I too was suprise he posted in the thread. I would love to hear his explanation for constantly reposting a 9/11anti-Muslim religion pie video and hear how he justifies exploiting a tragedy that killed thousands to make a buck?
I always thought that the motivation behind the "anti-Muslim" video as you call it was as a statement against the oppression of women in the fundamentalist Muslim sphere, particularly as regards to their freedom to express their sexuality. It was just a video of a lady getting pied in Muslim garb (a Burqa or Hijab, not sure). A provocative idea for a WAM video to be sure, but hate speech? Having said that, I noticed the other day that he deleted a recent post referencing that years-old video, and I don't know what was in that post.
I saw that thread, and noted soon after it had gone, did the OP delete it or did the mods remove it? When I saw it there were three or four followups, all from well known long-term members, including at least one very highly regarded producer, all saying "this is sick, racist, and has no place here". I hit the report button and flagged it to MM. I had three issues with it:
1. It was a form of anti-Muslim hate speech, reinforcing prejudice.
2. If social media got wind of it, can you imagine the unstoppable shitstorm it would bring down on the entire wam community in the USA for trying to profit from 9/11 wih a porn video?
3. It was putting the model's life in danger. It was poking a stick at the kinds of people who think nothing of crossing half the world (or recruiting local operatives) to execute anyone they think is a blasphemer or an apostate.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
I do remember the nearly "unstoppable shitstorm" that followed the initial release of that video, lol. It is a shame we can not refer to that very long thread now (it's either too old or deleted). All those points you raised were argued for and against pretty thoroughly then. Although it might be interesting to debate it again, I'm guessing StrapOn is no longer interested in doing that, assuming he deleted his latest post about it; or if the mods deleted it, even more reason to let it fizzle out. Anyway, this is a bit far afield from the main questions posed by the OP, regarding taking advantage of unsuspecting girls. Maybe we can just agree to disagree.
The hypocrisy when he first posted that thread was amazing, though. People posted out that no one complained about similar vids where a model in a catholic nun's habit gets wammed, but the general consensus was that "it's okay to dis Catholics/Christians because they've historically been a horrible influence on humanity, but not to Islam because that's the majority making fun of a minority."
There's a whole thread about ethics (or the lack thereof) if you have the stomach for it:
http://umd.net/forums/summer-sanders-pied
http://umd.net/forums/summer-sanders-pied
smess said:
I always thought that the motivation behind the "anti-Muslim" video as you call it was as a statement against the oppression of women in the fundamentalist Muslim sphere, particularly as regards to their freedom to express their sexuality. It was just a video of a lady getting pied in Muslim garb (a Burqa or Hijab, not sure). A provocative idea for a WAM video to be sure, but hate speech? Having said that, I noticed the other day that he deleted a recent post referencing that years-old video, and I don't know what was in that post.
clownpies said: ... I think the more interesting thing is that StrapOnPiegirls had the audacity to post, as if his whole 9/11-Muslim pieing post never happened. Disgusting.
fullypied said: ... As for StrapOnPiegirls, I too was suprise he posted in the thread. I would love to hear his explanation for constantly reposting a 9/11anti-Muslim religion pie video and hear how he justifies exploiting a tragedy that killed thousands to make a buck?
I always thought that the motivation behind the "anti-Muslim" video as you call it was as a statement against the oppression of women in the fundamentalist Muslim sphere, particularly as regards to their freedom to express their sexuality. It was just a video of a lady getting pied in Muslim garb (a Burqa or Hijab, not sure). A provocative idea for a WAM video to be sure, but hate speech? Having said that, I noticed the other day that he deleted a recent post referencing that years-old video, and I don't know what was in that post.
I am guessing you didn't read any part of the description of that racist video. It had nothing to do with women being "sexually repressed", it was supposed to be revenge against the 9/11 attach by tying up and hitting an Arab women with pies. Not all Arabs are Muslims and not all Muslims had anything to do with 9/11 or are terrorist. A close friend of mine in high school who is Muslim has to live the rest of his life terrified of planes because both his parents were killed in the attacks.
Making racism into a fetish is just sick and profiting off of death is far worse than some of the other topics people have brought up so far.
DrZoidberg said:
You mean it's absolutely immoral for a video producer to lie to the model about the intent of their video. Obviously. Absolutely agreed.
Obviously, anybody could be jacking off & sexualizing in their mind absolutely anything & anyone they want on the internet or on television or any media whatsoever, and are obviously not getting the consent of whomever is on television,
and there is absolutely nothing immoral about that. And there's nothing anyone can nor should do about that anyway. Since it is not physically hurting anyone else.
And it in no way physically stops you or anyone else from doing what they want.
Obviously, you were not referring to THAT situation.
And, again, provided they are not jacking off in public.
Sure, I don't want to hear or see it, but I know it exists.
LeilaHazlett said:
It is absolutely immoral to sexualize someone without their consent.
It is absolutely immoral to sexualize someone without their consent.
You mean it's absolutely immoral for a video producer to lie to the model about the intent of their video. Obviously. Absolutely agreed.
Obviously, anybody could be jacking off & sexualizing in their mind absolutely anything & anyone they want on the internet or on television or any media whatsoever, and are obviously not getting the consent of whomever is on television,
and there is absolutely nothing immoral about that. And there's nothing anyone can nor should do about that anyway. Since it is not physically hurting anyone else.
And it in no way physically stops you or anyone else from doing what they want.
Obviously, you were not referring to THAT situation.
And, again, provided they are not jacking off in public.
Sure, I don't want to hear or see it, but I know it exists.
No I mean what I say. If some creep is jacking off to a woman wearing open toed shoes on a bus it's immoral. It doesn't matter if it's in public of not. If you're some perv who likes to watch your neighbor bending over while gardening and jerk off to it in the privacy of your home it's still immoral. If you want to jerk off to your local news lady on tv, well that's just pathetic but still immoral. If anyone is that sexually deprived then they should take some time to develop a personality and learn how to date and interact with other humans on a normal level.
Nick said: Its immoral to have sexual fantasies about people? Surely not?
Sexual fantasies and sexual objectification are two different things. I admit that I am a bit of a sex addict and probably have more sexual fantasies than most people. A fantasy is one thing, it is something present in your own mind. If you start doing things to manipulate a person in a way that doesn't seem sexual to them but is to you than you are objectifying that person.
For example, due to my back problems I can't bend over to pick things up and often have to ask others for help at work. I'm not going to go up to the cute girl wearing a short skirt and say "hey I really need you to grab that box under the counter, no the one way far in the back" just to get her to bend over far enough to maybe get a glimpse of her panties. Instead I'll just ask a guy to do it knowing full well that a guy bending over in front of me is in no way sexual (sorry dudes).
blackdelta said: The hypocrisy when he first posted that thread was amazing, though. People posted out that no one complained about similar vids where a model in a catholic nun's habit gets wammed, but the general consensus was that "it's okay to dis Catholics/Christians because they've historically been a horrible influence on humanity, but not to Islam because that's the majority making fun of a minority."
I personally never saw that one. I was raised catholic and am married to a devote catholic (no he doesn't hate gays or evolution, he is a true catholic in the scene of following the teaching of Jesus). Someone in a nun outfit being wammed doesn't automatically come off as offensive to me unless there was anti-religious rhetoric in the description of the video. And while I hate to sound like I remotely agree with the fox "news" perspective that society is happy to discriminate against Christians it certainly is more PC to be anti-christian.
The 9/11 video was a bit beyond just being racist, a lot of people were also upset at the exploitation of someone trying to make money off the death of thousands of people.
