Erotomania Productions & Management, Ltd.

Documentary: American Courtesan

2013-01-19T05:52:00.001-08:00

American courtesans press-release from SGB Media Group, Startup Hive

FSC Announces 2013 Board of Directors Candidates

2012-12-28T01:40:00.001-08:00

CANOGA PARK, Calif. — The Free Speech Coalition has announced the candidates for its 2013 Board of Directors.

Only active FSC members may vote in the election; electronic ballots will be sent by online survey service Survey Monkey-Zoomerang.

FSC members may vote for nine seats available in this year’s election from the field of 14 candidates.

First-time candidates include Vivid Entertainment’s Marci Hirsch, veteran performer Amber Lynn, Madness Pictures’ Mo Reese, Girlfriend Films’ Moose, and Porn Guardian’s Peter Phinney.

Other candidates include Kink.com’s Peter Acworth, attorney Jeffrey Douglas, Maia Toys’ Mara Epstein, AAANews’ Sid Grief, XBIZ President and publisher Alec Helmy, Good Vibrations’ Joel Kaminsky, AVN’s Mark Kernes, attorney Reed Lee, and adult industry veteran Lynn Swanson.

Active FSC members who do not receive their electronic ballots by Dec. 27 should contact the FSC office at (818) 348-9373 or email joanne@freespeechcoaliton.com

FSC Announces 2013 Board of Directors Candidates (xbiz.com)
Nomination Period for FSC Board of Directors Election Now Open (xbiz.com)
FSC Board of Directors Nominations Now Open (xbiz.com)
Photog, Performer Mo Reese Hopes to Bring 'Average Guy' POV to FSC (xbiz.com)

Adult Industry Leaders to File Suit Against L.A. County Over Measure B

2012-12-27T18:14:00.001-08:00

LOS ANGELES — A group of adult industry leaders announced today their intent to file a lawsuit soon against Los Angeles County over Measure B.

On Nov. 6 voters of Los Angeles passed Measure B, or what industry leaders maintain is an ill-conceived law that makes it mandatory for adult actors to wear lab coats, goggles and gloves as well as condoms while shooting adult films in the County. The law was funded solely by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF).

"The industry has organized a team of highly respected attorneys to protect our First Amendment rights. I am confident that we will prevail and ultimately save L.A. County millions of dollars as well as save thousands of jobs. As an industry we are united in this effort and look forward to our day in court," said Steven Hirsch, founder/co-chairman of Vivid Entertainment.

Industry attorneys Paul Cambria of Lipsitz Green Scime Cambria, Louis Sirkin of Santen Hughes, and Bob Corn-Revere of Davis Wright Tremaine will represent the industry in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Adult Industry Leaders to File Suit Against L.A. County Over Measure B (xbiz.com)
Infographic: The FACTS about L.A. County Ballot Measure B (xbiz.com)
Steven St. Croix Encourages Porn Industry to Fight L.A. Condom Law (xbiz.com)
Porn Industry Reacts to Measure B Passage (xbiz.com)

Match.com Reveals the Ups & Downs of Dating Behavior of 2012 & How Celebrity Relationships Compare to U.S. Singles

2012-12-23T07:17:00.001-08:00

Hopeful Hearts: 64% of Singles' New Year's Resolution is Finding Love in 2013

Nearly 1/3 of Younger Singles Have Reunited with an Ex More Than Three Times

DALLAS, Dec. 10, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- The dating world has proven to be a whirlwind for singles this year – for celebrities and everyday people alike. In an attempt to make better sense of it all, Match.com, the world's largest dating website, compiled the most compelling trends and statistics tied to the biggest highs and lows of relationships this year. For starters, 64%* of singles reported that their top New Year's resolution will be to find new love in 2013, and nearly 1/3 of younger singles reported reconnecting with the same ex over three times – Bieber and Gomez are on track to beat the odds!

So what's really behind these wild dating trends, and what's the best medicine for bouncing back and adjusting to singledom post-split? New data unveiled from Match.com's 2012 "Singles In America" study, the largest and most comprehensive study ever conducted on U.S. singles, showed that age and gender play a major role in the recovery experience, with men taking substantially less time to bounce back than women.

To further showcase these trends, Match.com took a look back at this year's top 12 most notable Hollywood dating moments to see how they stacked up against the study's most prominent statistics. Were Johnny Depp and Peter Facinelli's fast moves to re-partner post-break really that shocking? Or is this behavior in line with the recovery process of most U.S. males? Find out below from Match.com's "Singles in America" data highlights, paired with celebrity analysis, of the top celebrity shake-ups of 2012:

TOP 12 CELEBRITY SHAKE-UPS OF 2012 ACCORDING TO MATCH.COM
1. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes	7. Taylor Swift and Conor Kennedy
2. Heidi Klum and Seal	8. Will Arnett and Amy Poehler
3. Johnny Depp and Vanessa Paradis	9. Joe Simpson and Tina Simpson
4. Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart	10. Shia LaBeouf and Mia Goth
5. Peter Facinelli and Jennie Garth	11. Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
6. Bradley Cooper and Zoe Saldana	12. Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman

Top Deal-Breakers for Singles: Cheating was cited as the top factor leading to singles' most recent breakup (17%), an issue K-Pat are all too familiar with following Kristen Stewart'srecent tryst with director Rupert Sanders.

How Singles Bounce Back: While talking to friends/family is the most popular move post-breakup overall (41%), men are more likely to go out for a drink (24%) or immerse themselves in hobbies (20%). Women are more likely to mourn their breakup with food (22%) or by holing up and watching TV (22%).

Recovery by the Ages:

20s: Singles in their 20s are more likely to work out (20%), talk to their friends (56%), or go out for a drink (32%).
30s: Katie Holmes' recent focus on her career is not unusual after a breakup at all, as the study found singles in their 30s are more likely to immerse themselves in work (25%) after a split.
40s and 50s: Singles in this age range are less likely to hit the gym for solace (7%), and more likely instead to call friends/family (39%) for support or seek escape by watching TV (20%).

Recovery Time: 37% of men take a month or less to get over a breakup (55% bounce back in three months or less), a behavior that Johnny Depp displayed after immediately jumping into a new relationship with Amber Heard after his split with former girlfriend of 14 years, Vanessa Paradis. On the opposite side of the spectrum, 32% of women take a year or more to recover, with 1/5 of those surveyed reporting it took 2+ years to move on.

Take a Note from Taylor Swift: Singles in their 20s take less time to get over a breakup, with 62% reporting it took them less than three months to move on. On the flip side, the study showed that older singles in their 50s-60s lament longer, with 30% taking over a year to rebound right.

Can We Still Be Friends? Men are more likely to remain friends post-breakup (28%), while women are more likely to cut off all communication (41%) with their ex-partner.

Remaining Friends is Easier with Age: Singles in their 60s are most likely to remain friends, as demonstrated by Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman'scordial post-split relationship. Meanwhile, younger singles prefer to have limited communication via email and phone post-breakup.

Reconciling With The Ex: 50% of women and 43% of men have reconciled with an ex-partner. And the top reason for getting back together? Men are more likely to try again because they miss her, while women are more likely to give it a second chance because they're still in love.

27% of Younger Singles have Taken Back the Same Partner Over Three Times: Overall, younger singles are more likely to get back with an ex than older singles, since 27% of respondents in their 20s reporting going through the breakup/make-up cycle with the same ex over three times (and 9.3% have done this over five times!).

For more survey results and tips from Match.com's Relationship Expert Whitney Casey, visithttp://blog.match.com/datingin2012

Methodology
Data results were pulled from Match.com's second annual Single In America Study. First released earlier this year, the study was funded by Match.com and conducted by MarketTools in association with biological anthropologist Dr. Helen Fisher, Chief Scientific Advisor for Match.com; sex and relationship therapist, Dr. Laura Berman; evolutionary biologist with The Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, Dr. Justin R. Garcia; and the Institute for Evolutionary Studies (EvoS) at Binghamton University. The results, which include the views of a representative sample of over 5,000 US singles, gives a specific look at the relationships between Sex and Politics, Gender Roles and Romantic Expectations and is the largest and most comprehensive national study of American singles ever to be conducted.

*Data point taken from a Match.com member poll of over 1,000 single male and females.

About Match.com:
Founded in 1995, Match.com was the original dating website and pioneer of the online dating industry. Today, 17 years later, Match.com operates leading subscription-based online dating sites in 25 countries, 8 languages and across five continents and is responsible for more dates, relationships and marriages than any other website. Match.com is an operating business of IAC (Nasdaq: IACI) and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas. For more information, visit http://www.match.com.

SOURCE Match.com

How Does Celebrity Dating Compare to Rest of the Country? (usdailyreview.com)
EHarmony founder has his heart set on reviving the dating site (charlotteobserver.com)
PIMPROLL Acquires Dating Community Site BeSocial.com (xbiz.com)
For Your Big Date Announces Grand Opening - the One Stop Online Shop for Perfect Dating Essentials and Advice (virtual-strategy.com)
The Most Shocking Breakups of 2012: Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez, Heidi Klum and Seal, More (news.stylecaster.com)
Dating Sites Offer Antidote to Seasonal Loneliness (sacbee.com)

Judge Denies Government Motion to Dismiss in 2257 Case

2012-11-26T15:48:00.001-08:00

Seal, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

PHILADELPHIA, PA—Argument on the U.S. Department of Justice's Motion to Dismiss the lawsuit in Free Speech Coalition, et al v. Holder was set for 1:30 this afternoon in the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson, but less than an hour later, it was over, with Judge Baylson denying the government's motion from the bench.

While plaintiffs' attorney J. Michael Murray was not available for comment, his associate Lori Baumgardner told AVN that with the dismissal of the motion, the judge allowed discovery in the case to go forward. That would involve taking depositions of both the various plaintiffs as well as attorneys and others in the Justice Department who might have knowledge of the facts and issues involved, and who might have possession of documents relating to the government's handling of the case.

"There was an oral argument set on the Motion to Dismiss, and some judges do that," Baumgardner said. "We were a little bit surprised, but in an abundance of caution, Mike prepared his oral argument on the Motion, and he ruled from the bench denying their motion."

Today's hearing was the first official action taken by Judge Baylson since his ruling in 2010 dismissing the case on the original pleadings—a dismissal that was overturned by a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals on April 16.

Check back with AVN for more details of this exciting development.

U.S. Judge Won't Dismiss 2257 Suit, Sides With FSC (xbiz.com)
2257: The Fight Goes On (xbiz.com)
FSC's Suit Over 2257 Headed Back to Court Next Month (xbiz.com)

Pornstars Revolt Against Condom Law

2012-10-06T06:06:00.001-07:00

Porn stars are thus far not amused

by LA County's attempts to require the use of condoms in the films they make. And on Monday, they'll be raising their voices extra loud by holding a fundraiser at Hamburger Mary's in West Hollywood to fight Measure B, which would enforce just such a regulation.

The measure, which will go before voters in November, would also require adult films to get permits from the L.A. County Department of Public Health.

Monday's event, which starts at 8:00 p.m. and costs $20 at the door, is being organized by the No on Government Waste, No on Measure B committee of the Free Speech Coalition. According to a statementreleased by the group today, it coincides with Hamburger Mary's regularly scheduled Legendary Bingo event.

Event organizer Mara Epstein said that “The time has come again, for all industry members to work together and keep the California industry from being attacked by our opposition.”

Party With a Porn Star: Fundraiser on Monday to Fight Condom Initiative (laist.com)
AHF Launches 'Yes on Measure B' Condoms in Porn Campaign (xbiz.com)
'No on Measure B' Fundraiser Adds FSC Promo for Performers (xbiz.com)
No on Government Waste Committee to Discuss Measure B at Press Conference (xbiz.com)
So, What Is the Los Angeles County Condom Initiative, and What Happens if It's Passed? (xbiz.com)
'No On Measure B' Fundraiser: Porn Stars Party To Stop Condom Mandate (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)

CatalystCon Announces Fundraiser for Scarleteen

2012-08-28T05:36:00.001-07:00

Long Beach, CA - CatalystCon creator Dee Dennis has chosen Scarleteen as the recipient of a fundraiser to be held during the conference weekend. Dennis is a supporter of Scarleteen and the important work they do. As a mother she knows firsthand the lack of sex education available to children and knows the very important need for financially supporting Scarleteen and making it possible to continue the very important work they do. CatalystCon will be held at the Long Beach Hilton Executive & Meeting Center in Long Beach, CA, September 14-16, 2012.

Scarleteen provides millions of people in their teens and twenties with progressive, inclusive and original sexuality, sex and relationships education, information and support every year. Established in 1998, and continued since despite no federal, state or institutional funding, Scarleteen operates primarily via its popular, award-winning website -- consistently the highest ranked sex education site specifically for young people since its debut -- which includes articles, in-depth advice columns, external resources, and direct, one-on-one services which allow users to ask or talk about anything they need to, like their busy, moderated message boards and their SMS service. "Scarleteen's model has always been strongly unschooling and youth-focused, both in what information is provided and how they provide it, but also within their organization itself: they make sure the majority of their staff and volunteers are always under thirty. At Scarleteen, young people are afforded the respect to be leaders, either within their organization or their own lives, including their sexual lives.

Dennis’ passion for sparking change and sharing knowledge with others means showcasing Scarleteen at CatalystCon to generate more fans as well as donations. “Scarleteen operates on a very limited budget and is funded entirely by donations,” says Dennis, who notes Scarleteen’s “amazing work providing a safe place for young adults to get the sex education our school systems and many parents are not providing.”

CatalystCon attendees will not only be able to possibly win two nights at the Hilton Long Beach and two registrations to CatalystCon 2013 but will also be financially supporting Scarleteen. Dennis on behalf of CatalystCon will match funds raised up to $500.

Dennis is excited at the opportunity to introduce Scarleteen to CatalystCon attendees and encourage them to contribute to its mission of sexual health, wellness and personal responsibility: “I personally feel funding Scarleteen and making it possible for them to continue the work they do is extremely important.”

For more information, please contact http://catalystcon.com/ and http://www.scarleteen.com/ Go to http://catalystcon.com/registration to register today.

Follow CatalystCon on twitter @catalystcon and visit facebook.com/catalystcon.

Brian Gross

BSG PR

818.340.4422

brian@bsgpr.com

@bsgpr

About CatalystCon:

CatalystCon will be making its debut at the Hilton Long Beach & Executive Meeting Center in Long Beach, California, September 14th through September 16th. CatalystCon creator Dee Dennis regards this conference as a “melting pot of sexuality” that will unite sex educators, sexologists, sex workers, writers, activists, and anyone with a passion for creating change. "Knowledge is power, and sharing that knowledge is the first spark in igniting change." This is the fundamental principle behind CatalystCon. Attendees to this groundbreaking event will benefit from important discussions on a wide variety of subjects, such as sex work, polyamory, sexism in hip hop, senior sex, sex and religion, sex education, and much more. Go to http://catalystcon.com/registration to register today. Follow CatalystCon on twitter @catalystcon and visit facebook.com/catalystcon.

Rocco Siffredi: ‘89 to 100’ Syphilis-Positive Porn Performers in Europe

2012-08-26T11:38:00.001-07:00

Rocco Siffredi: ‘89 to 100’ Syphilis-Positive Porn Performers in Europe

Rocco Siffredi told XBIZ Friday that there are “89 to 100” adult performers currently infected with syphilis in three different Eastern European cities where porn is regularly shot — Budapest, Hungary, Prague, Czech Republic and St. Petersburg, Russia.

Dr. Chauntelle Tibbals Interview

2012-07-15T06:15:00.001-07:00

Dr. Tibbals explains how she became interested in exploring the truth about the Los Angeles-based adult industry; social constructs, stereotypes and gender issues; feminism and individual life perspectives; cultural biases and insensitivities towards men and women.”

Tennessee's Newly Enacted Sex-education Bill

2012-07-11T01:27:00.001-07:00

In Tennessee, a newly enacted sex-education bill, which takes an unabashedly pro-abstinence stance, prohibits public schools from promoting so-called "gateway sexual activity." Unfortunately, the grown-ups who argued in favor of the bill were too polite to define exactly what "gateway sexual activity" is, prompting the opposition to sneeringly dub the legislation "the no holding-hands bill."

What's fascinating to me is that the Nashville debate reveals in microcosm the confusion that reigns in the American political discussion about sexuality as a whole. To oversimplify, the Left thinks the Right are prudes and the Right thinks the Left are perverts. What both sides have in common, however, is they are far more comfortable with ambiguity than with clarity. And that's why neither camp is ready to have an honest discussion about sexuality.

Maybe it's a remnant of the Puritanical roots of this country's founders, but it seems that when it comes to all other forms of human behavior we Americans can at least agree about what it is we'redisagreeing about. Discussions of human sexuality, in contrast, are mostly left vague. Even the highest court in the land is famous for its shameful lack of clarity when it comes to the subject of s-e-x. As Justice Potter Stewart famously wrote in his 1964 opinion about the definition of pornography, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it."

Continue Here

Tennessee Passes Law Against 'Gateway Sexual Activity', Critics Suspect Holding Hands Qualifies As Sex (ibtimes.com)
Tennessee Passes Abstinence Sex Education Law (godfatherpolitics.com)
Push to add sex education to national curriculum (theage.com.au)
Tennessee Sex Ed Bill Warns Against Hand-Holding & Other "Gateway Sexual Activity" On The Road To Slutdom (thefrisky.com)
Tennessee governor signs "gateway sexual activity" bill (news.yahoo.com)

Untitled

2012-07-11T00:30:00.001-07:00

Tennessee Passes Law Against 'Gateway Sexual Activity', Critics Suspect Holding Hands Qualifies As Sex (ibtimes.com)
Tennessee Passes Abstinence Sex Education Law (godfatherpolitics.com)
Push to add sex education to national curriculum (theage.com.au)
Tennessee Sex Ed Bill Warns Against Hand-Holding & Other "Gateway Sexual Activity" On The Road To Slutdom (thefrisky.com)
Tennessee governor signs "gateway sexual activity" bill (news.yahoo.com)

Recent Supreme Court Ruling

2012-07-01T20:39:00.001-07:00

The adult entertainment industry’s multi-decade war against the federal record keeping and labeling statutes, known to many as the 2257 regulations, recently received one of its biggest victories in years.

Specifically, a 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tribunal reversed a lower court’s earlier decision to dismiss a case brought against the government by the Free Speech Coalition and other plaintiffs seeking to invalidate the 2257 regulations on constitutional grounds.

Because of the ruling, the case will now go back to the federal district court in which it was filed for further proceedings.

There is good reason for the adult entertainment industry to celebrate this great decision, and to congratulate FSC, its co-plaintiffs, and the plaintiff’s attorneys for a job well done indeed. While the 2257 regulations are still, unfortunately, quite alive and well, in light of the 3rd Circuit ruling, the ultimate constitutionally of the regulations is now more in doubt than perhaps at any time in the past.

But it is important to note that the 2257 regulations are in serious constitutional jeopardy in large part because of the 3rd Circuit’s ruling that they apply to purely private communications.

This interpretation supports the plaintiff’s contention that the statutory foundation of the 2257 regulations, 18 U.S.C. § 2257 and 18 U.S.C. § 2257A, are unconstitutionally overbroad because they apply to far more expression than necessary.

In its opinion the court recognized the plaintiff’s assertion “that the statutes are substantially overbroad because they burden the entire universe of constitutionally protected expression involving sexually oriented images of adults—including private, noncommercial depictions created and viewed by adults in their homes.”

The court then acknowledged the government’s counter-position stating that, “the statutes’ scope should be narrowly construed as applying only to depictions of actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct created for sale or trade, and thus, producers of purely private depictions would not be subject to the statutes.

In support of this position, the government cites the preamble to the regulations, which states that the government interprets the statutes as being “limited to pornography intended for sale or trade.” 73 Fed. Reg. at 77,456. The government also points to specific terms in § 2257 that it asserts speak primarily to the creation of images for industry distribution, such as “sexual performers,” “places of business,” and “normal business hours.”

But despite the government’s arguments, the court completely rejected the government’s interpretation that the 2257 statutes only apply to commercial depictions. In support of its ruling, the court stated:

“[T]he plain language of the statutes makes clear that they apply broadly to all producers of actual or simulated sexually explicit depictions regardless of whether those depictions were created for the purpose of sale or trade. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. §§ 2257(a) and 2257A(a) (stating generally that “[w]hoever produces” any book or other matter containing “visual depictions” of actual or simulated “sexually explicit conduct” shall be subject to the statutes). It is axiomatic that regulations cannot supersede a federal statute. As a result, the plain text of the statutes setting forth their broad scope must trump any conflicting statements contained within the preamble to the regulations, including the assertion that the statutes are “limited to pornography intended for sale or trade.” 73 Fed. Reg. at 77,456.

Similarly, the regulations’ definition of “producer” also belies the government’s position. As discussed supra, the regulations define “producer” as a primary or secondary producer. 28 C.R.R. § 75.1(c). A primary producer is defined as any person who creates a visual depiction of a human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct. Id. at (c)(1). The definition of a primary producer is silent as to whether the depiction must be intended for commercial distribution. Id. A secondary producer, however, is defined as any person who, inter alia, publishes a magazine or other matter containing a visual depiction of a human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct, which is “intended for commercial distribution.” Id. at (c)(2) (emphasis added). Thus, because the definition of “secondary producer” limits its scope to those depictions created for commercial distribution but the definition of “primary producer” does not, the clear implication is that “primary producer” is not limited to those who create depictions for commercial distribution.”

The court then completely rejected the government’s interpretation that the 2257 statutes apply only to commercial content concluding that “the statutes are not susceptible to such a limiting construction.

A Great Victory and Word of Caution (xbiz.com)

"End Demand" - has hit another absurd low!

2012-06-29T08:33:00.001-07:00

English: New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg with Spider-Man at Midtown Comics Downtown. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Anti-Human Trafficking campaign - aka "End Demand" - has hit another absurd low in New York City. Mayor Bloomberg has now declared that New York Cabbies can refuse rides to any woman who "dresses like a prostitute.." and can be fined if they do, on the grounds that they are aiding the "trafficking of human beings.." Needless to say, all the working girls in the City will thank the mayor for further marginalizing them from the rest of society and making a dangerous job all the more insecure.

We're told that being a prostitute will mark a woman for life. Yet after several millennia of practice, lawmakers and social reformers still struggle to identify what a sex worker looks like.

You know,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said (in a June 15 appearance on WOR's perfectly named "The John Gambling Show") when asked what might go wrong with a bill that could penalize taxi drivers who knowingly transport people in the sex trade, “if I were a young lady and I dressed in a ‘sporty way’ -- or however you want to phrase it, and there's nothing wrong with that -- I would not want somebody thinking that I’m a prostitute.”

Has Mayor Stop-and-Frisk given pause on an issue of criminal profiling? Even the reliably hooker-baiting New York Post came out swinging against the bill, citing a protest held by women bartenders, who “aren't hookers – they just look like they can be!” concerned that cab drivers would leave them stranded for fear of getting stung.

The intention of this bill, according to proponents like New York City Council Speaker (and mayoral hopeful) Christine Quinn, is to make it undesirable for taxi and livery drivers in the city to risk any involvement in what they call “sex trafficking.” But the bill doesn't actually say that: it hits taxi and livery drivers with a $10,000 fine and the revocation of their license if they “knowingly allow” their vehicle to be “used for the purpose of promoting prostitution.”

Attorneys at the Sex Workers Project (SWP) have argued that language like “promoting prostitution” is too vague. “It could include anyone who knowingly aids another person to commit prostitution and anyone who receives money from someone else, knowing it came from prostitution,” SWP co-director Sienna Baskin said in testimony to the city council. No matter what the bill's intentions, cab drivers could end up passing up fares from sex workers – or people they think might be sex workers.

Bloomberg is overstating the issue a bit: no matter how they are dressed, it's unlikely his daughters would be profiled as prostitutes. But he's not wrong: there's simply no way taxi drivers can tell if the woman riding in their backseat is doing sex work, and whether or not she has been compelled or forced to, just by picking her up as a fare.

Putting such a law into practice in a culture that harbors intense myths and fears about what a “prostitute” looks like only ends up perpetuating dated and sexist notions of how women ought to conduct themselves in public, which in turn can put women in danger. In this regard, 21st-century anti-prostitution politics are not so different from their counterpart a century ago. There might be one difference: while today's anti-prostitution advocates will at least cop to it not being easy to tell if someone is a sex worker just by looking at them, that doesn't actually stop them from trying.

Not all that long ago, any unaccompanied woman on an American street could be considered a prostitute. At the turn of the last century, the phrase “public woman” was still synonymous with a woman in the sex trade, based on the notion that women's work was to be confined within the home, and besides, wasn't really work. The low-wage jobs available to working-class and some immigrant women took them outside the domestic sphere, and offered them a measure of freedom, and for the first time, their own money. That mobility, as much as their growing financial independence, made those young women suspect in the eyes of social reformers.

As Elizabeth Alice Clement documents in her book Love For Sale, these working young women of the Progressive Era faced intense scrutiny from social reformers, for how they made their money and how they spent it. The social welfare reformer Jane Addams warned that girls who took jobs in department stores might be especially likely to become prostitutes. “It is perhaps in the department store more than anywhere else,” Addams wrote in her 1912 treatise A New Conscience and An Ancient Evil, “that every possible weakness in a girl is detected and traded upon. It is not surprising that so many of these young, inexperienced girls are either deceived or yield to temptation in spite of the efforts made to protect them.”

Addams' remedy to such a threat? Educating young women and their caretakers on how essential it is that they must remain chaste. Women, in Addams' estimation, could bring about a world in which they not fear being “despoiled” if they abstain not just from sex but from public amusements – rather than fighting to ensure their right to work and take up space in the public sphere without fear of rape or violence.

With the agitation of Addams and other reformers of her time, laws against prostitution and “white slavery” swept the states. While some reformers meant for the laws to allow them to separate “innocent” victims from those “fallen women” who chose prostitution, the result was the closure of red-light districts in American cities, including raids on businesses that allowed prostitutes to patronize them and rooming houses that allowed prostitutes to live and work there.

All this was done in the name of “protecting” women, and yet prostitutes found themselves out in the cold, or pushed to work for managers who could act as go-betweens with customers and landlords, protecting the prostitutes from being known as prostitutes or discriminated against. The laws that were supposed to protect them ended up pushing prostitutes to the margins of cities and the social order itself.

Such attitudes – vintage victim-blaming or slut-shaming, meant to “save women” from themselves – shifted only slightly at the dawn of women's liberation and the sexual revolution.

When a young San Franciscan named Margot St. James was arrested and charged with prostitution in 1962, she attempted to defend herself to the judge, saying, “Your honor, I've never turned a trick in my life.” According to St. James, the judge replied that he knew she must be a prostitute because “anyone who knows the language is obviously a professional." St. James concluded, “My crime was I knew too much to be a nice girl.”

It was only after this encounter with the law that St. James became a prostitute, going on to found one of the first organizations in the United States to organize for sex workers' rights, COYOTE (Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics). By the 1970s, COYOTE had succeeded in getting the National Organization for Women to adopt the decriminalization of prostitution as a policy platform.

Even as some corners of the feminist movement reconsidered prostitution laws and the damage done, a national backlash was on against gains made by the women's and gay liberation movements. City governments moved to “clean up” neighborhoods that mixed porn theaters and gay bars with entertainment and tourism, like Boston's Combat Zone and New York's Times Square.

In 1976, New York state passed a law criminalizing “loitering for the purposes of prostitution.” How were cops to identify “intent” to commit prostitution? In reality, the law gave them the power to stop and question women walking in neighborhoods known for prostitution, or for “looking like” a prostitute in a neighborhood she “shouldn't” be in. In a report evaluating the law a few years after its passage, New York Women in Criminal Justice argued that the anti-loitering statute violated the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution, as it was overwhelmingly used to target women.

Loitering-with-intent charges are still brought against women today, and against women of color and trans women far more often than white women and cisgender women. Women also rarely fight these charges, as St. James did. The rise of “anti-prostitution zones” in cities like Washington, DC means that women can face arrest simply for entering one of these areas, declared at the discretion of the police. In practice, cops rely on racial and gender profiling in enforcement, a feminized version of “stop and frisk.”

You could be forgiven for mistaking 2012 for 1912. Jane Addams' philosophy is still alive, too, only with a pseudo-feminist twist. In a training for Georgia law enforcement offered by the anti-prostitution campaign “A Future, Not A Past” (AFNAP), they suggest ways that cops can identify young women in the sex trade. A few of the warning signs? “Inappropriate dress, including oversized clothing or overtly sexy clothing.” “Poor personal hygiene.” “Older boyfriend.” Acting “angry” and “tearful.” They also warn parents of daughters to be wary of “rumors among students regarding sexual activity – which your child may not necessarily deny.”

They say they just want to give cops and parents tools to help girls. But stoking fears that their daughters could be victims of trafficking if they're having sex, or expressing completely average feelings for a teenager? Likewise, instructing cops that it's okay to profile young women based on their dress, in order to stop and question them? Groups like AFNAP don't call it searching girls for evidence of “shame” or “ruin” anymore. Now they call it “empowerment.”

A hundred years of incoherent law has delivered us to a point in history where prostitution is as illegal as it ever has been, and yet politicians demand more laws against it. Contemporary anti-prostitution activists claim more women than ever before are trapped in what they have begun to call “modern-day slavery,” and yet, these advocates tell us they are hard to find. Yet neither prong of the anti-prostitution cause seems to consider how these laws against sex work drive its invisibility, and can turn any woman deemed to be doing the wrong thing in the wrong place at the wrong time into a suspect or a criminal.

Do You Look Like a Prostitute? (Whatever That Means): It Might Mean No Taxi Cabs (alternet.org)
Bill Would Fine Taxis for Carrying Sex Workers (theepochtimes.com)
City Room: On Radio, Mayor Signs Taxi Sex-Trafficking Bill (cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com)
Sex buyer ban 'hasn't had desired effect' (thelocal.no)
Hey Ho! Backpage Protesters Hit Village Voice on the Hottest Day of the Year (betabeat.com)

CatalystCon Announces over 50 Speakers, 40 Sessions for Inaugural Conference

2012-06-28T20:15:00.001-07:00

September 14-16, 2012 at the Long Beach Hilton Executive and Meeting Center in Long Beach, CA

Long Beach, CA - CatalystCon announces over 50 speakers and 40 sessions for its upcoming inaugural conference to be held September 14-16, 2012 at the Long Beach Hilton Executive and Meeting Center in Long Beach, CA. CatalystCon will feature many of the most recognizable names in the field of sexuality including Carol Queen, Ducky Doolittle, Rachel Kramer Bussel, Charlie Glickman, Joan Price, and Reid Mihalko.

CatalystCon creator, Dee Dennis regards this conference as a “melting pot of sexuality” that will unite sex educators, sexologists, sex workers, writers, activists, and anyone with a passion for creating change. "Knowledge is power, and sharing that knowledge is the first spark in igniting change." This is the fundamental principle behindCatalystCon.

Attendees to this groundbreaking event will benefit from important discussions on a wide variety of subjects, such as sex work, porn, polyamory, sexism in hip hop, senior sex, sex and religion, and sex education.

Dennis co-organized the MOMENTUM conference on sexuality, feminism and relationships earlier this year in Washington, DC. In the wake of the profound success of the MOMENTUM, she felt that there was a very real demand for a similar conference on the West Coast and is excited to host CatalystCon, which she believes will “inspire exceptional conversations about sexuality.”

Battles over sex education, reproductive rights, gay marriage, obscenity, pornography and other forms of adult entertainment and expression have played a central role in the 2012 election season. Sex is always a political issue, but it becomes even more so in challenging economic times, both dividing and uniting individuals.CatalystCon's Opening Keynote plenary, moderated by UNLV Women’s Studies Professor Lynn Comella and featuring esteemed panelists Dr. Marty Klein, Megan Andelloux, Maggie Mayhem, and Francisco Ramirez, will tackle these issues head on as the panelists address ongoing debates over sexuality at the local, national and global levels.

Comella predicts that CatalystCon will be “one of the most exciting sexuality conferences that I’ve ever been part of. Sex, reproductive rights, gay marriage and pornography have been at the center of an often heated 2012 campaign season, which makes this conference especially timely.”

Pre-registration is required to attend CatalystCon and Early Bird pricing is available until July 1st. Go tohttp://catalystcon.com/ registration to register today.

Follow CatalystCon on twitter @catalystcon and visit facebook.com/catalystcon.

Brian Gross

BSG PR

818.340.4422

brian@bsgpr.com

@bsgpr

Good Vibrations Announces Inaugural Sex Summit (xbiz.com)
A new sex education programme (todayonline.com)
Sex Education - Yes or No (gcaffe.com)
"Sex Should Come Naturally" is Nonsense (psychologytoday.com)
Sex and sexuality education: live discussion (guardian.co.uk)
Intimate Organics Participate in Harvard's Sex Week (xbiz.com)

XXX Top Level Domains

2012-06-12T22:30:00.001-07:00

XXX Top Level Domains

A Windfall for ICM Registry, and Potentially Worse

Stephen W. Workman, Esq.

In a reversal of position, ICANN has decided to authorize ICM Registry to offer and oversee a new “xxx” TLD regime. Whatever you may think of ICANN’s decision, for now it’s a reality to be dealt with. So the question becomes whether you, as an owner or operator of adult websites, should participate in this, eh hum, brave new world.
The creation of the xxx registry presents you with a Hobson’s choice: If your site is successful, and you don’t purchase the xxx domain, chances are that someone else will. If that happens, there are two potential results, neither good. Result One: the xxx domain registrant will attempt extortion, demanding payment of several thousands dollars in exchange for transferring the domain to you. Result Two: the domain registrant will launch a site in hopes of confusing consumers as to its identity or affiliation with yours and, as parasites are want to do, feed off the success you’ve worked so hard to enjoy.
The ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy would in most cases relieve you of such nefarious threats or actions, but even that streamlined procedure comes at a cost of time and money, albeit minimal. (I’ve utilized ICANN’s domain dispute procedure on many occasions on behalf of clients, and – thus far - the arbitrators have always gotten it right, so I do have confidence in that protocol.)
But ICM offers you “good news.” ICM has a solution to this problem (keep in mind that the problem was created by ICM, to be solved at your own expense). The solution is to pay ICM a “one-time fee ranging from $50 to $250” and it will block your second tier name, so that no one else can use it in the xxx regime.
Clever, and perhaps good public relations. Paying ICM a “one-time fee” is cheaper than filing a domain dispute under ICANN, let alone filing a Lanham Act complaint against the plagiarist who seeks to unfairly cash in on your hard earned success. That said, I’m not about to offer much credit to ICM for this gesture.
ICM’s pitch to ICANN has been that establishment of the xxx TLD would represent an act of good citizenship, a great public service: xxx domains would enable parents and businesses to block access to those domains on their computers, and would enable consumers of adult entertainment to have “peace of mind,” as website operators under ICM’s regime will supposedly be compelled to commit to principled standards of operation. Apparently, ICANN finally bought into the argument.
I disagree with ICANN’s decision, if only for the fact that it serves to create and enrich a monopoly, i.e., ICM. Moreover, I believe the more accurate characterization of the xxx TLD is not as a public service, but as an effort to create a “cyber-ghetto.”   As history has informed, the problem with ghettos (where a manner of culture or, in this case, a manner of entertainment, is concentrated) is that it becomes all too easy for opponents of that culture or entertainment to punish or banish it.
Constitutional principles should, hopefully*, thwart any misguided attempts to corral all adult websites into the xxx neighborhood. And make no mistake, the temptation is there, tantalizingly close to those who would like nothing more than to marginalize, if not eradicate, your content.
(* Would forcing you to give up operating on a .com domain and move to a xxx domain violate the “taking” clause of the Fifth and Fifteenth Amendments? Some courts have determined that your rights to a domain are akin to your rights to a telephone number – if this analysis were to ultimately hold sway, then the answer as to whether you can be compelled to operate on a xxx domain is dangerously unclear - - as we all know, your telephone area code can be changed, and there’s nothing you can do to prevent it. Could the courts decide that a TLD is akin to an area code? It’s not outside the realm of possibility.)
But beyond that important issue – which I can address at length in a subsequent article - - the fact is there are millions of adult websites, untold numbers of which are successful. Many of those will feel compelled to either register and redirect, or at least pay to block others from using, identical or confusingly similar xxx domains. That’s an immense financial windfall for ICM. And, from your point of view, for what?
I think you know the answer to the question, and if it angers you, it should.

Mr. Workman has represented the adult Internet community, throughout the U.S. and internationally, since 1997. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or (630) 852-2620. www.worldmedialaw.com.
© 2010 Stephen W. Workman P.C.

via worldmedialaw.com

Please Help Tara Who Had A Stroke

2012-05-07T20:14:00.001-07:00

Give

Ira Issacs Found Guilty

2012-04-29T04:11:00.001-07:00

Ira Isaacs Found Guilty on Five Counts of Federal Obscenity

A jury today found fetish filmmaker Ira Isaacs guilty on five counts of violating federal obscenity laws.

The MOMENTUM Conference in Washington DC will Make Waves in Sexuality, Feminism and Relationships

2012-02-17T00:17:00.001-08:00

New York, NY – The 2^nd annual MOMENTUM Conference (momentumcon.com) will take place in Washington DC from March 30^th through April 1^st, 2012. The conference will be held at the Crystal City Marriott at Reagan Airport. MOMENTUM brings together the best people in their fields of the LGBTQ, sex-work, BDSM and non-monogamous communities. Speakers will discuss ways to bridge the baffling dichotomies our culture creates around sexuality.

Abortion laws, restrictions on gay marriage, abstinence programs, medicalization of sex, fear of pornography and prosecutions for teenage sexting are examples of one side of the spectrum. The discomfort that strives to make us keep our sexuality hidden conflicts with the use of sex — especially the female body — to sell everything from food to cars to “performance enhancing” products.

The opening Keynote Plenary Panel is moderated by the legendary Dr. Carol Queen and features esteemed panelists Bill Taverner, editor-in-chief of the American Journal of Sexuality Education, author and sexuality educator, Dr. Logan Levkoff, founder and director of the Red Umbrella Project, Audacia Ray, and university professor and Education Program Manager at Good Vibrations, Charlie Glickman, PhD. Our Closing Plenary features author of the international bestseller Mating in Captivity, Esther Perel, and journalist, Lara Riscol. The conference will kick off with an exclusive meet & greet and performance by comic Maria Falzone.

MOMENTUM is geared toward anyone interested in intelligent conversations about the influence of new media on sexuality. After a sold out first year in 2011, MOMENTUM has expanded its space, presenters and sessions, with over 40 sessions and 60 presenters.

MOMENTUM will cover a wide range of viewpoints on sexuality, and the program is sure to have something of interest to everyone.

Each participant in MOMENTUM will leave the conference with new perspectives, new connections and a plan to carry the MOMENTUM forward into 2012 and beyond.

Pre-registration is required to attend MOMENTUM. Go to momentumcon.com or http://momentumcon.com/registration/hotel for registration.

For more information, please contact Brian Gross, BSG PR, (818) 340-4422. Email: brian@bsgpr.com. Twitter: @bsgpr

The MOMENTUM Conference in Washington DC will Make Waves in Sexuality, Feminism and Relationships

2012-02-17T00:15:00.001-08:00

MOMENTUM will cover a wide range of viewpoints on sexuality, and the program is sure to have something of interest to everyone.

Each participant in MOMENTUM will leave the conference with new perspectives, new connections and a plan to carry the MOMENTUM forward into 2012 and beyond.

Pre-registration is required to attend MOMENTUM. Go to momentumcon.com or http://momentumcon.com/registration/hotel for registration.

For more information, please contact Brian Gross, BSG PR, (818) 340-4422. Email: brian@bsgpr.com. Twitter: @bsgpr

iHookups.com

2011-11-20T21:37:00.000-08:00

YOUR TEXT OR IMAGE GOES HERE

Fighting Over Online Sex Ads

2011-11-08T07:20:00.001-08:00

What if the price of having a vital, well-financed string of newspapers included rare, but inevitable, sexual predation of minors?

Not a tough call, right? But maybe more complicated than you think for the businesses involved.

Before you head out for the lanterns and pitchforks, it’s worth remembering that a free press is not free. One of the offshoots of free speech is that it will be used to pernicious ends. In this instance, Village Voice Media has a classified network called Backpage.com that includes a section labeled “adult” with categories like “escort” and “strippers & strip clubs.” The vast majority of ads involves one consenting adult seeking another, but there have been instances in which the section was used to offer minors for sexual ends.

Village Voice Media is controlled by Jim Larkin and Michael Lacey, whose weeklies include The Village Voice, Westword and Phoenix New Times. It has an anything-goes approach to advertising, but in a digital age, that policy has new implications.

In September 2010, Craigslist, which hosted a great deal of sexually related advertising, bowed to pressure and banned that advertising in the United States. A number of crimes, including several murders, had been linked to ads on the site, and many critics, including a number of state attorneys general, suggested that Craigslist was enabling the trafficking of minors.

A significant portion of the estimated $44 million in sex-related advertising on Craigslist found a home on Backpage.com. Like a lot of newspapers, Village Voice Media’s chain of 13 weeklies has struggled through the terrible economic cycle and big changes in advertising spending, so the revenue from Backpage.com, much of it unrelated to sex, has played a critical role in its survival.

But in August the country’s 51 attorneys general sent a letter demanding that the site close its “adult” section, and now a coalition of religious leaders has joined that effort. Last Tuesday, Groundswell, an interfaith social justice group sponsored by Auburn Seminary in New York, published a full-page ad in The New York Times that was signed by clergy members of all stripes and cited the arrests of adults who had sold minors for sex using Backpage.com. The ad stated, “It is a basic fact of the moral universe that girls and boys should not be sold for sex.”

“While we empathize with your business challenges and the increasingly difficult marketplace in which Village Voice Media competes,” the letter went on, “we trust that you are committed to running your business without compromising the lives of our nation’s boys and girls.”

The Rev. Katharine Rhodes Henderson, the president of Auburn Theological Seminary, said that while the issue was complicated, the bottom line was not.

“On Backpage.com, you can buy a toaster, a car or a girl for sex,” she said. “We agree with the attorney generals on the legal issues, but we are raising this as a moral issue. Even if one minor is sold for sex, it is one too many.”

Mr. Larkin and Mr. Lacey are accustomed to having people come after them. They were harassed and arrested in the middle of the night in response to the coverage by one of their newspapers of Joe Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz. Mr. Lacey, who has made a career out of tweaking the powers that be, sees this battle as no different.

“I am beginning to like our odds,” he said. “We have all these practicing politicians and concerned clergy after us. We must be doing something right.”

In a phone call, he and Mr. Larkin pointed out that Web sites like Backpage.com are not legally responsible for posted content and added that the company had spent millions on both human and technological efforts to screen ads that feature minors. They said they had worked with law enforcement officials and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in an effort to make sure Backpage.com’s “adult” section included only adults.

Both men see the debate as a free speech issue.

“We have always had a very libertarian approach to advertising,” said Mr. Larkin, adding that classifieds represented 30 to 35 percent of their business. “We don’t ban cigarettes, we take adult advertising. We take ads that sell guns.”

From their perspective, the claims of their opponents are wildly exaggerated and all the money being spent trying to wipe out advertising would be better spent on the root causes of the problem, including drug addiction, poverty and family abuse.

“There is a lot of mythmaking around the issue and I think it’s a way of avoiding the real problem,” Mr. Lacey said.

Rob McKenna, the attorney general of Washington State and the head of the association of attorneys general that went after both Craigslist and now Backpage.com, says the issue goes beyond minors.

“I think we have to be careful to protect the First Amendment rights of publishers, but free speech does not extend to the knowing facilitation of criminal activity,” he said. “This is not just about children being prostituted, this is about human beings being trafficked into the sex trades, as adults and as children.”

It’s no news to anyone that sex is an integral component of the Internet and much of the mainstream media. Early on, AOL included lots of raunchy backrooms. The brand-name cable channels make a great deal of money on sexually explicit content, and if someone is looking to buy sex, there are any number of Web sites that cater to all manner of interests.

It’s worth remembering that while pressure from the attorneys general and Congress led to a change at Craigslist, the whack-a-mole on the Web continues. If Backpage.comretreats — not likely given the predispositions of its owners — some other alternative will immediately take its place.

It reminds me a great deal of the early 1990s, when I was the editor of The Twin Cities Reader, an alternative weekly in Minneapolis. At the time, we were under fire for publishing ads for strip clubs, escort services and massage parlors. The staff and the publisher at the time, R. T. Rybak, were keenly attuned to the community and always looking for points of difference from City Pages, our weekly competitor. With support from the staff, Mr. Rybak announced that we would no longer take ads that “objectified” women, a bold move. It was thought that beyond the good will we earned in the community, other, nonracy advertisers might find our paper to be a more suitable platform.

Our critics, including many women’s groups, were thrilled at their victory and congratulated us on our sensitivity. The policy went into effect, wiping out, as I recall, about 15 percent of the bottom line. City Pages left its ad policy unchanged. Some of what we lost went to them and little in the way of new ads materialized to fill the hole.

City Pages eventually became the dominant paper — in part because it was very good and run by smart people — and when, yes, Village Voice Media decided to enter the market, it bought both papers and closed The Twin Cities Reader. I was gone by then, but I thought the decision to be selective about ads contributed to its demise.

I called Mr. Rybak, who is now the mayor of Minneapolis, to ask if he regretted the decision.

“It was absolutely the right move,” he said. “When you engage in a certain kind of journalism that is designed to be an alternative to the mainstream, you have a special obligation to have your editorial, your values and your advertising align.”

“If we had more time, I think it may have worked out,” he said. “But I often think about what would have happened if we had those two pages of ads in the back. Would the paper still be around? It wasn’t the only reason it went out of business, but it played a role.”

Although Mr. Larkin and Mr. Lacey hardly agree, they are taking their own version of a principled stand. And just because it aligns with their business interests doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.

E-mail: carr@nytimes.com;

Twitter.com/carr2n

Lisa

2011-10-17T02:32:00.000-07:00

XBIZ.netView My Industry Profile »

Connecticut Prisoners Protesting ‘Unfair’ Porn Ban

2011-10-09T17:24:00.001-07:00

State officials believe that having a bunch of porn lying around in prisoners' cells all the time doesn't make for a very hospitable work environment for women who work in Connecticut's penitentiaries; indeed, the Associated Press reports that some female guards have complained about being sexually harassed by porn-wielding inmates. Also, porn doesn't really help rehabilitate sex offenders, officials say. But the pro-porn protester-prisoners assert that the ban violates their First Amendment rights. (It might also violate their Eighth Amendment rights, if they happen to be Chronic Masturbation Syndrome sufferers.) They're willing to compromise: If they can't have magazines, they'll accept "cable programming that offers and displays nudity, also sexual activity"—otherwise known as Pornographic Films.

Do you think it's unfair to make Connecticut prisoners do their time without access to "pictorial depictions of sexual activity or nudity?" Or do you think these guys are just being whiny and spoiled? At least they don't have to remain in isolation for 22 hours a day or endure being frozen by air conditioners running at full-blast, like the hunger-striking prisoners in California's Pelican Bay prison do. Maybe that's an unfair comparison to make, but consider that the ban "doesn't include material that could be considered literary, educational, artistic or scientific." So it's not like they're being kept from reading. These guys can still subscribe to National Geographic, which sometimes has naked people in it. And art magazines. And Reader's Digest, which doesn't have nudity but a lot of great jokes.

Porn.xxx Domain Expected To Fetch $50,000 At Auction

2011-10-09T07:34:00.001-07:00

After more than ten years of very vocal opposition by nearly every company potentially affected by the new .XXX top level domain (TLD) extension, on March 17th 2011 ICANN approved .XXX despite numerous concerns. Chief among those concerned was a prevailing consensus that the creation of the .XXX domain was an simply an underhanded attempt at a money-grab by ICM Registry, the backers and owners of the new domains. Now, the truth of that concern is finally coming to light. .XXX History And Widespread Opposition The theory that ICM Registry [1] would use their new .XXX domains to fleece owners of existing .com domains has become commonplace. The addition of a new extension with no other redeeming value according to opponents, serves solely as an attempt by ICM Registry to extort large sums of money from companies interested in protecting the purity of their existing brand names. Primary domains like Sex.xxx, XXX.xxx ,Porn.xxx, Hustler.xxx, Playboy.xxx and others were thought to be the most likely targets. Several leading companies from all facets of the adult entertainment industry banded together to take part in the creation of DotxxxOpposition.com, a news resource and community forum backed by the Free Speech Coalition and many industry insiders. The site hosts a parody style video that satires the efforts of ICM Registery and stars Larry Flynt (Huster CEO), Allison Vivas (PinkVisual CEO), John Stagliano (Evil Angel CEO), Joanna Angel (BurningAngel.com), Ron Cadwell (CCBill CEO), Peter Acworth (Kink CEO), Mitch Farber (Netbilling CEO), and a host of other adult industry leaders. The film was written directed and produced by Wasteland.com CEO Colin Rowntree. [2] Industry communication among online message boards and trade shows has also been decidedly against the creation of .XXX, and ICANN itself stated serious concerns that lead to a denial initially and a half-hearted approval eventually. "Upon first blush, a .xxx sTLD sounds like a brilliant idea. But once one factors in the real world implications of such an easily blocked, censored, marginalized, and manipulated domain suffix, it becomes far less appealing" according to DotxxxOpposition.com "When a business with no ties to the online adult entertainment industry decides to “protect” it by cornering the market, aggressively pushing for the domain, rewriting history, treating our representatives and press with marginal respect, brushing our concerns aside, charging $60 per registration — and telling us we’re lucky that the price is that low — even beer goggles don’t make it look kissable. For these and other reasons, we believe that, in spite of panicked domain preregistrations, the voice of the industry is soundly raised in opposition to what would ultimately become Stuart Lawley and the ICM Registry’s company store." Limited Market And Curtailed Reach As if the opposition to .XXX from within the industry it seeks to consolidate was not enough of a headwind for ICM Registry to overcome, major regions of the world including India and the Middle East immediately stated their intention to block all .xxx domains when word of their approval by ICANN was announced. According to a report published by The Economic Times: "India along with many other countries from the Middle East and Indonesia opposed the grant of the domain in the first place, and we would proceed to block the whole domain, as it goes against the IT Act and Indian laws," said a senior official at the ministry of IT. "Though some people have said that segregation is better, and some countries allow it. But for other nations transmission and direct distribution of such content goes against their moral and culture." [3] Michael Humphrey of Forbes.com also picked up on the myriad of economic problems that would unnecessarily be caused by the release of .XXX stemming from exorbitant domain registration fees, ghettoizing of adult content chilling free speech, and he concluded " Whatever your stance on porn might be, you can see why the industry thinks those “x’s” look more like a mark than a market." [4] Domain Pricing Expectations While ICM Registry has already set the wholesale price for 'standard' .xxx domains at approximately $60 per year, with markup charged by each associated domain provider at the consumer level expected to bring prices up to the $200-300 dollar range for newly purchased domains, ICM Registry has also chosen to hold back a large number of 'premium' .xxx domains in the hope of generating much higher selling prices at auction. It should be noted that much of the intrinsic value of some of these domains can be directly attributed to the fact that the underlying .com version of the same keyword has already been used in the marketplace successfully for years. In that way a strong legal argument exists regarding copyright infringement if companies decide to litigate rather than capitulate when acquiring the '.xxx version' of their own existing brand names. While the windfall profits may fall far below the desires of ICM Registry, the costs projected still make litigating appear to be inexpensive in contrast to purchasing premium domain names that may be garnered easily via court order instead. According to EllitotsBlog.com, a leading community of domain speculators, a poll recently posted asked what price domainers believe movies.xxx may bring as part of the auction at an upcoming TRAFFIC trade show. Two telling facts can be taken from the poll. On the one hand, the lowest option listed by editors was 'Under $50,000', creating a bias within the results of at least a five figure sale price. The other fact is that more than 40% of respondents at the time of this writing have made 'Under $50,000' the clear winner, with almost twice as many votes as any other price bracket. [5] Approval of Many More Top Level Domains When the initial ICANN ruling authorizing .xxx domains was announced, many onlookers were shocked by the decision. The 16 member panel had seemingly allowed the creation of .xxx in direct conflict with the industry most affected by it and opened what some believe to be a Pandora's box of free speech problems in the process. Two months later, on May 30th 2011 ICANN may have expressed it's reasoning through its own action in a way much more profound than any of the earlier rhetoric. A major barrier to completely revising the way the internet is managed was forever discarded by a 13 to 3 vote in favor of introducing an unlimited number of new top-level domains to compete with .com, .net and .xxx. The new process requires a $180,000 application fee and a fair amount of bureaucratic red tape, but for the first time it sets a clear path for anyone interested in creating their own new TLD quickly. For the mainstream market this means a company like Disney may soon own the TLD .kids or a company like Dreamworks might choose to create a .Movies extension. However, for the adult industry and .xxx specifically, the impact may be much more immediate and profound. If the price of creating the entire .Sex or .Hardcore TLD is only $180,000 and includes every domain name under a comparable adult TLD extension, why would any company choose to spend more than that amount seeking to secure the .xxx version of their own .com domain from ICM Registry? It is a question that domainers seem to be answering with the silence of their checkbooks. Analysis And Summary After a decade of battle to bring .XXX through the ICANN process and millions of dollars in expenses, ICM Registry may be left holding the bag on an entire set of domain names that lose value as each day passes. "We can unequivocally say that the industry does not support it," said Diane Duke, the executive director of the Free Speech Coalition, at a press conference covered by PCMag.com during a formal protest attended by many top industry executives during ICANN deliberations. [6] The fact that seems to have eluded ICM Registry is that the number of companies willing to explore business opportunities in the adult entertainment market has always been very limited. Most so-called mainstream companies won't even purchase traffic from massive adult sites or allow their affiliate program traffic partners to use explicit content to generate sales. With such a small list of potential buyers to begin with, the systematic efforts of ICM Registry to confound industry insiders and overlook industry concerns may have poisoned the well before .xxx ever had a chance to take root. Resource Links & Sources This Op-Ed by Stewart Tongue is based on information from private discussions with industry professionals, domainers and numerous credible resources. Some of the more prominent resources are linked below for your conevenience. [1] http://www.icmregistry.com/ [2] http://dotxxxopposition.com/ [3] http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-03-24/news/29181495_1_new-d... [4] http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelhumphrey/2011/03/24/indias-reaction-to-xxx... [5] http://www.elliotsblog.com/at-what-price-will-movies-xxx-sell-8475 [6] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2382185,00.asp#fbid=0CPO3-xA6az Stewart Tongue is a writer and professional SEO marketing consultant for leading adult entertainment industry brands. His work also includes a consistent focus on the ethics of online commerce. He owns and operates a network of more than 700 active websites.

This Week's Posts on Xbiz

2011-10-02T09:55:00.001-07:00

New Google Tool Tracks Traffic in Real Time

Google launched a new tool that will allow webmasters to track in real time how many people are currently on their site.

New Google Tool Tracks Traffic in Real Time

Google launched a new tool that will allow webmasters to track in real time how many people are currently on their site.

FSC: Jeffrey Douglas - It’s Time

I have a policy: FSC does not give awards to standing board members. To the outside world it would seem a conflict of interest and somewhat self-serving. However, in this milestone year for FSC I thought it not only appropriate, but also necessary to say a few words about a man who is significantly responsible for FSC’s success — FSC Chairman of the Board Jeffrey Douglas.

XBIZ EU a Resounding Success, Draws Top Industry Execs

The inaugural XBIZ EU international digital media conference this past weekend was a resounding success, with many top industry execs praising organizers for large turnouts to its seminars and events.

Adult Entertainment Execs Face Jail for Cheating IRS

Two proprietors of “live adult entertainment for cash-paying customers” could get jail time for cheating the IRS.