Max Hardcore

[40_and_frisky]

It takes a little bit of initial effort, but I've found a great source of free pictures from GGG videos. You first have to sign on to Yahoo Groups - if you're not registered with Yahoo, you'll have to do that first. Then go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/facials-only/ and subscribe to that group. You can't go to that link directly as it's an adult only one. You can only access after being signed on to Yahoo groups. There's a guy there who posts a message every day with a jpg attached that's a series of about a dozen pictures from a GGG movie always ending in a massive facial. Enjoy.

As for Rocco, if you like him rough and nasty, check out his Animal trainer series.

I've seen Rocco in other movies before, and I think he's an absolute babe. But, I don't think I've ever seen one of his own movies before. There are these mpegs that I've been downloading from the internet lately that I think are really hot. I think the movies are made by a German company (GGG?). The scenes always have lots of guys for every girl (yummy), lots of rough sex and degradation (yummy), and lots of cum (double yummy).

 

[nawtyleanni]

thanks frisky, I'll have to check that group out.

 

[Andreina]

I can't speak for Max Hardcore, but I know that I am definitely not a misogynist.

I respect women a great deal, and completely believe in gender equality.

That doesn't mean I don't want to desecrate and violate women in the unholiest of ways when we're fucking, but thats just me and I don't step on any toes.

couldn't agree more!

 

[nawtyleanni]

Yes, he did put that rather eloquently

 

[rosco rathbone]

Nemoalia said: "Misogyny comes in several different forms (including fantasy), but it's still misogyny, in varying degrees. "

I love Max and Rocco Siffredi and the whole rough sex/humiliation side of perverse fucking. I also think it's well worth taking the time to introspect and to wonder why, though I believe in equality for women, it does nothing to make my penis hard.

It's interesting to think about how our political beliefs and our emotional beliefs may often be at odds. Many times I find myself walking the streets, seeing all that pass with the misogynistic eye: what I call the eye of rape. I know from long self-examination that a well of black woman-hatred lies inside me, and I know that it is fed by the springs of negative pornography. Speaking for myself alone; I think it would be irresponsible and worse, self-blinding, to deny that I enjoy images of violent sex and humiliation (enjoy in the sense of strong emotional sympathy) due to a fundamental misogynistic strain in myself. I will go way out on a limb here and suggest that any other man who enjoys this kind of thing is likely to be a bird of similar feather.


roscoe

 

[Ebonyfire]

Those who know this place and the kind of conversations we have here will know, too, what place he holds.

I was not gonna say anything but I must say...Oh puleeze!

Ebony

 

[Sandia]

Marquis, I wasn't going to say anything, either, but since I've just waded through a very long thread, I feel posting should be my reward.

I haven't watched Max Hardcore, and based on the descriptions, I don't think I wanna - but then, I've never cared much for video porn. I've always liked stories better.

I did get your reference to the difference between the stories on this site and the posters.

The stories have all kinds of subversive and kinky acts and people in them, but on the boards people tend to shy away from that.

There's a tendency to objectify the physicality of sex - to deny the psychological implications. Nobody wants to own to what's going on in the mind.

Including me.

Heh.

 

[morninggirl5]

Marquis, I wasn't going to say anything, either, but since I've just waded through a very long thread, I feel posting should be my reward.

I haven't watched Max Hardcore, and based on the descriptions, I don't think I wanna - but then, I've never cared much for video porn. I've always liked stories better.

My thoughts exactly.

I did get your reference to the difference between the stories on this site and the posters.

The stories have all kinds of subversive and kinky acts and people in them, but on the boards people tend to shy away from that.

The authors, posters, and readers on this site are three different groups and they don't intersect to a great degree. I haven't read a story here in probably a month.

There's a tendency to objectify the physicality of sex - to deny the psychological implications. Nobody wants to own to what's going on in the mind.

Including me.

Heh.

I definitely want to own what's going on in the mind. Although there are times that turning your mind off is a wonderful feeling.

 

[gumbie]

i have seen some of Max's videos. Some turned me on, some turned me off. i guess it is one of those personal preference things.

 

[NemoAlia]

Speaking for myself alone; I think it would be irresponsible and worse, self-blinding, to deny that I enjoy images of violent sex and humiliation (enjoy in the sense of strong emotional sympathy) due to a fundamental misogynistic strain in myself. I will go way out on a limb here and suggest that any other man who enjoys this kind of thing is likely to be a bird of similar feather.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, rosco! I don't think we've officially 'met,' yet, but it has been a pleasure to read your thoughts on these boards. Your honesty is commendable and brave, especially since you're admitting something that might not be your most flattering side.

Why not take it step farther and claim that women who "think" they like sex, really don't, and only do it to capitulate to society's expectations? And even if women do things in bed that they really aren't too crazy about in order to please a man, it's still their choice to do so.

Good point, nawty. However, I didn't mean to imply that society was forcing women to choose one thing over another. I just believe that society often tries to limit the number and variety of options that women have to choose from. I think Max Hardcore's videos give the (false) impression that to choose submission is to choose to be the victim of misogynistic abuse.

Explain to me what the difference is between Max Hardcore's films and the acts that are in them? Are you just offended by the way he markets his movies? That he stays in character and refers to women as bitches and sluts while talking about his movies, and not just in his movies?

Yes, certainly a part of my indignant response involves Max's marketing of his films. In fact, I would definitely say that it's the strongest indicator the films' overall tone. While the acts can be viewed in several different lights, the words he uses to describe them cannot be misconstrued.

He is definitely selling misogynistic sex, but many people (men and women) are turned on by it. Is that wrong?

No, I will never fault anyone for being turned on by something. However, I believe that we have a responsibility as a society (and that Max Hardcore in particular has a responsibility as a director) to make sure that people who are turned on by rough sex know that there are other ways of approaching it that they might prefer if they knew about them.

I'm sure I have more to say, but it has been so long since I've had the time to sit down and type a reply that I've just about run out of endurance. Thanks for the interesting discussion, Marquis!

 

[nawtyleanni]

NemoAlia

No, I will never fault anyone for being turned on by something. However, I believe that we have a responsibility as a society (and that Max Hardcore in particular has a responsibility as a director) to make sure that people who are turned on by rough sex know that there are other ways of approaching it that they might prefer if they knew about them.

*So your problem with Max Hardcore is that his vision of "rough sex" invariably involves calling the woman names and humiliating her? And you think he should mix it up more so that his audience realizes that "rough sex" does not have to be overtly misogynist?
But why should he do that? He has his little niche in the market, and if people what to see other kinds of S&M, they can rent different movies. Furthermore, I would guess that most of his customers want to see overtly misogynist sex when they rent/buy one of his movies, and would feel cheated if he "watered down" his product. And lastly, to many feminists, any form of sex that involves a man being rough with a woman is misogynistic.

Yes, certainly a part of my indignant response involves Max's marketing of his films. In fact, I would definitely say that it's the strongest indicator the films' overall tone. While the acts can be viewed in several different lights, the words he uses to describe them cannot be misconstrued.

While I do think that the meaning and connotation of words is often open to interpretation, I won't argue that when Max Hardcore uses words like "whore," "cunt," and "slut" that he means them in anything but a demeaning way. But that's his product; misogynistic sex. So unless you think it's wrong for people to watch depictions of misogynistic sex, I don't understand why you would have a problem with the language that he uses.

I think that when an attractive man makes sexual comments to a woman in the work place, it's usually called "flirting," but when an ugly man makes the same comments to a woman in the work place, it's usually called sexual harassment. Could a similar phenomenon be happening in our appraisals of Max Hardcore? If he was a charming, good looking man would people be as offended by his work? Personally, I like rough sex and name calling, but I can't stand to watch Max dish it out because he is so unattractive to me.

*I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, just genuinely trying to make sure I understand the point you are making.

 

[Marquis]

NemoAlia




I think that when an attractive man makes sexual comments to a woman in the work place, it's usually called "flirting," but when an ugly man makes the same comments to a woman in the work place, it's usually called sexual harassment. Could a similar phenomenon be happening in our appraisals of Max Hardcore? [/B]

wow, thats a really good point. I think you may have taken this discussion to the next level.

 

[rosco rathbone]

...and that is why the ugly are fundamentally sexier than the beautiful and Max is superior to Rocco.

 

[NemoAlia]

*So your problem with Max Hardcore is that his vision of "rough sex" invariably involves calling the woman names and humiliating her? And you think he should mix it up more so that his audience realizes that "rough sex" does not have to be overtly misogynist? But why should he do that? He has his little niche in the market, and if people what to see other kinds of S&M, they can rent different movies. Furthermore, I would guess that most of his customers want to see overtly misogynist sex when they rent/buy one of his movies, and would feel cheated if he "watered down" his product.

Yes, it's difficult for an 'auteur' to educate his audience if they don't want to be educated. That is perhaps one of the reasons why 'they' killed Socrates, why Mozart died a pauper, why... well, anyway, the list could go on forever. All right, then, give the public what they want. And, for that matter, keep demanding more of what you have. I mean, we are all part of "the public." We all have the privilege of demanding whatever sorts of products that we'd like to see.

However, if BDSMers who would like to see BDSM freed from the shackles of public outrage choose to support Max Hardcore as one of their own, they're shooting themselves in the foot. Max Hardcore supports about outright, universal misogyny. Real-life, safe sane and consensual BDSM, for most people, does not. Some feminists may argue otherwise, but it's very difficult to prove that these personal, caring BDSM relationships violate our public sense of decency and respect. If we support them and disown Max Hardcore, perhaps we will win some respect and legitimacy for our life/lovestyle.

 

[nawtyleanni]

BDSM wouldn't be nearly as much fun if it was "legitimate."

 

[NemoAlia]

Nawty -- That's a pithy post! I do believe I'm going to start a new thread with that as its subject, just 'cause I'm curious to hear what other folks have to say. As always, you spark my mind to action and my curiosity to a real interest.

 

[UCE]

Max is quite hot, IMO, although his isn't the best porn I've seen. Bangbus does witty VA (verbal abuse and humiliation) better; Rocco does evil anal-busting hunk better, and many places do violent face-fucking better. Nobody does the filthy dirty soaked makeup-smeared fuck-slut look better than Max, however (I mean he does it to his partners--he doesn't look that way himself, lol. He must have lots of fun messing up their faces). He always strikes me, however, as "appearing" to be harsh but actually being quite gentle. He pulls his punches--I mean slaps. I've never seen a woman at the end of one of his films or photo sessions with actual bruises. I love his piss degradation stuff: he's very creative in that area.

I think I'll find Max hotter for me when he gets a bit older and the age difference between him and the twenty-somethings who dress up as little girls in his flicks gets more pronounced. I like the dirty old man sexual dynamic a lot but Max, who may be old for all I know, still seems too energetic and middle-aged.

My favorite kinky-sex videos, FWIW, are made by INSEX: just simple, real, bondage and torture in an industrial setting.

Nice ass picture follows:

 

[Marquis]

Thanks for the picture but just curious where that fits in to this conversation?

Not that I am ungrateful.

 

[UCE]

...and almost every one of us believes that he/she is "smart enough" to make this distinction. However, if we are all capable of making this distinction, why do racism and misogyny still exist? My argument is that there is no distinction to make. Misogyny comes in several different forms (including fantasy), but it's still misogyny, in varying degrees.

I think you're incorrect in that last statement. Misogyny is _not exactly_ misogyny if the person who is the victim of it or apparently gets the raw end of the deal (the woman) gets off on it or, even more, craves it and needs it in her sexual life so strongly that she will bitterly and vocally fight anybody who tries to deny her freedom to access this material by stating that her favorite directors need to "change their tune." I don't know if you realize it, but you're kind of sort of promoting censorship here, because you don't like a particular style of sexual relating. But you need to realize that this style, as much as you dismiss it or find it disgusting and horrific, gives a minority of us, men AND women (you won't believe how many women I know who are into this kind of shit) a reason to live.

The same goes for racism. I was an active participant for many months in a forum my black girlfriend started that was all about white men sexually abusing and stereotyping in the worst possible language and actions, black women. Totally racist, totally politically incorrect, but for the black women and white men eagerly participating in in that group, INTENSELY HOT.

Sometimes the most beautiful flowers can emerge from a bed of foulest dung. The world is upside-down and what is dark is light and what is light is dark. I don't know how else to say it: you either feel the deep intimiate connection between good and evil which turns them into their own opposites or you don't. I feel this very strongly in the sexual realm. Max Hardcore and others like him will always be minority voices in the large porn arena. But my life would personally be a lot less rich without him and his ilk around. He reaffirms my wonderful positive intensely sexual sense of myself by being his darling old misogynist self...because he speaks to the dark part of me were my sexuality burns brightest.

Charming porn pic follows. This guy is not misogynist, but he is tres hot...to me. I hope he doesn't die of a heart attack any time soon:

 

[UCE]

Thanks for the picture but just curious where that fits in to this conversation?

Not that I am ungrateful.

It doesn't fit into the conversation at all. I'm just posting these pics at random because I collect them and like to share them and becuase the forum software lets me. If you see any in the future, just assume they're completely unrelated to the chit-chat...unless I say there's a connection, and then I'll make the connection clear.

 

[NemoAlia]

UCE, I believe that the word "misogyny" describes the misogynists, not the women who are getting the raw end of the deal. Whether or not these women are enjoying themselves (and I do know many who are!) doesn't affect my description of the misogynists at hand.

I'll admit that's a fine tightrope to be walking in a BDSM forum!

Still, BDSM is a personal thing -- not a generalization. Humiliation between a Dom/me and a sub is one thing; categorical devaluing of an entire group of people based on a common characteristic is another thing entirely: something that is not BDSM in my book.

Max Hardcore may be hot, but that doesn't make him acceptable to me.

Does this mean that I am advocating censorship? No. But I am advocating awareness and thought, as well as careful introspection. Blatantly advertising misogyny encourages people to embrace the generalizations and catch-phrases without ever putting any of their own thought into the subject. Therefore, I think that Max Hardcore is partially responsible for what I believe is a negative aspect of BDSM, and of sexuality in general. I will not deny him the right to his decisions, but one of the consequences of his decisions is my dislike.

And as for the women out there who might be denied access to material like Max Hardcore's work if my opinion ever becomes popular, here's my off-the-cuff analogy:

Let's say you enjoy eating monkey brains; they're a real delicacy. Of course not everyone shares your taste, but at least you're free to enjoy those brains yourself. One day, the world's scientists and health care professionals finally make their voices heard: monkey brains carry disease! In an effort to keep people safe, grocery stores stop carrying monkey brains, restaurants stop serving them, and suddenly you either have to do without monkey brains or go to the jungle and find them yourself. Well, okay. No one's stopping you. But keep in mind that monkey brains do cause disease -- there's a reason why nobody wants to buy or sell them any more! From here on out, you'll have to do without the middleman. It's between you and the monkey. Consider yourself warned.

 

[UCE]

that's a fine tightrope to be walking in a BDSM forum!

Still, BDSM is a personal thing -- not a generalization. Humiliation between a Dom/me and a sub is one thing; categorical devaluing of an entire group of people based on a common characteristic is another thing entirely: something that is not BDSM in my book.

In your book, yes. In my book, no. And if you kept it to your book, that would be fine. But in your other message and below you are advocating that people restrict their freedom of speech and expression simply to conform to your conceptions (and yeah, I know they are the majority conceptions) of morality and comfort. That is NOT cool, IMO. Stay away from what bothers you, speak against it, fine. But please don't try to guilt trip or otherwise influence others who get off on this stuff to not do it because our sexuality is somehow "irresponsible" in your opinion. No one is forcing this form of sexuality on anybody. The people drawn to it tend to be the ones who get off on it. So why not take an attitude of live and let live and let them do their thing? Certainly you'd love it if the straight world did the same thing for the kinds of bdsm you do approve of, right? Certainly it bothers you when the straight world interfers with your sexuality, perhaps jailing your parnters or people you know and love because the overall majority considers them "abusive?" So why advocate the same type of draconian treatment for a subgroup within bdsm that you, for whatever reasons, happen to disapprove of? By doing so, you become just like "them."--the oppressors.

You go on to say:

"Does this mean that I am advocating censorship? No. But I am advocating awareness and thought, as well as careful introspection. Blatantly advertising misogyny encourages people to embrace the generalizations and catch-phrases without ever putting any of their own thought into the subject."

This is an example of the "people--particularly women--as innocent and unsuspecting victims" style of thinking that the intellectual elitists tend to adopt. YOU can think, YOU can be critical but the vast majority of morons out there cannot. Uh-uh. I don't buy it. People become attracted to misogony for the same reasons they are attracted to bdsm general or any kind of sexuality: it strikes a chord in them, it appeals to them, it resonates or feels RIGHT. Sure, there are high-school age girls who might adopt misogyny if they thought it was cool and everybody was doing it, but highschool kids are liable to do that about any trend that seems popular. Later, they grow up, and decide for themselves what it is they actually like. Besides, the chances of misogyny of the type Harcore displays is not likely to become the "in" thing in highschool land. I would think that Eminem and other rappers are much larger misogonystic boogeymen and bad influences for the young and easily influenced than Max.

I don't mean to insult you, but this argument you're usin--that it's irresponsible to advertise X because it sways the poor little befuddled minds of others who don't know how to correctly evaluate issues the way that superior intellects like _I_ do--is the primary form of argument over at NOW and MS--and they use it to condemn almost any form of sexuality and behavior (and that's a lot) that they disapprove of.

You know what? I am quite guilty of the same sorts of feelings--although my object is a different one. I have in the past felt almost as strongly about the mainstream and well-accepted bdsm commonplaces (which I call "myths" because almost all of them are false and harmfully misleading) as you do about Hardcore. And I rail against them, when I'm in the mood. And I do see people, over and over, being influenced by and blindly adopting ideas from mainstream bdsm that later on really bite them back hard (if you base your actions upon false assumptions and incorrect facts, the outcomes you expect and desire will almost never come to pass). But lately I've come to the belief that people need to make whatever mistakes they make--and learn from them, if they are capable, as that's the only way most of us learn. I have always known that I learn best through fucking up, but I hadn't applied that idea to others until just recently. I think that all you can do is put out, as reasonably and clearly as possible, your views about why such-and-such is bad and let people make up their own minds. What they decide will be based in large part on their experience and how that experience colors your message--not what you say, necessarily, although being crystal clear about it always helps.

You say:

" Therefore, I think that Max Hardcore is partially responsible for what I believe is a negative aspect of BDSM, and of sexuality in general. I will not deny him the right to his decisions, but one of the consequences of his decisions is my dislike."

Of course, I can have no issue with that, and I fully support your right to feel any way you want toward him or toward other forms of misogyny.

You then said:

"And as for the women out there who might be denied access to material like Max Hardcore's work if my opinion ever becomes popular, here's my off-the-cuff analogy:"

This I flat out don't agree with--you're hinting at a "right equals might, moral majority--WE get to deny YOU access to ideas becuase there are more of us than there are of you and so we have the power to suppress what WE do not like attitude. Do you _really_ want to be saying this? Everybody is entitied to the kind of sexuality that turns them on as long as it hurts nobody else besides the two people involved. What goes on between them, be it the most blatent form of misogyny, is nobody else's business, and furthermore, if you ever gain the political clout to _supress_ misogyny via legal or other methods, then you are denying people, like a very young woman who is a lot like me, access to the only kind of sexuality that will make her hot, happy, and fulfilled: you are condeming her to a sexless empty boring "yes it was great dear" life in much the same way the feminists wish to make bdsm women's lives that way.

Let's say you enjoy eating monkey brains; they're a real delicacy. Of course not everyone shares your taste, but at least you're free to enjoy those brains yourself. One day, the world's scientists and health care professionals finally make their voices heard: monkey brains carry disease! In an effort to keep people safe, grocery stores stop carrying monkey brains, restaurants stop serving them, and suddenly you either have to do without monkey brains or go to the jungle and find them yourself. Well, okay. No one's stopping you. But keep in mind that monkey brains do cause disease -- there's a reason why nobody wants to buy or sell them any more! From here on out, you'll have to do without the middleman. It's between you and the monkey. Consider yourself warned.

Before I give my argument against this analogy I wish to point out that in it, you are, indeed, promoting censorship. Grocery stores stop carrying monkey brains: bookstores stop carrying pro-misogyny books and magazines. Resturants stop serving them: libraries stop stocking them. And finally you have to do without moneky brains or go to the jungle to find them: and finally, all distribution channels, including the internet, are cut off for misogynists to express their ideas to others and one must go underground and take extremely risky and illegal actions in order to find them. I'm sorry Nemo but censorship IS PRECISELY the decision by people in power that one idea or group of ideas is like a disease and therefore should be denied to other people "for their own good."

This is an accurate analogy IF and only IF one can dare to presume that misogyny is a disease rather than a sexuality choice, like bdsm, that some of us feel compelled to adopt for our own happiness and peace of mind. I see the absurd lengths to which some governments have gone to make pot illegal as very similiar: I'm talking of course about the way they take it away from legitimate medical organizations dispensing to people for whom it is a medecine, whom it really helps. Pot and Misogyny are similar in another way, in my opinion. Not only is misogyny a life-saving medicine for a small minority of us, it is also a largely harmless substance for the majority of us. Most people are not the brainless dummies your message seems to imply theyy are. They're going to see misogyny, either be repulsed (or, more likely, bored) by it and go on. It doesn't have this secret glamourous appeal that you seem to see it having, just as pot isn't the devil weed or hardcore evil drug that some paranoid non-smokers seem to think it is.

I would like to see you express your ideas about WHY you see misogyny as so harmful to others. What is it that really bothers you about what max does specifically or what misogynists do in general. Get real detailed with me if you can: describe specific actions he takes.


Also would you deny hate groups and neo nazis and other very politically incorrect groups the right to express their ideas in the mainstream, by doing the media version of treating them as poison? If no, why not? Freedom of speech is very important, and when you classify one type of speech or certain ideas as a "disease" that should be wiped out, as in your analogy, by stopping all forms of mainstream distribution of the ideas.

Unda

 

[UCE]

I want to make one more thing clear: I don't mind anyone being pro-censorship. You have a right to your opinion, even if I violently disagree with it. What I DO mind is dishonesty: calling a bloody axe a soft comfy cushion. And Nemo's denial that her argument was pro-censorship followed by the analogy in which the fundamental argument behind censorship was advocated (that's why they banned and burned books in the 50s, too--because these books were feared and seen as a "disease" of the mind): the idea that somoe ideas are too dangerous for the poor helpless populance and should therefore be controlled by those of us who know better and who are in power.

I know you won't make yourself friends or popular by stating outright that you are in favor of censoring anything. But when you are dishonest about your intentions and your real beliefs slip out, like they did so clearly in your analogy, it makes it hard for people like me to take you seriously on an intellectual level. I know that most people don't see through that sort of rhetorical technique: overt denial and covert approval, but if you feel very strongly about an issue, you need to write about it as if the smartest and most critical individual you've ever met is reading it carefully looking for serious problems with your argumentation, because sometimes they will be. Scrupulous honesty in one's approach, however personally painful that honesty may be, will make an argument, if it has actual worth, invincible.

 

[Marquis]

Damn UCE! Bring it!

 

[Sandia]

I'm going to step away from the censorship/freedom issue for a moment and go back to the sex/misogyny issue: the interesting thing about sex - the wonderful thing about it - is the extent to which it is transgressive. This is important because the liberalization of sex destroys - or attempts to destroy - what makes sex transgressive in the first place.

Look at the language for a moment - look at the words: What does "fuck you" mean? What is the difference between calling someone a cunt or a cock? Why is it an insult to tell someone to bend over and take it up the ass? Or to "suck my cock?"

There's a buried (well, not too buried) misogyny throughout our culture that's expressed through the language. It's part of the hard-wiring in our brains, combined with the woman-as-mother, woman-as-wife, woman as virgin sacrifice. The Madonna/whore dichotomy.

Look at slut-wife literature. Why would a guy get off on imagining his wife used as a slut by gangs of violent men?

The yin and the yang of sex is humilition/degradation, light and dark, good and evil, love and sacrifice. Pain and pleasure, for some. To take one without the other - to try to convince yourself that sex is all goodness and light, a purely physical pleasure, like eating or sleeping - is to deny the friction that makes sex explosive - that makes it pleasurable, and more than just pleasure, but an obsession in the first place.

So should subversive sex be suppressed?
Absolutely.