I never saw this before, I know it's legal but how?
 

A twisted old gf just did a shoot for this site called insex.com so I go and take a look and man that is one twisted site. I know the girls all signed releases and it is all legal but how? I thought graphic depiction of rape was against the law? I had a client who wanted to host a rape storie and graphic site with me and I declined because I did not want any trouble.
Anyone have any ideas?


fuel

I just checked out the site. I don't see any rape or simulated rape. I see extreme BDSM. What's the problem?

I'm no expert, but I thought penetration while bound is illegal.

Maybe Lawpal can tell us?

Yes, penetration while bound is illegal, so is fisting. Those were two highly enforced rules when I last worked in a live studio (not on camera but supervising). This also applied to hustler hardcore feeds, so I believe it is true unless the rules have changed in the last two years.

Theres rape through out the whole site. Girls are bound gagged and forced to have intercourse with toys or cock. I was under the impression that penetration while bound was against the law. But it's seen through out the whole site.


fuel

why would simulated rape be illegal?
Don't movies have similated rape or murder?
Watch Rambo and you see thousands killed but all fake.
Who gives a shit?

I think Adam Glassers case legitimized fisting, at least as far as LA County proseutors are concerned. In fact the scene in question on Tampa Tushy Fest II was actually double fisting. In the plea Glasser copped, the DA agreed to allow him to continue distribution of T T F II, double fisting scene included, with a guarantee he would face no obscenity prosecution for it.

Extreme BDSM is another thing entirely. It would be far easier to get a conviction for something which to an S&M lifestyle uninitiated Jury looks like rape/abuse.

The difference would be in the "artistic merit" and "socially redeeming value" portions of the obscenity test set forth in the Miller case.

We don't know how "simulated" it is on the inside of the site, do we? I think the distinction may have to do with the fact that in the Hollywood movie it really IS simulated, whereas in this case perhaps it is not.

Stories are not illegal, no matter what is in them. If there have been convictions in the past, that just means that someone somewhere had a shitty lawyer, or it was the 50's.

Free speech, motherfuckers!