All your questions answered (and by the way, I’m selling the blog to Focus on the Family)
For those of you following the saga of Alas and the Pornographer, Barry has spoken: Yes, he knew there would be porn. Yes, he understood that the internet rating for Alas would drive up the search engine rankings for the pornographer. No, he doesn’t think it’s such a bad thing. Yes, he should have been upfront about it, and he’s sorry.
It’s been noted that Barry has the right to do what he likes with his domain, and yes, he does. But his readers also have the right to know that the site is both promoting and benefiting from pornography. Pornography like this:
First Time Auditions is exactly what it sounds like. These girls are at their first auditions, usually 18-25, thinking that they are auditioning for the next big role. Well, they do get something big alright, just not the role. These girls getting down and dirty on camera for the first time. Each trying to make a name for herself and make it to the big time.
Or maybe just trying to avoid getting beaten up by her boyfriend/pimp, or maybe trying to make enough money to get a drug fix…
Mikes Apartment, the only place where ass turns into cash. Mike puts ads in the paper for week-to-week room renting in his apartment. The only catch, you have to be female and you have to put out. Mikes Apartment features tons of smoking hot amateurs getting down and dirty.
Because there’s nothing hotter than women prostituting themselves for a place to sleep.
Other links include BangBros, well-known for its extreme-misogyny porn, and a bunch of other heartwarming sites.
A surprising number of commenters at Alas and various other sites don’t seem to grasp that the commercial relationship between Barry and the pornographer is ongoing. There seems to be some idea that Barry just sold the domain and now has nothing to do with it. I don’t know why people think this, since Barry has stated quite clearly that not only was he paid for the domain, but he receives free server hosting from the pornographer. And the pornographer, in turn, gets to feed off of Alas’s high internet ranking.
Barry can do what he likes. But pornography is a feminist issue, and if a feminist blog is being supported by and is in turn supporting pornography, the readers have a right to know. Just my opinion.
45 Responses to “All your questions answered (and by the way, I’m selling the blog to Focus on the Family)”
-
Chris says:
I don’t know why people think this, since Barry has stated quite clearly that not only was he paid for the domain, but he receives free server hosting from the pornographer.
And that’s an aspect of the arrangement I neglected to mention in my post, and it’s creepy as hell.
October 11th, 2006 at 9:10 pm EST -
Chris says:
And shouldn’t that be “I’m sellling the blog to spend more time with my family,” or is that Mark Foley’s blog I’m thinking of?
-
Violet says:
The comment thread on this over at Alas is just incredible. The mental gyrations people go through…
“What was he supposed to do, starve?”
So selling to pornographers is the only way to make money? And on top of that there’s a law against informing your feminist readers and contributors?
“The only people who have a problem with this are people who already hate Amp!”
And that would be people like…me? Lauren? I’ve never had a problem with Amp and I’ve always linked to his blog. You don’t have to be an anti-Ampersand fanatic to see a serious, serious problem with his handling of this business.
-
Mandos says:
Apparently Ampersand got a year’s worth of Ampersand’s salary from this deal, claims Heart on her blog.
-
Chris says:
You don’t have to be an anti-Ampersand fanatic to see a serious, serious problem with his handling of this business.
Nope.
And contrariwise, my last public interaction with Barry was essentially a screaming match — well, I screamed anyway — and yet my response is all annoyingly nuanced and shit.
-
gordo says:
Mandos–
The sale price was probably gigantic. Getting your site on the front page of Google when someone is looking up “MILF” or “Free Porn” or “Brutal Rape Movie” has got to be worth some serious cash.
Violent–
I wouldn’t want the poor guy to starve. Or get a job. Clearly, this was the best choice for him.
Fortunately, I have other options — I’m heading downtown right now to peddle my ass. I hate doing it, but it’s better than selling my site to Bangbros.
I can’t help but wonder why he didn’t just tell people up front what was going on. If he thinks he’s justified, he should have felt compelled to do it. If he’s ashamed of himself, it could have been cathartic:
“Look, I hate doing this, but it’s a whole lot of money. I read Traci Lords’ autobiography, and it tears me up to think that I’m helping people to exploit young women and girls that way. But like I said, it’s a serious wad of cash we’re talking about.”
-
will says:
As you have highlighted, at least he sold it to a porn site and not something really deviant like Focus on the Family or Pat Robertson.
Maybe we should have a game:
What is Your Price?
Would VS turn over her blog to porn for 5 million?
Would VS turn over her blog to Falwell for 2 million?
Would Chris sell faultline to Gail Norton for 1 million?
-
Pony says:
I’m having some money problems. I’ve got just over $10,000 to live on for the rest of my life. If I live about 8 months, I’m good! I have no pension having used my savings to live on when I became disabled and could not work, and when I cared for someone else ill. I work very limited time now, but work I do, sometimes in a lot of pain. I don’t get any disability income, or take welfare. I’ve always been a housewife, or worked from home for min wage and no benefits, or worked contract for low wage and no benefits. I’ve raised a family on less than $14,000 a year, helped with university eds, including my own started at age 46 , never had debts or borrowed from anyone, not seen a dentist in 15 years (but keep my teeth clean), give money to native panhandlers, because well, they’re my kin, and we live in their home eh? Do not buy mags newspapers, cds, do not smoke, drink or have gadgets, cell phone etc. Do not buy what I can’t pay cash for, or what I would need more electricty or batteries or pay for upkeep to run. Dumpster dive for anything I can use. Wear clothes found there, or Goodwill, cut my own hair, do not buy or wear makeup, do not go to movies, rent dvds, do not buy prepared foods, have not had a holiday in 11 years (prior to this past weekend visiting friends in another province).
These are just some of my choices to live within my means. If it’s not free, I can’t afford it, and I don’t happen to think it’s your responsibility to support me with your taxes, either, so I don’t take some things I might be able to get if I filled out a gigajillion forms for the gov’t. I just owe no one, am owned by no-one, and manage with less, or none.
My kids didn’t like it much, the way I did things, by the way. They survived.
We always have choices.
AMP had other choices. He chose to pimp out the feminists who built his blog for him.
-
will says:
“We always have choices.
AMP had other choices. He chose to pimp out the feminists who built his blog for him.”
I agree completely. But, it is easy to criticize from a distance. The justification is easy to make too (correctly or incorrectly). “I can always build another site. I’ll take the money and it will only temporarly impact things.”
When the bag of cash is in front of you, do you make the correct decision?
-
annared says:
Pony -Personal integrity, yours, many others and mine are intact and standing for something. Some are just like reeds blowing the wind. I do not wish to get into any philosophical debate re the word ‘integrity’ I am using it to demonstrate having proper regard for what is valuable and not selling them out for rewards.
-
ginmar says:
Don’t you think calling it ritualized condemnation of what everybody’s upset about this week is kind of condescending? Smacks of, “Those emotional women, getting all twisted up over shit that doesn’t matter.”
-
Violet says:
And contrariwise, my last public interaction with Barry was essentially a screaming match
When was that?
But, it is easy to criticize from a distance. The justification is easy to make too (correctly or incorrectly). “I can always build another site. I’ll take the money and it will only temporarly impact things.”
There are two distinguishable issues here: 1, Barry sold out to pornographers. 2, he wasn’t upfront about it. I just don’t see how anybody can excuse him for 2. As for 1, obviously some people would excuse him for that or not even see a problem, while others of us would be disgusted. But at least we would have known what was up and could have chosen to take our blog business elsewhere, as it were.
-
Pony says:
Taking our business elsewhere, after he used us to build his sale price?
Violet AMP and I had a few words the first thread I posted on there, sometime in July/August I believe. He took my posts out, along with someone else’s. Later, in another couple threads, I posted some heated rhetoric. They stayed. I was somewhat puzzled. Did it again. It stayed. Lots of comment and argumentation on that thread, much directed to my posts.
Now I know why it stayed.
AMP knew where to find a porn spammer, by the way. You can take that any way you like.
-
richard cherry says:
As this is America (well thankfully THIS isn’t - this is Britain, but you know what I mean) there must be a chance of a lawsuit. If all the people who feel they have a claim on the IP that made Barry’s old pre-sluts ‘n bitchfest site all stick in a dollar for representation and trot down to Mr Hutz’s office, I bet they could come up with something that while it may not stop him would inconvemnience him for a while and maybe cost the pornographers money to stop. Are those who used to have writings on the site being defamed by association with pornographers.
I’m sure it’s all very shaky legally, but if you chuck enough legal action, be it never so silly, something will happen.
It’s a thought - a negative and petty one but I bet it would annoy them and that’s always the biggest victory for me.
It would be terrible if someone who knew about these things were to sabotage the site - and I am certainly not inciting anyone to do anything like that as it would be most illegal and would make the porno guys deeply unhappy, which none of us would want. Russian teenagers are currently the world champions at that kind of thing.
Allegedly.
Don’t get liberal - get even. -
will says:
Violet:
I do not think that what he did was honorable or an action to be praised.
But, if I offered to buy your site for $3,000,000.00 to link to porn, you would turn me down?
It is a nice hypothetical, but since we are not in that position, it is a little easier to say that we would not do the same thing. The theory/rationalization being that you didnt start this blog that long ago, it would not take long for you to build another one up.
-
Chris says:
Don’t you think calling it ritualized condemnation of what everybody’s upset about this week is kind of condescending?
I didn’t have this issue in mind when I wrote that paragraph. The post in question covered several different topics.
I have no problem with people criticizing Amp for this, except in the one area of his right to dispose of his property.
-
Violet says:
Will, do you get the part about how he didn’t tell anybody? Why couldn’t he just say to everybody, “look, I know some of you will find this intolerable, but it’s what I’ve decided to do.” Why compound the error by keeping it a secret and letting anti-porn feminists continue unwittingly to participate in the blog?
-
Chris says:
Also, I wouldn’t even hesitate for a second if Gale Norton offered me a million for Faultline: I’d snap up the cash and wave “goodbye” to the domain. But I’d wait for the check to clear before transferring the domain, and I sure as hell wouldn’t keep my blog on her new “logging links” website.
-
will says:
VS:
Maybe that was part of the contract.
I am not suggesting that he should be praised for it.
Chris:
What if that was a condition of the money?
-
Chris Clarke says:
What if that was a condition of the money?
Is there a tiger or a salad bar behind door number two?
-
will says:
“Is there a tiger or a salad bar behind door number two?”
How did you know?!??!
-
Chris Clarke says:
Mmmm tiger salad.
-
ginmar says:
Chris, don’t you think you should kind of be aware of one of the most persistant stereotypes hurled at women, so you won’t go using it yourself, which you did?
-
ginmar says:
Huh. There are some missing comments.
-
Violet says:
Ginmar, this comment belongs on the other thread. I’m moving it.
-
ginmar says:
Weird.
-
will says:
I was trying to figure out how tiger salad was offensive to women.
-
ginmar says:
God, I’m looking at those things you posted in the piece itself, Violet, and what gets me is that they’re making sex out of stuff that would be at the very least coercion. The casting couch? Sex for a place to stay? This is sexy, being able to do this? And this is okay with the pro-porn crowd? I guess it is.
-
Chris Clarke says:
Ginmar, I’m not about to stop criticizing people who blindly follow the herd. More men do that than women in my experience.
I agree that women are unfairly descrtibed as getting upset over nothing. and that’s offensive. But what I’m talking about is the notion that a blogger is culpable for NOT getting offended at something. I think getting offended is fine, and if you’ve got something original or creative or compelling to say about the thing that’s offended you (generic “you”) then I more than likely want to read it.
But when it comes down to allegations of “you mmust support this offensive thing because you didn’t criticize them hard enough,” which is increasingly common and not just on this topic, then that’s just wrong.
-
will says:
Chris Clarke’s feminist credentials are excellent. Just look at him. He never removes hair.
-
ginmar says:
Um, Christ, who are you to say that somebody is blindly following the herd or not? That’s really frickin’ presumptuous, not to mention condescending. So nice you can read everybody’s mind and know that people are spreading the word so it gets around or that they’re being mindless zombies.
Wow.
-
Chris says:
That’s not true, Will.
Ginmar, I looked at my post again and I see a sentence there I should clarify. My reference to “the bad thing that everyone else is upset about this week.” was not intended to refer to this particular week, October 9-16 2006 or this particular bad thing. It was intended in a more general sense, as in “whatever it is the blogosphere happens to be upset about this week.
-
ginmar says:
That doesn’t have anything to do with characterizing a bunch of people as doing something blindly.
-
Mandos says:
I think you should have titled this thread “All your questions are belong to us.”
-
the biscuit queen says:
Don’t you think calling it ritualized condemnation of what everybody’s upset about this week is kind of condescending? Smacks of, “Those emotional women, getting all twisted up over shit that doesn’t matter.”
Bahaha…straight from the horses mouth. Although men can be just as upset over the flavor of the month. We are, afterall, all human, and humans tend to get upset over things in spurts.
Funny because Focus on the Family also hates porn…maybe he should have seriously thought of that!
-
ginmar says:
Oh, look, it’s the BQ, male ass kisser extraordinaire. Isn’t some MRA whining for his ass kissing?
Violet, have you and the BQ been introduced? She’s the female cheerleader, the Phyllis Schlafly, of the woman-hating movement, one of the token females at a woman-hating website where feminists get demonized. Email me and I’ll hook you up with some of her oh-so-charming past.
-
the biscuit queen says:
And oh look, again someone who can only insult. Does that ever get old for you? I would think eventually you might grow out of it, but I guess I am wrong there.
Can’t be easy seeing that you have some deep idiological commonalities with the religous right.
Give Amp a break, some people have to work for a living, and these things cost money. I really have not seen anyone offer to fund his little project here.
-
Ann Bartow says:
Alas, A Blog seems to have a lot more right wing fans than I would have expected. I usually just read the posts there, and ignore the comments, which is maybe why this comes as a surprise. See e.g. (warning, right wing web site):
http://catallarchy.net/blog/ar.....-sell-out/
[BTW: Note first comment there:
This is actually terribly amusing. Did you see that Max Sawicky did something similar a month or so back? Google delisted him. ]
Here is another repulsive right wing site weighing in:
-
ginmar says:
Is it an insult if it’s true, BQ? Because you seem to think you’re one of the honorary guys. Good luck with that. You choose to spout long-since discredited bullshit about women adn feminists so you can be special to the guys. Except they’re pretty damned loathsome guys. But whatever. SAy hello to your scummy little woman-hating friends for me—once they come up from their parents’ basements, that is.
-
Ann Bartow says:
Here is a right wing site talking about the Sawicky site; I have no information about the accuracy of this post, but I’m starting to feel ever more paranoid about the blogosphere:
-
Mandos says:
That isn’t talking about Sawicky’s site…
-
Mandos says:
This is what Sawicky did:
http://timworstall.typepad.com.....oring.html
Sawicky’s still one of the best econobloggers from a social-democratic perspective. However, he’s made it clear from the beginning that he has no qualms about selling his site for money. Before he naively did the domain-selling thing and got delisted, he joined the right-wing blog ad group PajamasMedia as one of their token leftists, because he didn’t see the point in not taking their money.
-
Txfeminist says:
amazing how right wingers ( as in one of the above sites) don’t get the difference between “sex” and “pornography”. They never do. How very telling.
I delinked to Amp.
-
Ann Bartow says:
Whoops, sorry about that. Thanks, Mandos, for providing the correct link. The Pajamas Media thing is pretty freaky but at least it is out in the open.
-
Mandos says:
It’s kind of funny because you sometimes see posts violently in favour of things like the estate tax next to several giant ads *against* the estate tax.
