Ames Iowa GOP straw poll

cincybearcat

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I know not directed at me, but I don't care what you do. I just find it laughable that you think the adult video industry is better than corporate america.

And I find it laughable that you don't.

I worked in a corporate purchasing job and I saw LOTS of more drug abuse (people getting up from their desks and coming back 10 minutes later sniffing the remaining coke off their fingers) and sexual abuse (men harassing the women, screwing their secretaries), alcoholism (people coming back from lunch too drunk to focus for the rest of the day) and corruption (having week-long brainstorming sessions to figure out how to screw over our customers) than I've EVER seen in the adult industry.

And by the way... two of the three companies I've worked for are out of business and the third is on it's last legs. While... my industry is still going just fine. So...

What was your point?

I guess no porn companies have ever gone out of business huh?

I think my point is, and you made it yourself so thanks, that you must have worked for some really crappy places. And they are not representative of all.

Parachute

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Parachute wrote:

Yeah... I hear most porn stars go on to have really fulfilling and meaningful lives....

I mean... I think my life is pretty fulfilling. My doctor was a Colt model and my lawyer was the guy who directed "The Jersey Score" and "Finding Levi's Johnson."

Don't believe what you see in Boogie Nights. That was just a movie, not a documentary.

Where can I sign my kid up for the porn-apprenticeship? Lot of good opportunities to work w/ some really interesting people...

I'm sold.

OK.. I WAS going to make a snarky comment about how I doubt that a biological offspring of yours could possibly have a "long enough... um.. resumé."

But to be honest... we actually do have a lot of people who intern at our studio. You might not approve of what we do but it's a business that's strong even in the depression handed to us by Bush and Boehner.

Thankx for making the "snarky" comment about my kid's genitals...

I find your latest comment to be extremely creepy.

I think I'll find meaningful debate elsewhere from now on. After a hot shower...

Prince Of Dorkness

cincybearcat wrote:

I guess no porn companies have ever gone out of business huh?

Of course plenty of adult studios have gone under. But our industry as a whole is doing much better than most.

And really, we were talking about how people are treated in a corporate environment. And from my experience and just reading the paper, they're not treated very well.

I think my point is, and you made it yourself so thanks, that you must have worked for some really crappy places. And they are not representative of all.

Don't be silly. Corporate corruption is rampant through banking (read the news) and pretty much all businesses. Look at how companies like Target and Walmart and Nike and The Gap take advantage of child labour in third world countries, even "progressive" companies like Apple have been accused of doing business with companies that severely abuse their workers.

Don't think that you're any better than me because only 90% of the people I work with wear pants.

keeponrockin

Parachute wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

Parachute wrote:

It feels great.

I saw the light at the end of the tunnel yesterday- and it was Rick Perry. I can now see the end of the regime, and the final days of this loser's failed Presidency are not far...

Ps: w/ respect to unsung, Ron Paul is a gibbering moron, and completely unelectable (Unless you are Iranian or a heroin addict.)

i'm guessing you were a fan of Bush as well!?

His convictions, not his spending.

Which convictions? Specifically what did he do that you think was good for America?

Prince Of Dorkness

Parachute wrote:

I think I'll find meaningful debate elsewhere from now on.

Ok, you can't claim to be wanting "meaningful debate" when this morning you've used the phrase "Kenyan Marxist" three times.

cincybearcat

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Don't think that you're any better than me because only 90% of the people I work with wear pants.

Here's the thing, I never said I was. What I said was that your claims of being better are not true.

And the 1 place where your job of choice certainly falls far below the standard of corporate america is in your offering of jobs to people over the age of say....30?

Prince Of Dorkness

cincybearcat wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Don't think that you're any better than me because only 90% of the people I work with wear pants.

Here's the thing, I never said I was. What I said was that your claims of being better are not true.

And the 1 place where your job of choice certainly falls far below the standard of corporate america is in your offering of jobs to people over the age of say....30?

Haha... um... I'm 42. And in very high demand. My boss is named "Jake Cruise." He's 53 (DO NOT GOOGLE HIIM FROM WORK). He's one of the biggest porn performers working at the moment. There's a very popular adult site called "Men Over 30" and on the straight side of the industry the "MILF" niche is MEGA huge.

Many of the biggest performers are under 24... that's true. But to say that we don't employ people over 30 is just wrong.

Tyler Saint is one of the top stars and he's 41. Rocky Labarre is 38. Dean Flynn is 39. Dean Phoenix is 41. Kevin Crows is 31. Arpad Miklos is 40. Bo Dean is 32. Nick Moretti is 41. There are a LOT of older stars working right now and they're in very high demand.

cincybearcat

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Don't think that you're any better than me because only 90% of the people I work with wear pants.

Here's the thing, I never said I was. What I said was that your claims of being better are not true.

And the 1 place where your job of choice certainly falls far below the standard of corporate america is in your offering of jobs to people over the age of say....30?

Haha... um... I'm 42. And in very high demand. My boss is named "Jake Cruise." He's 53 (DO NOT GOOGLE HIIM FROM WORK). He's one of the biggest porn performers working at the moment. There's a very popular adult site called "Men Over 30" and on the straight side of the industry the "MILF" niche is MEGA huge.

Many of the biggest performers are under 24... that's true. But to say that we don't employ people over 30 is just wrong.

Tyler Saint is one of the top stars and he's 41. Rocky Labarre is 38. Dean Flynn is 39. Dean Phoenix is 41. Kevin Crows is 31. Arpad Miklos is 40. Bo Dean is 32. Nick Moretti is 41. There are a LOT of older stars working right now and they're in very high demand.

I'm talking %. You can find football players over the age of 40, but it's not very many. I would think this is a point you'd have to concede. It's not a career for most, it's a job, a cash grab, and then they had better find something else to support them for the rest (and majority) of their lives.

I do have a serious question though...how are the benefits (health and retirement type benefits (401k), etc). For the average actor, not for an owner.

cincybearcat

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

(DO NOT GOOGLE HIIM FROM WORK).

Hahaha, thanks for that. Don't worry, I don't plan to google any of those names from anywhere. Not my style.

Prince Of Dorkness

cincybearcat wrote:

I'm talking %. You can find football players over the age of 40, but it's not very many. I would think this is a point you'd have to concede. It's not a career for most, it's a job, a cash grab, and then they had better find something else to support them for the rest (and majority) of their lives.

I mean, I haven't taken a poll (yes.. I did actually just say that). But the studio that I work for I'd say the median age is about 28. For some studios like Titan and Raging Stallion, it's higher, probably about 32. For studios like Next Door Male it's probably closer to 21.

No, for most performers it's not a long-term career. Much like acting in mainstream movies... or waiting tables... younger people do it to make money so they can pay for school and go on to do something else. One of the reasons that summer is so busy is that all the college students are out of class so they're more available to come shoot scenes... around exam time is when we go on vacation.

I do have a serious question though...how are the benefits (health and retirement type benefits (401k), etc). For the average actor, not for an owner.

That's a VERY varied thing. Things like 401K packages and insurance are for long-term employees. Most studios do short-term contract work with performers. We'll hire someone to do 5 scenes over the course of a week... that sort of thing. Studios that have long-term contract performers all have health insurance and some have retirement savings plans. There are two studios on the gay side of the industry that I'm aware of that actually have scholarship programs for their performers to go to college once their contracts are up.

We did have a few long-term exclusive guys on our roster and they all were covered by our health insurance that the rest of the staff were covered by. We have 11 off-camera employees where I work and everyone is covered by the PPO offered by the company. (we also have a doggie day care, by the way... it's pretty cute to watch them all play together).

unsung

polaris_x wrote:

unsung wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

at least paul finished second in this poll ...

By only 152 votes out of nearly 17000 cast.

yeah ... on one hand ... that's great ... but on the other - he lost to michelle bachmann ... doesn't that frustrate the shit of ya!?? ...

Would I rather he had won? Of course. However he was grossly outspent by her and she was born there. She had predicted 6000 votes. So to me this is a virtual tie, and a victory for Ron Paul.

cincybearcat

unsung wrote:

Would I rather he had won? Of course. However he was grossly outspent by her and she was born there. She had predicted 6000 votes. So to me this is a virtual tie, and a victory for Ron Paul.

Have you seen any reports on the $ spent by each candidate?

fife

I don't see how this straw poll is ever worth anything. this was not a win for anyone. if i read correctly before. there are over hundreds of thousands of people who could have voted but only 17,000 people did. this was a joke.

Prince Of Dorkness

fife wrote:

I don't see how this straw poll is ever worth anything. this was not a win for anyone. if i read correctly before. there are over hundreds of thousands of people who could have voted but only 17,000 people did. this was a joke.

You know what this is? It's the 24 hour news cycle desperate for a new story.

honestly, it's like seeing Christmas commercials on TV in July.

fife

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

fife wrote:

I don't see how this straw poll is ever worth anything. this was not a win for anyone. if i read correctly before. there are over hundreds of thousands of people who could have voted but only 17,000 people did. this was a joke.

You know what this is? It's the 24 hour news cycle desperate for a new story.

honestly, it's like seeing Christmas commercials on TV in July.

I don't think you can just blame the news channels on this. i was watching cnn yesterday and some woman there was talking about how important this poll was for determining who are the front runners and the funny thing is that today only 1 of the top 2 are being talked about as front runners and 1 guy who placed like 7 is the leader and another guy who was not even in the poll is another front runner. what i think this is about is Iowa feeling happy that they are in the news for something.

unsung

cincybearcat wrote:

unsung wrote:

Would I rather he had won? Of course. However he was grossly outspent by her and she was born there. She had predicted 6000 votes. So to me this is a virtual tie, and a victory for Ron Paul.

Have you seen any reports on the $ spent by each candidate?

I've seen Pawlenty was in excess of $1M spent, Bachmann brought in Randy Travis, gave away hundreds of $30 tickets, bussed people in, and spent more time in Iowa than any other. I doubt there are real dollar figures unless it is released by each campaign. Ron Paul did outspend the field for the prime real estate on the grounds. Chris Wallace stated that Ron Paul spent very little money.

unsung

cincybearcat wrote:

Have you seen any reports on the $ spent by each candidate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8MKYwjYpT0&t=3m42s

WaveRyder

http://www.thestarpress.com/article/201 ... -Paul-debt