From JimmyD’s site: (JimmyD is a one of the best writers in porn)

I wouldn’t give two cents to Max Hardcore’s legal defense fund, and I’ll tell you why: What we as an industry are facing with cases like Hardcore’s is a decision to defend the most extreme, disgusting, mysoginistic content our industry has to offer. And I’m pretty sure there’s plenty of content out there that I don’t personally care to defend.

Some of you may have read my Extreme Associates-bashing editorials regarding the Mother and Daughter incest team. If Extreme should end up prosecuted for this content, do you want to contribute to it’s defense? I know I don’t and won’t. They can go fuck themselves. As far as I’m concerned, they’re on their own. And in fact, any company that chooses to push the envelope to the most extreme content they can imagine, will also be on their own as far as JimmyD is concerned.

The Free Speech people are trying to get you and I to buy into the same bullshit propaganda that the U.S. government tried to put out regarding communism in the fifties and sixties, i.e., the Domino Effect. The Domino Effect said, in simple terms, that wherever we don’t take a stand against the onslaught of communism, nearby countries will also fall just like dominos that are stood up and lined up next to one another. Well, I didnt’ believe that horseshit then, and I don’t believe it now as it’s applied to this industry. I don’t believe for a nano-second that if we don’t all come together to defend material that we ourselves may find abhorent, the government will then go after everyone else, regardless of what kind of content is being produced. There was no Domino Effect in Southeast Asia in the 60’s, and there is no Domino Effect in the West San Fernando Valley in the New Millenium.

It’s one thing to defend Free Speech, it’s another to defend foul, disgusting garbage. There was a time in my life that I defended free speech with my personal freedom: not for smut, but (at least in my mind) for some things a little more important. So I’ve made my bones in the free speech defence crew. And I know there’s many who will say, “Ok JimmyD, who will decide what content crosses the line?” Well, let me put it this way. Most pornographers know when the content line is crossed. And when it’s crossed, we also know it has nothing whatsoever to do with Free Speech or the First Ammendment, but has everything to do with making money. If you’re one of those pornographers who are incapable of making anything erotic, anything with actual erotic value, then you’ll probably fall into the category of those that make shit: The content is shit, the technical quality is shit, the cinematic quality is shit. When is the last time you watched a particularly grueling, push-the-limits, porno, and noticed that it had great production value, it was well-lit, well-shot, well-edited? The answer is you haven’t seen one like that. Why? Because the makers of garbage don’t know how to do anything else. But when one of them is called to task by the community for dumping garbage in public, we’re all supposed to come running to their aid? Gimme a fucking break!

So in the spirit of this, my personal opinion about Free Speech as it applies to smut, I offer the ‘Simply JimmyD List’ of content I wouldn’t give two cents to defend. Interestingly, it’s a fairly short list, and doesn’t include a lot of the stuff that’s on the Cambria List:

1. Scat and Pissing Content – If it includes feces and/or piss, count me out. Having diarrea on some chic’s face, or pissing in her mouth, or having her drink cum that leaks out of her’s or another’s ass, ain’t my idea of sex.

2. Child Porn – Real or Imaginary. We all know where the line is here. The line is at 18 years of age.

3. Incest – I might defend the right to depict incest dramatically, but not to record actual acts of incest.

4. Any act of extreme violence masquerading as a benign sexual act. You want to make a movie showing ultra-violence, then do it. But don’t pass it off as some liberated, ain’t-this-fun, sex act.

Ok, I’ll climb off of my high horse now and contemplate whether my sensibilities are too timid to be in this business.

As a Libertarian this whole thinggives me a dilemma. I am pretty much a first ammendment absolutist but I agree with what JimmyD has to say here I think the main point being if you don’t like what you are contributing to defend don’t contribute. Speaking of, yesterday the Free Speech Cabal was making noise about the 20,000 dollars the made at a golf tournament, at the risk of sounding like a broken record…WHERE IS IT ALL GOING?