Noel from Sean Cody suspended from High School

[Críostóir]

I don't agree that Sean Cody is at fault here. They're a business. The legal cosent age is 18. He has the looks, personality, and ability to perform. They're not in the business of turning those people away. In real life, you're going to make your own desicions and may have to deal with the consequences. That's the real world. If someone thinks 18 year olds aren't emotionally mature enough to make these desicions, then their issue is with the American legal system. People are entitled to their opinion and I understand where they're coming from, but I think it's unfair to blame Sean Cody

Not everything that's legal is moral. (Not everything that's illegal is immoral either: ask a gay man in Nigeria or Russia!) We're not constrained to blame only people who break the law, or to attack everyone who does.

The principal of the school IS (as a representative of the state) so constrained. She has no right to judge him or penalize him for his legal behavior.

But the idea that businesses are blameless if they follow the law strikes me as rather naive. It misses, among other things, the fact that businesses shape the law (or even control it), that there is a power imbalance, and on and on.

You're entitled to your own opinion, of course, but I wish you'd consider more than the law in your evaluation of SC's behavior. And in fact, they have an opportunity to step up to the plate here; they could make an announcement, offer him the use of their lawyer, etc. That would be beyond what is required by law, but would show quality on their part.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

It wouldn't make any difference to me.

Not everything that's legal is moral. (Not everything that's illegal is immoral either: ask a gay man in Nigeria or Russia!) We're not constrained to blame only people who break the law, or to attack everyone who does.

The principal of the school IS (as a representative of the state) so constrained. She has no right to judge him or penalize him for his legal behavior.

But the idea that businesses are blameless if they follow the law strikes me as rather naive. It misses, among other things, the fact that businesses shape the law (or even control it), that there is a power imbalance, and on and on.

You're entitled to your own opinion, of course, but I wish you'd consider more than the law in your evaluation of SC's behavior. And in fact, they have an opportunity to step up to the plate here; they could make an announcement, offer him the use of their lawyer, etc. That would be beyond what is required by law, but would show quality on their part.

You both seem to be missing the point that it's still something he is choosing to do. It doesn't matter what circumstances led up to it.

 

[xbuzzerx]

You both seem to be missing the point that it's still something he is choosing to do. It doesn't matter what circumstances led up to it.

A lot of college kids sign up on some of the credit card offers they are spammed with in the mail, too. Not realizing that the fine print on the interest rate offered is highway robbery. That doesn't make the companies mass-spamming those offers at college housing zip codes in bulk mail any less unsavory.

 

[Críostóir]

The porn on JUB isn't even that great (sorry, folks). A simple Google Video search offers miles beyond the pretty vanilla offerings JUB has. I see the same exact college-age guys with a small helping of twinks and "daddies" every time a porn ad loads here.

Ah, you haven't visited the Fetish [STRIKE]thread[/STRIKE] Forum. I'll say no more.

 

[CowboyBob]

I don't agree that Sean Cody is at fault here. They're a business. The legal cosent age is 18. He has the looks, personality, and ability to perform. They're not in the business of turning those people away. In real life, you're going to make your own desicions and may have to deal with the consequences. That's the real world. If someone thinks 18 year olds aren't emotionally mature enough to make these desicions, then their issue is with the American legal system. People are entitled to their opinion and I understand where they're coming from, but I think it's unfair to blame Sean Cody

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. Exploiting a broke immature high school teenager isn't right.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

A lot of college kids sign up on some of the credit card offers they are spammed with in the mail, too. Not realizing that the fine print on the interest rate offered is highway robbery. That doesn't make the companies mass-spamming those offers at college housing zip codes in bulk mail any less unsavory.

It's not fair to compare that to porn. There's a need for porn, there's no need for those credit card spam offers. Are you saying that, like those spammers, porn should cease to exist? After all, older people who do porn are putting themselves in the same position. It doesn't matter if you're 18 or 40, you're still doing the same thing.

I don't believe porn is the problem. It's the principal at his school, employers who won't hire previous porn models, and everyone else who throws their own personal "morals" onto porn models. They're the ones who are denying these people a future. I'm happy that people like "Noel" are speaking out. If people like him don't make people aware of these injustices, nothing is going to change.

 

[Kulindahr]

There's a need for porn....

 

[xbuzzerx]

It's not fair to compare that to porn. There's a need for porn, there's no need for those credit card spam offers. Are you saying that, like those spammers, porn should cease to exist? After all, older people who do porn are putting themselves in the same position. It doesn't matter if you're 18 or 40, you're still doing the same thing.

I don't believe porn is the problem. It's the principal at his school, employers who won't hire previous porn models, and everyone else who throws their own personal "morals" onto porn models. They're the ones who are denying these people a future. I'm happy that people like "Noel" are speaking out. If people like him don't make people aware of these injustices, nothing is going to change.

We aren't even discussing the school issue. The school was in the wrong and there's been 100% agreement about that from everyone in the thread.

When I said "trolling hard-up high school kids with thousands of dollars in exchange for things that may hurt them for the rest of their life" I was not talking about the reaction of his classmates. I was talking about possible life-long career repercussions and more especially, the potential of lifelong or life-threatening diseases from barebacking to make some money off a h.s. kid. Yes, it's legal. It's also despicable.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

You have no need for porn?

 

[MrMojoRisin]

We aren't even discussing the school issue. The school was in the wrong and there's been 100% agreement about that from everyone in the thread.

When I said "trolling hard-up high school kids with thousands of dollars in exchange for things that may hurt them for the rest of their life" I was not talking about the reaction of his classmates. I was talking about possible life-long career repercussions and more especially, the potential of lifelong or life-threatening diseases from barebacking to make some money off a h.s. kid. Yes, it's legal. It's also despicable.

Ummm did you even read my last post? Older people take same risks in porn. So, does that make it okay just because they're, according to you, mature enough to make those choices? It sounds like you're saying porn should cease to exist altogether! Again, porn is not the problem. The problem lies with people who throw their own personal "morals" onto porn models. For example, employers who will fire a former porn model or won't hire them at all. It is a risk at this point in time. But if people like "Noel" don't take those risks and speak out about it, nothing is going to change. We shouldn't just sit by and accept people's unfair judgement. They are the ones who are wrong. I think "Noel" was very brave for doing what he did and I'm proud of him.

And I agree with you on the barebacking issue. I think condoms and testing should be mandatory. I covered that as well in a previous post. However, it's something the models are choosing to do at the present moment. Testing is required (at least on Sean Cody), so they're aware of the risk they're taking. You can't honestly tell me the models are going, "So what is this HIV thing you guys keep bugging me about?"

 

[xbuzzerx]

Ummm did you even read my last post? Older people take same risks in porn. So, does that make it okay just because they're, according to you, mature enough to make those choices?

Yes. I think h.s. kids are borderline overwhelmed with a million pressures within the realm of academia and have almost no real-world experience yet. Most have never independently managed any money or held bank accounts, some if not most haven't had a real job yet, nearly all have never gone through the process of applying for a professional job, most have never gone through serious medical repercussions yet for anything in life. So yes, an 18 year old senior in high school and a 26 year old making the same decision to enter unprotected porn are doing it from different points in life with different levels of experience and different perceptions of how their actions and decisions may affect them later.

When you wave thousands of dollars in front of their face for one afternoon of work that's incredibly tempting, they don't have a lot of comparable alternate choices, while at the same time they don't have enough real world experience to understand how this may affect them for years to come.

What I find gross is when a porn company run and managed by substantially older adults is taking full advantage of that situation in order to profit. And not only that, but then nudging him to do unprotected sex. Don't worry, it's safe. We test our actors. C'mon. You'll make more money....

I think everyone who says they'd see this situation exactly the same and approve of it if they were coming at it from the point of view of being a parent of the kid rather than a guy who masturbates to the end product is lying.

 

[Críostóir]

And I agree with you on the barebacking issue. I think condoms and testing should be mandatory. I covered that as well in a previous post. However, it's something the models are choosing to do at the present moment. Testing is required (at least on Sean Cody), so they're aware of the risk they're taking. You can't honestly tell me the models are going, "So what is this HIV thing you guys keep bugging me about?"

I can't agree, especially with the part I've highlighted. The rise of bareback porn has been happening for two reasons: 1) demand and 2) a real decrease in the danger. With new and better tests that can detect the virus with a window period of just a couple of days (if not hours), and drug regimens that make transmission unlikely in the extreme, barebacking (especially in porn, where these protocols are affordable as they are to few in everyday life) is just not nearly as dangerous as it was even five years ago. To absolutely mandate condom use now (especially after not doing it for the years when barebacking was more dangerous) would be silly.

It would be like saying no one can ever point a gun, loaded or unloaded, at another person in a movie. In real life, you never point a gun at someone unless you're planning to shoot them, and never shoot them unless you mean to kill. But in a movie? Characters do that all the time (and yes, there are occasional tragedies like the death of Brandon Lee), and no one is saying it should be banned, nor that stunt performers shouldn't be allowed to jump off buildings because people who jump off buildings in the real world generally die, or that no one should be allowed to ski double black diamonds because people sometimes die skiing double black diamonds.

Bareback performers, like stuntmen, are doing something you wouldn't do yourself, because it's too dangerous for you, under circumstances that aren't as dangerous as they look onscreen. And the danger level even in everyday life is much less than most people now believe. I think the tut-tutting over "Noel" barebacking misses the point by quite a lot.

 

[Redsox]

Apart from the money, what did he expect? He's probably a hero at school now.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

Yes. I think h.s. kids are borderline overwhelmed with a million pressures within the realm of academia and have almost no real-world experience yet. Most have never independently managed any money or held bank accounts, some if not most haven't had a real job yet, nearly all have never gone through the process of applying for a professional job, most have never gone through serious medical repercussions yet for anything in life. So yes, an 18 year old senior in high school and a 26 year old making the same decision to enter unprotected porn are doing it from different points in life with different levels of experience and different perceptions of how their actions and decisions may affect them later.

When you wave thousands of dollars in front of their face for one afternoon of work that's incredibly tempting, they don't have a lot of comparable alternate choices, while at the same time they don't have enough real world experience to understand how this may affect them for years to come.

What I find gross is when a porn company run and managed by substantially older adults is taking full advantage of that situation in order to profit. And not only that, but then nudging him to do unprotected sex. Don't worry, it's safe. We test our actors. C'mon. You'll make more money....

I think everyone who says they'd see this situation exactly the same and approve of it if they were coming at it from the point of view of being a parent of the kid rather than a guy who masturbates to the end product is lying.

I don't think we should give people a free pass to play the victim after they fuck up and make a mistake just because they're young. If you're aware that you must be tested for HIV to perform this scene, you'd have to be pretty dumb to still not be aware of the risk that you're taking. Talk to any good parent and they will tell you that teaching kids to take responsibility for their actions and deal with the consequences afterwards is the way to go. That's how they learn. Not everything is going to be handed to you on a silver platter my friend. All parents reach a point where they have to let their children go and make mistakes. You may not approve of it, but it's the way of the world.

 

[xbuzzerx]

I don't think we should give people a free pass to play the victim after they fuck up and make a mistake just because they're young. If you're aware that you must be tested for HIV to perform this scene, you'd have to be pretty dumb to still not be aware of the risk that you're taking.

He's not claiming victim status from Sean Cody Nor was that the point of my post. He doesn't need to be a hapless victim for me to say Sean Cody's hiring of him was opportunistic and soulless.

Talk to any good parent and they will tell you that teaching kids to take responsibility for their actions and deal with the consequences afterwards is the way to go.

And that is why I feel he has a crappy mother. No good parent wants their kid to learn the hard way if the price of learning is something that could hurt your body or your career for the rest of your life.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

He's not claiming victim status from Sean Cody Nor was that the point of my post. He doesn't need to be a hapless victim for me to say Sean Cody's hiring of him was opportunistic and soulless.



And that is why I feel he has a crappy mother. No good parent wants their kid to learn the hard way if the price of learning is something that could hurt your body or your career for the rest of your life.

You don't know the whole story, so it's unfair to pass judgement. All you know is that she supports her son's career choice at this present moment. You have absolutely no idea what led to his career choice. Would you rather she kick him out of the house and disown him for being in porn? Would you rather she go on television and shame him at a time when he needs her the most? At a time when he's being denied graduation from high school for no good reason? Would that make her a better mother in your eyes? I, personally, would rather he have a mother that is supportive.

And sometimes parents have no choice but to let their kids learn the hard way. Parents can only control so much for so long. That doesn't make them bad parents.

 

[Latimer]

Remember, this also happened in Florida.

This whole story could be the first chapter in a Carl Hiaasen novel.

 

[xbuzzerx]

You don't know the whole story, so it's unfair to pass judgement. All you know is that she supports her son's career choice at this present moment. You have absolutely no idea what led to his career choice.

Well sure, if we completely disregard the reasons they themselves gave in the stories, then let's just make up whatever picture of it we want to. That appears to be what you're doing.

 

[refujiunderground]

i can't feel sorry for the guy. he's 18 years old. he's an adult. the school was wrong for suspending him, it was illegal and they could have got a lawsuit and worse for it. if dude thinks that people should feel sorry for him because he has people making fun of him or looking down on him for his choice of employment, then he has another thing coming. i see that there's people feeling sorry for him or rooting for him to be in porn BUT dude has already proven that he can't handle that life. porn is looked down on and so are performers. my question is what does he plan on doing with his life because now, he pretty much made himself become unemployable. who's going to hire him?

and to see that his mom is supporting his choice. it just makes it worse. really? you can't tell your son to get a regular job. even though it pays little and he might get minimum wage, at least his ass could move up the ladder.

 

[Latimer]

I doubt this will do permanent damage unless he lets it. The kid is actually quite impressive, and presents himself well. In the end, those attributes are more important than the porn.