The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Some things to know about this forum:
    If you're new, please read the Posting Guidelines. Banned content is in "List of Content Never Allowed on JUB".
    The most important thing to know: images of persons under 18 years old are never allowed here. If you cannot verify that the person in the picture is 18 years or older, don't post it.

Patrick Bateman In Jail

Hellax24

Hellax24

JUB Addict
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Posts
2,191
Reaction score
21
Points
38
Location
North Carolina
Sex offenders are prohibitted from working in the adult industry?
 
That's bullshit. He was 19 and she was 17 and because of that he's a sex offender? What fresh hell is this?
 
Royal Heart said:
That's bullshit. He was 19 and she was 17 and because of that he's a sex offender? What fresh hell is this?
Click to expand...

Be glad you live in a civilized (or I guess that should be civilised) country. The fresh hell here is the anti-sex, draconian permanent punishment hell.

Sigh. I used to be proud to be an American.
 
Wait. That article says "IF" she was 17. She might have been younger.

Also, sexual battery is a completely different crime. This guy really could have done something we all would find worthy of punishment.

I still think permanently prohibiting him from working in the adult industry is pretty stupid.
 
Sexual battery is a step below sexual assault (i.e. rape), and covers all sorts of gray areas. However it does mean that unwanted intercourse did not take place. It could be one of those 'she said he said' situations in which a man can never win.
 
We don't know what happened so why make judgments based on snippets of information? He could have committed something very serious. The only thing we know for sure is that she (and since he was g4p I'm assuming her) had to be 16 or younger based on the report.
 
micesu said:
Furthermore, why would you want someone that may have raped someone back in the industry? Even porn has to have some kind of standard."

This brings up a good point, why would you want him back in the industry if he did sexually assault someone? Should he be given a pass because he is hot? Where do you draw the line? What if one of the bigger names was convicted of molesting a child, would you want them back in the industry.

A similar point has been made about Mark Dalton who is a convicted abuser of women.
Click to expand...

Why would people ever buy a Chris Brown cd again? Why would people be sad that Charlie Sheen isn't available to shoot episodes of Two and a Half Men lately?

We're a society that gives a lot of passes as long as the people we're passing are 1) attractive and 2) entertaining us.
 
micesu said:
Still doesn't make it right.

Sheen has a morals clause in his contract and CBS isn't happy with his behavior. Chris Brown lost a lot of support for beating Rhianna and is nowhere near what he was a few years ago.

I've yet to see a convicted rapist make a comeback in the entertainment industry.

Again, where do you draw the line. If the details are as skeevy as the charges he is convicted of appear to be, he's going to have a hard time in any kind of work he does. Would you support a performer that was a convicted child molester or a rapist? What if he gay bashed someone? I wouldn't and frankly no self respecting gay man would.

Probation rules for registered sex offenders are very strict, a probation officer will most likely say no to someone who was convicted of a sex related offense that wants to work in the sex industry again.
Click to expand...

Um, where did I say it's right?

Oh, that's right--I didn't. Kinda the whole point of my post--we give people passes for being hot and entertaining. If these people were ugly, we'd shun them. If we didn't get something from them in the way of entertainment, we would shun them.
 
The guy was 24, which means that he was 19 at the time of the alleged incident. The fact that it took so long for the 'wheels of justice' to turn, during which time he was free to come and go as he pleased indicates that he wasn't considered a major threat to the community.

Whatever happened, he didn't rape anyone, so stop calling the guy a convicted rapist. It could be a case of 'I didn't know I was being sexually harassed until somebody told me'. And if it is in fact a 'she said he said' situation, these days what he said counts for squat and what she said is never questioned. I have actually heard an otherwise rational, highly intelligent woman say 'if a woman says she's being sexually harassed then she's being sexually harassed'.

I only hope the fact that he is Charlie Sheen's nephew did not unduly influence the court.
 
And I heard Pat was a really good guy. He always offered to lend his car to help the Girls Scouts deliver cookies, and all he asked for in exchange was a box of Samoas. He volunteered as an assistant coach for the high school girls swimming team, and took the beast-stroke squad to the state championship! He gave up his weekend nights to work at a home for wayward girls . . .

Seriously, there are way too many people in this country who get railroaded into jail because of ambitious and unscrupulous prosecutors more interested in chalking up convictions that obtaining justice. On top of that, we live in an age where a man can't even compliment a woman on her dress without opening himself up to a sexual harassment charge. All of which is to say I'd have to read the pleadings before I came to any conclusions about this one.
 
micesu said:
Five felony convictions don't exactly bolster your point don't they? Yes lets blame the victim/victims because a good looking guy like Pat could never rape someone right?
Click to expand...

Yes I did read the code. Sexual Battery is not rape, but rather covers a laundry-lists of lesser situations that seem very open to liberal interpretation. Yet you continue to use the 'r' word. Might this be influenced by your knowledge of his peculiar night job?
 
micesu said:
you're "you can't compliment someone without being charge with sexual harassment" argument is silly and has zero relevance to what he was convicted/pled guilty to of. Frankly we don't live in that society, most of us that are active members of society (including women) know the difference between "that is a nice dress" and "you look so fucking hot i want you right now" 5 felonies including two separate counts of sex with a minor doesn't exactly scream railroaded now does it?

The r word? Uh what are you babbling about.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea the number of 'sensitization' seminars I have been forced to twiddle my thumbs and attend regarding what is and is not appropriate to say to female co-workers? Ever see the South Park episode 'Sexual Harassment Panda'? That's how utterly absurd it's become. No you can no longer say 'that's a nice dress' because she can say 'There was something about the way he said it . . . I could just tell he was leering at me!', and it will stick.

the 'r' word: you are using rape when a Trier of Fact has found otherwise.
 
Never seen or heard of this guy until now. He was G4P? Grawd, what happened to all the gay porn stars we could be proud of?

Críostóir said:
Wait. That article says "IF" she was 17. She might have been younger.
Click to expand...

According to the criminal charges linked to via a jpg, it says "sex with a minor -16".
 
micesu said:
Who is "we" I certainly don't nor do a lot of people. Again, I don't see Chris Brown getting half the support he had before. Nor did I see the public overwhelmingly support OJ Simpson or Robert Blake after their acquittals for murder.
Click to expand...


I already said who "we" are. American society is still more forgiving than many of these offenders (or alleged offenders) deserve. Brown's album might be tanking, but it still sold more than it probably should, and even after details emerged about his actions, many were still blaming the victim and supporting him. OJ Simpson and Robert Blake had been out of the public eye for some time, and you would be hard pressed to consider Blake attractive at that point in his life. Do you remember the craziness after OJ walked from the first trial? He had many supporters across America rejoicing for his acquittal.

The irony here is you're nitpicking and arguing with me, and my whole point is that the kinds of behaviors these men have carried out are too often over-looked or forgiven if the perps are attractive or entertaining. I believe fame and celebrity are privileges, and they should be revoked entirely once one is convicted of the kinds of acts discussed in this thread. Unfortunately, that's not often the case.
 
Thought I'd resurrect this thread: does anyone know when he's getting out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top