Jessica Lynch: Current media darling of American conservatives, all-American face for the Iraq war.
Larry Flint: Long-time scourge of American conservatives, reknown for peddling porn and tweaking Republican hypocrisy(*).
Seems rather obvious to me.
(* = Surely I’m not the only one who remembers, during the Lewinsky bruhaha, when Flynt was offering $1 million to anyone who’d prove they were having an affair with a current member of Congress – which uncovered the affairs of Bob Barr and Bob Livingston…)
Indeed. From his statement about the Lynch photos, he didn’t print her pictures because she is not a hypocrite.
Bullshit. Flynt is no Liberal. He is more of a Libertarian. He loves to expose pious hypocrites and his offer was totally consistent with his philosophy. There is enough hypocricy amongst the Republicrats to full the Astrodome and one side is no better than the other. Mr. Flynt is a lot of things but a hypocrite is not one of them.
Ever since I have been married, a naked young female has lost its luster for me. Ok, spread legs, vagina, clitoris. Yea! I do enjoy pornography, but naked girls do little anymore.
The only naked pics I se that could get me grabbing for my inner remote is Sandra Bullock. Maybe Kate Mulgrew (I am into MILF and am a ST fan). No one else famous.
I got the impression (and correct me if I’m wrong) that the existence of the photos to the highest bidder was public knowledge, and Flint just happened to be the one to buy them. If this is true, then her reputation has been unchanged by Flint’s declaration, but, if he remains true to his word, he is protecting her ‘modesty’.
Except that Larry Flynt isn’t a public figure and thanks to the wonderful free market he is free to dig up all the dirt he wishes on various people and publish it at his whim in his skin mag. Long live capitalism!
Except that Larry Flynt isn’t a public figure and, by definition, any inquiries he makes are not public inquiries. He’s not a representative of anything except himself and his own perverted motives. Someone can claim to be against public(that is government sector) inquiry into a private sex life and still have no problems with a private entity spending their own damn money and effort to make the same investigations. Thanks to the wonderful free market Mr Flynt is free to dig up all the dirt he wishes on various people and publish it at his whim in his skin mag and people who don’t want to see it don’t have to buy it. If public officials use tax money to dig in the dirt then they’re spending someone elses money and every taxpayer has to fund it. I can be pissed off about my tax dollars going to such useless inquiries and have no problem with non-tax dollars doing such things. No hypocrisy there. Long live capitalism!
Ok, I don’t really know you, or know anything about you, so I may be way off, if so, my apologies.
But, have you ever been enlisted? Have you been enlisted and stationed OCONUS? To some god-awful place in the world?
I have…having spent the better part of a year living in a tent in Turkey in support of Operation Provide Comfort. Let me tell you something about being young and in the service, you work hard, you play hard. A boob picture taken in the barracks while partying with some friends? Big deal. Hell, I’ve played co-ed strip twister in the barracks, and I’m fairly sure someone had a cam-corder there. So what? It bears no shame to it, and she should not be seen as any less of a person because of it. As I said in the other thread I think she should just go ahead and sign for playboy, and make a buck while she can, as these photos will almost inevitably make their way onto the net.
As to the question of if Flynt should or should not publish them? That’s entirely up to him. He paid for them, and it’s his magazine. If he thinks he can do it, and get away with it, then it’s his call. I see a lot of preconceived notions about someone just because they work in porn. Do you have sort of cite of something that he’s done that makes him scum? Besides knowing what some men in this country want to look at? I must have missed the stories about him paying kids in brazil pennies to stuff envelopes, or about the exploitation of migrant workers he uses to developed his film. All that can be said about him is that he sells porn. Base porn that people obviously want to look at.
I’ve seen articles talking about what his publicist said, or someone’s representative said, but I don’t think I saw the press conference he called just to announce he had the pictures. I think it far far more likely that he purchased the pictures, then the information got out, and he commented on his decision then.
I swear sometimes the self-indulgent better-than-thou attitude of this board is discouraging. Unless you yourself have been in that exact same situation, with the same circumstances, you don’t have a leg to stand on while pointing out how “wrong” someone is.
I think Daniel and Atrael are on the right track here. If someone took a nude pic of you or me or that babe over there, there are lots of nude pix on the Internet, and one more would be of interest only to the relatively few people who know us. It was under these circumstances that Lynch was photographed; she had no way of knowing that she was mere months away from being a global celebrity. It certainly wasn’t something she sought.
As far as Flynt goes, it does seem like “I have nude pix of Lynch, but I’m not going to publish them” is almost as objectionable as just going ahead and publishing them.
Isn’t Jessica Lynch’s 15 minutes of fame long past overdue by now? I mean, what exactly did she do that causes people to be so fascinated by her? She was injured in a vehicle accident in Iraq. My current copy of Time magazine devotes about 15 pages to exerpts from her book. Since she didn’t really do anything notable, why is this remotely considered newsworthy? It’s not like they don’t have other, more pressing issues to deal with, right?
Well that’s kinda the problem with the media (and the public). The media provides bullshit “human interest” stories instead of actually discussing the real issues in a serious manner. And seeing as how the vast majority of newswatchers tune in to CNN or FOX, you can’t really place all the blame on the reporters–it’s what the people want.
No offense Atrael, but I am enlisted, and have been in OCONUS for a long stretches in Saudi Arabia for Southern Watch and Kyrgyzstan for Enduring Freedom (and short trips to Incirlik, Rein Main, Aviano, etc…) and have NEVER seen anyone of the opposite sex getting naked. Don’t make it sound like it’s a normal thing for US troops overseas to be getting naked co-ed in groups, because it’s sure the hell not. Not to say there isn’t some hooking up, but that’s hardly the same thing as topless partying. Your naked twister game would have landed you in a world of shit if the “wrong” person got wind of it or the tape, and Pvt. Lynch would similarly have been harshly delt with if that picture found it’s way into the bosses hootch. The US Military does not consider that kind of behavior to be “no big deal”.
Agreed, RT, so long as the existance of the pics was not known publically.
On the other hand, if others knew about the pictures, Flynt would not have been revealing any secrets, and may have actually been doing something good by purchasing them and then not publishing them (assuming he follows through on this claim).
While clearly a train wreck of a human being, Flynt sometimes shows a strangely moral side. It’s almost like he wants to confound everyone’s expectations of him.
