Halx

I thought this would be an interesting topic.

One of the models whose site I run has come across a very interesting dilemma. For all intents and purposes, her website is her responsibility. She writes in her diary on the site several times a week and she keeps up with her forums daily. The result is a website that, if you bothered to read the words as well as looked at the pictures and video, reflects her. She's very open and honest with her members, but we've come across an instance where her passions have run aground of those of one of her most vocal supporter's.

This subscriber of her's has been around for several months, writes to her on her forums and through email. He has ordered several custom videos of her doing his bidding. For all intents and purposes, he loves her. Until now.

Another of her members just happened to ask her about her political views in her forums and she obliged with a very passionate, very long response about her true opinions. These opinions did not match those of her #1 fan. He wrote to her suggesting to leave that part of her life out of her website. It could be taken as, "Shut up and just take your clothes off."

She's pretty pissed off and it's taken a little persuasion from Matt and I for her to not completely tell him off. Thus our debate begins.

She is a nude model. She takes her clothes off and masturbates for money. Her customers pay for the fantasy of a hot, kinky big-breasted nymph satisfying their every fantasy. There is no question that introducing politics into the mix will upset those who do not agree with her. So, who can you really side with on this?

Model: Pours her heart and soul into website. Feels she has the right to do and say anything she wants within the confines of her member's area. Maintains that customers have the right to cancel their account if they don't like it.

Customer: Pays $20 a month to entertain his fantasies. Also pumps out MUCH MORE money for custom videos and private webcam shows. Requests to leave politics out of the mix because it no doubt infuriates him and ruins his fantasies.

Let's hear your takes.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

phredgreen

her website, pure and simple. she can do anything she damn pleases.

if this guy is that turned off by her politics, then he can cease paying his money and move on elsewhere, or shut the fuck up and continue enjoying the show. it's like going out with someone whose religion is different than yours. one person can change to please the other, two people can co-exist with mutual respect, or you can go your separate ways because there's no way you can accept the other's differences.

__________________
My country is the world, and my religion is to do good.
- Thomas Paine

Paq

i can see why this is so perplexing

On hte one hand, she does have hte right to say whatever she wants and he is paying to get a view....

All in all, though, i'd say she's free to write it adn he's free to either just look at the pictures or to just stop supporting her site. It's about that simple, really. Hell, most of my gf's have views that i don't agree with, but i can just slide those disagreements aside for the greater good of booty-getting.

sooo..the guy should just accept and move on or ignore

__________________
Live.

Chris

OpieCunningham

She should politely inform the guy that his request has been refused (ideally in private) and delete his account if he continues to make his request an issue. And that's what it is - a request.

Her goal is to make money by selling a fantasy while at the same time offering her opinion on anything she wishes.

His goal is to enjoy a fantasy.

If his fantasy excludes her opinions, but that is the only fantasy she is offering - he needs to find an outlet for his fantasy elsewhere.

This should all be handled delicately because the customer is only wrong when they insist you sell them something you don't have.

Kadath

Well, the only issue is if she is just the talent and not the sole investor. Then she has a responsibility to the investors.

__________________
it's quiet in here

MageB420666

well, her job in the forums is to respond to her subscribers questions and one of them asked her a question. Should she ignore one subscribers questions just to satisfy another's "fantasy"? The "#1 fan" does not have to read every single thread in the forum, if he doesn't want political views in his fantasy then he doesn't have to read the thread. It's her website and she has the right to post what she wants.

__________________
Apathy: The best outlook this side of I don't give a damn.

Sargeman

I agree it's her site and if someone doesn't like it they can go elsewhere, however it is an entertainment site where people pay, hence making them customers. The old saying the customer is always right does have some clout behind it, but in this case another customer asked her a question. Being the good host she obliged to answer. Like it or not she answered a question.

To me it's no worse than going to see the Dixie Chicks or Charlie Daniels(I don't care for country music just using them as an example). I'm not paying to hear their political views. I'm paying to be entertained. All that being said, if I go backstage and someone asks them a question about their political views, they should have the right to answer a fan honestly regardless of whether another fan likes it or not.

So what's next, someone asks her who her favorite football team is and because another member doesn't like it she can't comment on them anymore?

She too has a life and as a "public" entertainer who gets asked questions she should be allowed to answer honestly. Even if he's her number one supporter he needs to get a grip. Either don't read the things that you don't like or go seek someone else to entertain you.

__________________
...because there are no facts, there is no truth, just data to be manipulated. I can get you any results you like, what's it worth to you.....

OpieCunningham

The concept that an entertainer shouldn't give their political viewpoint because you're simply there for entertainment is weak.

Why is there even a distinction between what is entertainment and what is a political opinion?

The entertainment that the Dixie Chicks or Charlie Daniels or Halx's co-worker provide includes political opinion. If you don't like the opinion or the expression of the opinion, it is likely that you are no longer being entertained and should consider looking elsewhere for your entertainment. That doesn't make it the fault of the entertainer unless they feel their opinions are driving away too many consumers of their entertainment.

DelayedReaction

I suspect many more people consider her website to be entertainment beyond a simple T&A show. Given how much she has put into it, and how personal a site it has become, I don't think she should compromise for the sake of one customer.

Perhaps splitting the website into two distinct areas would be better? One for the porn, and another (possibly free) section for her to air her views? She might get more hits that way as well.

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

Mephisto2

What phredgreen said.

However, if she is interested in the money more than self-expression, then the final decision is pretty obvious.

Mr Mephisto

Lebell

Like most things, the question boils down to this: is she making enough money (there and/or elsewhere) that she can tell said customer to pound sand?

If so, run it as she pleases.

If not, she might have to suck it up (figuratively speaking).

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

The Phenomenon

Well the guys do not subscribe to the site for her, they do it for the sex. Plain and simple. If she wants to keep her customers she should keep quiet, but since its her website she can do whatever she wants.

She is in the business of taking her clothes off, not political discussion. She should decide whats the most important to her.

She acts on the videos right? Why doesn't she just keep this part of her life out of it? I sure as hell can't say whatever I want at my job, very few people can.

Diamond

Kind of a double edged sword here. Someone asked, she answered, thats fair, its her site. Does her "#1 customer" pay any more than others? It's kind of an odd arena to have any political input. She has a right to her opinion.

tecoyah

Money Talks.....George Bush Walks

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Averett

Well... she's running a business right? She's making money doing what her customers want, right? If she wants to continue to make money, she'll have to give her customers what they want. If that's "shutting up and getting naked" then that's it.

Maybe she should find another area (here?) to express her political views. I'm not saying it's wrong or right that she should censor herself, but if she wants to make money from her high paying customer, then maybe she should shut it.

__________________
Absence is to love what wind is to fire. It extinguishes the small, it enkindles the great.

dy156

Lebell and averett have it right. It's a business decision. Either this guy is her best customer, and she can't afford to tell him to shove it, so she shuts up and gets naked, or she tells him to shove it, and continues how she pleases, hoping to hook more customers by showing a little more of herself than her private body parts. There are lots of websites of girls that get naked. Becoming more specialized might set her apart. I bet she could carve out a nice niche by being "the liberal naked chick" or "the Bush supporter who shows bush" or something. You obviously know far more about the economics of how these sites work than I do, and it's really just a business decision.

chickentribs

I know that I am late getting in on this discussion - but pls just humor me for a sec..

My ex and I are still good friends. She is a sales rep for a software co. and she came to me with a situation that was similar. She had taken a pretty large client out for dinner and he brought up politics, specifically the situation(s) in the Mid-East and how he thought it was time to "nuke them all!" Well she is from Iran, and just by her name you would know that she was probably from that part of the world. She just ended the eve. as quick as she could and left before she said something she would regret. Was he a insensitive boob? Absolutely. Does it matter? No. Not when it comes to business.

But - I would agree with most of the people here that your friends success is certainly at least in part due to her personality. With T&A dime a dozen on the web especially I think we underestimate how important it is. So I would tell her to absolutely stick to her guns and her belief, because it is inherent to her success.

So why would I tell the person I care about to turn the other cheek?? I understand why - I work in same industry and have people who report to me and my concerns at work are 1. Stay Professional and 2. Get the Contract. But I shouldn't have gone down that road with her. Funny how adament I was that I was right until I read your post. Fuck. I feel like a bit of a heel.

Sorry for the long post and if all this was TMI - I thought it kinda interesting the way the two situations compared. If it helps to make the story any more palatable, my ex is a knockout and could easily do the web porn thing. (probably shoulda mentioned that at the start - somebody would still be reading)

__________________
Oft expectation fails...
and most oft there Where most it promises
- Shakespeare, W.

hannukah harry

i don't think i could truely for an opion on this with a pic of the lady in question.

but really, he could just not read anything she posts that involves politics or anything else that might not sync with his opinions.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

onetime2

The guy has a right to express his opinion about what should or should not be included in the site since he is a paying customer (and apparently one of the best she has). Introducing politics into any situation is full of risk. It seems that she may have a little more illusion about her opinions mattering more than her other contributions to the site. Ideally she probably should have refrained from answering the first question as she should have known (or at least she knows now) that it inevitably will piss someone off.

I'm sure she doesn't share all her personal thoughts about the people who frequent her site. Odds are she doesn't do it because it would piss some of them off. Politics is the same. In the end she has to decide if she will run it as a business or as a blog.

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

the_marq

I don't understand why there is any dilema here. Nearly every actor and actress in Hollywood has gone on record with their political stance (Tim Robbins, the Baldwins, Sam Jackson and on and on...). So why should this actress be any different, just because she is a pron/Internet actress?

The Governer of Califorinia has made some awesome movies over the years that I have loved, does that mean that I have to agree with his crackpot political leanings? Fuck no. As a consumer of movies or pron all we can do is vote with our dollars.

So go ahead, if she feels that passionate about her political beliefs... let fly. Just be aware that roughly 50% of your audience is going to disagree with you, and of that 50% at least some will disagree with you to such an extent that they will stop 'voting for you with their dollars.'

__________________
The Truth:

Johnny Cash could have kicked Bruce Lee's ass if he wanted to.

#3 in a series