The line is probably somewhere between her vagina and her anus. Just because she's in the middle of a sex act doesn't mean something cannot occur that she had not consented to. That said, if she took the money, zero sympathy from me. (and that doesn't mean that she deserved to be raped.)
Rape is an ugly and violent crime. This director sounds like a real POS and should be run out of the industry but I'm not convinced that this incident is rape. She was paid to do a job which is sex on film. She was in the middle of the scene and had a disagreement about how it was going, but she did not have sex against her consent. Isn't she part of a porn actor's union? This should all be spelled out, it's going to be a contractural disagreement...this should not be uncharted territory.
I didn't say it didn't, what I said is she may not have explicitly stated that the line was crossed. It might be a little confusing if she's saying "yes, put that cock in my ass and my pussy!...Cut" vs "stop, I'm not comfortable with this" If she clearly expresses that the act isn't consensual and the other party continues it is rape but in the case of ambiguity, which this does seem to be, it's hard to say it is rape if one party thinks it is still consensual.
We'll have to disagree. I believe "ambiguity" is your first clue to stop. "Better safe than sorry" definitely applies to sex.
She entered into an act in which she freely consented, it is up to her to withdraw consent I can't say that happened. Given that she probably signed a contract consenting to the sex acts if the video didn't have her EXPRESSLY REVOKING consent it would be extremely difficult to prove rape occurred. Given the information we know, I can't say a rape definitely occurred even though she says so after the fact.
You seem bent on assuming that she gave consent to ALL sex acts. Actresses often get paid differently for different sex acts. Just because you signed on for missionary doesn't mean you give permission for someone to piss on you. I don't believe it works like that for all of them, but I have definitely heard interviews describing it that way. Things like "I don't do anal."
Again, I get that. But this isn't the situation of a college girl drunk at a frat party it's an adult sex worker. The only thing she says that she did was say "cut" at one point, what does that mean in this case? For all you know the contract could have allowed for her to fuck a donkey. None of us know what it said or allowed but I think we can agree that the sex started out consensually. Where we diverge is at what point did it stop being consensual and was it clear to all parties involved that it was no longer consensual. Consent is really the backbone of the law here and I think that the standard for communication among sex workers would be a bit more than a drunk college chick. As an example those who are into bondage and s&m use "safe words" to express when they are no longer consenting. So is the word "cut" clear indication that a boundary has been crossed? I certainly can't say it is.
The one long conversation I had with a porn producer did touch on this subject. They very clearly discuss what the scene is about before it is shot. There is a lot more to it than showing up and having sex. According to him there is always a safe word and if that word is uttered, then all activity stops immediately. He went on to say that many women are indeed told they will be doing one thing, then basically raped when the producer or male star ignored the command and that it was an extremely ugly part of the industry that goes largely unchecked because of public perception. He advised me that he was known for running clean shoots and it gave him an advantage when booking talent.
Actually what might be going on here is that the woman cried rape during the filming, then instead of calling the police, she gets on social media to raise hell about it. From those actions it might look more like a ploy to gain some bit of sensationalism for the movie which, of course, will raise the interest to see it several levels. More notoriety, more interest, more money earned. Just saying.
And without trying to sound too insensitive but, Nikki Benz is 35 years old and been doing porn for more than a decade. So its no secret she's likely in the twilight of her porn career all things considered. I'm sure she's not getting gigs as often as the new fresh faced 20 year olds fresh out of dropping out of university. So it would make sense.
I'm torn because of the taking the money part. If you were raped then don't take the money and press charges. Or hell, take the money and press charges. But either way go to the cops not twitter.
I get that. The twitter thing is weird. This is their income though. You bet your ass if my employer raped me, I would still collect my check. But I would also go to the police afterwards. Any unpaid balance from my contract would be met with litigation.
Yeah, accepting the money and saying it's okay or even signing something stating that won't matter if she goes to the cops right away.
To quote Dalton the great Roadhouse philosopher "Opinions Vary". https://theringer.com/last-tango-in-paris-maria-schneider-marlon-brando-d66025d206ce#.omn5bo9ye
Yeah the Brando thing is bullshit. They didn't tell her the details of the scene but he wasn't even close to actually penetrating her or raping her.
Yeah, but the money would not be for a sex act. That's a major difference, in my opinion. There would be no ambiguity in this case.
