Garry k wrote:

(After the "legalization " of porn in the 70s ) there  were actually  a number of porno actresses in America who  committed suicide in the late 70s and 80s - some by very violent means ( ie Shawna Grant - gunshot to the  head ) presumably out of grief and despair over how their lives had gone  ( but that isnt talked about much ) .... I believe that trend is lessening now  as porn is becoming more and more acceptable to teh mainstream

ditto. and let's not forget those who got caughtup in the drug part of it. john holmes who was a drug attic and died of aids. there is a series of porn stars from the 70's and 80's who got aids, o.d. on drugs, commited suicide etc...

porn is more mainstream now. scary because general motors who was the owner of direct tv was the largest producer of porn. this is because direct tv largest client are the customers who order porn. mci and other like companies also contribute to the porn business. Larry, the owner of hustler magazine stated some years ago on tv that what he was doing back his day that was controversial is now the norm on cable and satelite tv.

but to answer that question, it depends on the indivual who they are working for. I don't want to see Paris Hilton nude.

dani faye wrote:
Nowadays...anything goes

yeap.

Nicolette Nightingale wrote:

I'm right there with you.

)

JAY carreon wrote:
Garry - the problem is that the answer to your o.p. and original question is so obvious, that it couldn't be anything other than a rhetorical question.

And - no, Pam and Paris did NOT "go hardcore" technically speaking.  "Personal" tapes of themselves in private and intimate moments having sex with their significant others were "unearthed" - and whether this was intentional or not is still open to discovery.  Neither girl has signed with Vivid nor Wicked Pictures as "contract girls" doing hardcore films on a regular basis as far as I know.

Are you alright, Garry?  You're a little bit wobbly in the logic and facts departments there.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Yeah Im getting a little wobbly .....tired .......need sleep ......

You win by TKO

Garry k wrote:
Yeah Im getting a little wobbly ( but I am enjoying thsi discussion and  I am still standing )

THe issue of who released the home video sex tapes of Pammy and Paris isnt much of an issue  .THe tapes would ahve done equally well in terms of sales even if the "Actresses themselves had realeased them  >>But in releasing the tapes themselves the actresses may have  tarnished their reps so that tv might not have so eagerly embraced them back so quick ...but I think they would have returned to the spot light

And what of former Miss France -"Tennyse-" ( she who looks like Claudia Schiffers younger sister ) She jumped fully and willingly into the high end Euro Porn scene - did some of the raunchiest scenes imaginable - and I dont think had  her popularity hurt much  by such

Tennyse who?  (My point, exactly!)  What Chanel ad was she in?  Oh - and "former" means she has left non-porn modeling and become a (popular) porno star in Europe.

Pam and Paris didn't "go hardcore" because the tapes were released "without their consent".  That is the point.  To "go hardcore" means that either female elected to start a career in hardcore porn - but neither has.  Again, to my knowledge, neither has signed on to Vivid or Wicked Pictures or any other producer of hardcore content.  Why is this point so hard for you to get?  And it has NOTHING whatsoever to do with how much money was made with that tape.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:
porn is more mainstream now. scary because general motors who was the owner of direct tv was the largest producer of porn. this is because direct tv largest client are the customers who order porn. mci and other like companies also contribute to the porn business. Larry, the owner of hustler magazine stated some years ago on tv that what he was doing back his day that was controversial is now the norm on cable and satelite

I hope the fellow from Tennessee is reading this

When I start seeing porn on Fox, CBS ABC etc....I'll concede that porn has become mainstream.  There's a difference between pornography becoming more tolerated (even lauded) and it becoming a part of mainstream media.  Try airing it on primetime on a major network and see exactly how mainstream porn is.  Even better, simply try printing an erotic passage in a local newspaper.  The powers that be won't let these things happen, because erotica is not as widely (or openly) accepted by the public, therefore not mainstream (which is defined as a PREVAILING direction of activity or influence).  Maybe the day will come to where pornography is a part of the mainstream, but that day hasn't come yet.

Jason D. wrote:

When I start seeing porn on Fox, CBS ABC etc....I'll concede that porn has become mainstream.  There's a difference between pornography becoming more tolerated (even lauded) and it becoming a part of mainstream media.  Try airing it on primetime on a major network and see exactly how mainstream porn is.  Even better, simply try printing an erotic passage in a local newspaper.  The powers that be won't let these things happen, because erotica is not as widely (or openly) accepted by the public, therefore not mainstream (which is defined as a PREVAILING direction of activity or influence).  Maybe the day will come to where pornography is a part of the mainstream, but that day hasn't come yet.

Porn will never be on mainstream TV because there is not enough ad revenue to support it.
However, sex and nudity are becoming part of mainstream TV.
NYPD - Partial Nudity
CSI - Nudity (Breasts)
Desperate Housewives

You get the point here.

Porn as an industry is no longer a killer like it used to be.

Traci Lords was mentioned earlier.
She has not only done a bunch with SCI-FI, but had a few roles in regular TV series.
Pretender - Where she ran around in bra and panties most of the time.
Wanted- Where she was a scantily clad barkeep.

As far as models and Porn goes, I have to agree with whomever posted above about content, and intent.

If Kathy Irelands boyfriend shot a video of them having sex where it is obvious that Kathy did not know, then I doubt it would do much (Long Term) to harm her career.
There would have to be an immediate backlash, but it would fade quickly.

As for the Victoria's Secret thing, You do realize that one of the VS models used to be a high-paid call girl.
There was a TV show on it a couple of years back, and it did not seem to harm her....

It's ok to have sex for money, as long as no one tapes it I guess.

Jason D. wrote:

When I start seeing porn on Fox, CBS ABC etc....I'll concede that porn has become mainstream.  There's a difference between pornography becoming more tolerated (even lauded) and it becoming a part of mainstream media.  Try airing it on primetime on a major network and see exactly how mainstream porn is.  Even better, simply try printing an erotic passage in a local newspaper.  The powers that be won't let these things happen, because erotica is not as widely (or openly) accepted by the public, therefore not mainstream (which is defined as a PREVAILING direction of activity or influence).  Maybe the day will come to where pornography is a part of the mainstream, but that day hasn't come yet.

mainstream doesn't mean Fox Abc and cbs. Just look at the rock videos and rap videos over the years, porn stars are now seen in these videos. guys like ron jeremy is now a celebrity to the public. it's more mainstream because decades ago, porn was more of in the closet and taboo thing that was primarily men would go to theaters in big cities, NYC, Chicago, detroit etc. to see. women wouldn't be dared be seen and caught up in these places unless their man tried to get them to go.

when the video stores were the in thing during the 1980's, you got to see all types of people that people would never label as viewers of porn. porn was labeled with perverts or just some horney man who looked a paticular way. stereo type. but the video stores changed and exposed all of that. i remember reading a news report in the newspaper about a video store. the lady who ran the video store exposed the clients who come in to rent these videos


quote: most of our money is made from the x-rated videos. you'd be surprised to see who is renting these moies. business men, women, all from different life styles etc. end quote.


now with the internet, cable tv, satelitte and many other avenues, porn is avalable to damn near everyone. it is now becoming part of the 'norm'. when you start seeing people like pamela anderson (another that i don't want to see), paris hilton and others, some how 'accidently' have their 'private' videos aired on the internet, it is a sign of the times. celebrities making movies to get more controversy aka exposure is a great way to get more money because people are weak for gossip, rumors and they want to see. amazing. porn is now part of the mainstream.

Ty Simone wrote:
OJ has a porn video out now.

Snuff videos arent mainstream outside muslim countries.

That Look Photo wrote:
porn never killed anyone !

Unless it's a snuff flick!

Garry k wrote:
Would doing porn ( ie an explicit home video ) kill the FASHION  career of a Supermodel -( lets pick on Giselle for this  one )

Up until a couple of years ago the  conventional thinking was that a foray into porn would kill the fame ( and commercial opportunities ) available to a celebrity - but then along came both Pammy and  Paris's sextapes ..After the shock waves died down both ladies seem to have become more popular than ever. adn in the mainstream market ( whats the latest - they are thinking of casting Paris as Mother THeresa ?)

SO my question is - If a hardcore home video sex tape of  Giselle were released - would Victorias Secret ( or any other fashion house ) still feature her .......

( I am not asking how many male photogs would add the Giselle sex tape to their collection )

...It would get her the million dollar Playboy spread!!

jade83 wrote:

...It would get her the million dollar Playboy spread!!

And no more fashion work afterwards.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:
Would doing porn ( ie an explicit home video ) kill the FASHION  career of a Supermodel -( lets pick on Giselle for this  one )

Up until a couple of years ago the  conventional thinking was that a foray into porn would kill the fame ( and commercial opportunities ) available to a celebrity - but then along came both Pammy and  Paris's sextapes ..After the shock waves died down both ladies seem to have become more popular than ever. adn in the mainstream market ( whats the latest - they are thinking of casting Paris as Mother THeresa ?)

SO my question is - If a hardcore home video sex tape of  Giselle were released - would Victorias Secret ( or any other fashion house ) still feature her .......

( I am not asking how many male photogs would add the Giselle sex tape to their collection )

Since a lot of the responses here are fraught with dismembered logic, baseless speculation and rhetoric - why don't we ask the opposite question:

Can a model in this day and age be successful while keeping her clothes on?

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Darkdesire wrote:
What about martina warren? she is on here, and a very good model, she does adult work.

I have photographed Martina Warren and agree she is very beautiful.  But we are talking about Supermodels here - girls like Giselle Bundchen who do worldwide Gucci campaigns, not Penthouse Pets.

Perhaps we should re-phrase the o.p.'s original question: Would a Supermodel cease being a Supermodel if she did a porno?

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

retphoto wrote:

Try Tracy Lords...who made her first Pornn movie at the tender age of 15(yeah she used a fake id). she's a Regular now on the Sci-fi Channel produced shows...

Also look up Georgina Spelvin, which is used by female actresses to avoid using theri real name in blue films...

There's trivia I'd have never guessed.  Ms. Lord's filmography on IMDB suggests she made the transition from blue movies to television in the 1990's.  (And for the record, George Spelvin, in mainstream film long ago, was a stage name borrowed by men).

JAY carreon wrote:
Since a lot of the responses here are fraught with dismembered logic, baseless speculation and rhetoric - why don't we ask the opposite question:

Can a model in this day and age be successful while keeping her clothes on?

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

That is a question that will spark some heated debate.
The question is first, how do you define sucessful.
I have met a model that makes enough money to live, albeit not as comfortable as I do, without taking her clothes off, at least as of the last time we spoke.
She did however mention that she would have been gotten a lot more opportunities and money, had she been willing to do nudes (implied)

As I stated elsewhere, all of the top 100 money making models have posed at least implied.
Notably though, Anna Kornikova, although not a model, has made enough from both print and commercial advertising, without removing any clothes. But, she made her name in tennis first.
Had she not been a tennis star, I do not think she would have made anywhere near as much money purely modeling.

I can tell you of other models that have made decent sums, one of which made more money in one sitting than most models make in a career, without taking clothes off.
For the most part though, those models are a rare specialty type thing, at least at this point in the game.

So, to answer your question, odds are greatly against it.

JAY carreon wrote:

Not to mention "slut" and "bimbo".

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

THats not very nice either ,,,,,

JAY carreon wrote:

But then, neither are you for trying to mislead people who don't know any better with your lurid innuendo's about the fashion and modeling industries. 

This may sound strange coming from me but, "Better for him to be thrown in the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than he mislead one of these little one's".  Yes - there it is, the Devil quoting scripture!

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Lurid Innuendos  about the Fashion and Modelling industries --You are TOO FUNNY!

You are obvsiouly an outsider (but a  well read one ) looking in ....

At best the fashion World is a refelction of the non fashion World ( some or it pretty-some not so pretty )

At worst...Well you Im sure  can guess  what happens when people have too much money , time on their hands ,opportunites to indulge themself and meet their needs etc ( you can guess that right ?)

JAY carreon wrote:

Tennyse who?  (My point, exactly!)  What Chanel ad was she in?  Oh - and "former" means she has left non-porn modeling and become a (popular) porno star in Europe.

Pam and Paris didn't "go hardcore" because the tapes were released "without their consent".  That is the point.  To "go hardcore" means that either female elected to start a career in hardcore porn - but neither has.  Again, to my knowledge, neither has signed on to Vivid or Wicked Pictures or any other producer of hardcore content.  Why is this point so hard for you to get?  And it has NOTHING whatsoever to do with how much money was made with that tape.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Maybe that is a critical pont - If a celebrity elects to do porn they could be vilified ,,,however if the porn ies released without their consent then they are not vilified > However what would then stop an actress /model etc from creating the illusion that a tape was released without their conset ( but really they consented to it ) That way they could have their cake and eat it too .....

AS you are not aware of Tenysee  - you should google her ....Stunningly beautiful - I heard she married some superrich guy and retired . Who needs to work at all - when you are rich!!!!

DarioImpiniPhotography wrote:

Snuff videos arent mainstream outside muslim countries.

Oh give me a break - those arent snuff videos . thsoe videos ( showing the killing and decapition of hostages ) are made to psychologically demoralize the" enemy "

Its really just an just an extension of what the first Crusaders saw when they entered the holy land - the heads of slaughtered Christians on poles .......

Jason D. wrote:

When I start seeing porn on Fox, CBS ABC etc....I'll concede that porn has become mainstream.  There's a difference between pornography becoming more tolerated (even lauded) and it becoming a part of mainstream media.  Try airing it on primetime on a major network and see exactly how mainstream porn is.  Even better, simply try printing an erotic passage in a local newspaper.  The powers that be won't let these things happen, because erotica is not as widely (or openly) accepted by the public, therefore not mainstream (which is defined as a PREVAILING direction of activity or influence).  Maybe the day will come to where pornography is a part of the mainstream, but that day hasn't come yet.

You are not  going to see porn on commercial televsion that can be viewed by children ( for one thing they would ahve to take soem of the violence off the air to make room for it . and who wants that ! ( LOL )

Ty Simone wrote:

Porn will never be on mainstream TV because there is not enough ad revenue to support it.
However, sex and nudity are becoming part of mainstream TV.
NYPD - Partial Nudity

Sex and  nudity are not becoming part of commercial network  tv either ( Janet Jackson set that trend back about 10 yrs ) Sexual innuendo and implied nudity may be
CSI - Nudity (Breasts)
Desperate Housewives

You get the point here.

Porn as an industry is no longer a killer like it used to be.

Traci Lords was mentioned earlier.
She has not only done a bunch with SCI-FI, but had a few roles in regular TV series.
Pretender - Where she ran around in bra and panties most of the time.
Wanted- Where she was a scantily clad barkeep.

As far as models and Porn goes, I have to agree with whomever posted above about content, and intent.

If Kathy Irelands boyfriend shot a video of them having sex where it is obvious that Kathy did not know, then I doubt it would do much (Long Term) to harm her career.
There would have to be an immediate backlash, but it would fade quickly.

As for the Victoria's Secret thing, You do realize that one of the VS models used to be a high-paid call girl.
There was a TV show on it a couple of years back, and it did not seem to harm her....

It's ok to have sex for money, as long as no one tapes it I guess.

JAY carreon wrote:

Excuse me Andrea - but we're not talking about drug use here, rather "appearing in porn".

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Excuse me JAY- but I wasnt really reffering to drug use rather the idea that there is no bad publicity. People said the coke incident would kill Kate Moss's career and its only gotten bigger. "ok?"

ANDREA barnett
FORMER MODEL

Max V wrote:
Paris or Pam are not supermodels.

Max V.

Go back to sleep , If they were the question would have been answered . Some speculation is required based on their examples of other  celebritries crossing  the line into porn.....

Garry k wrote:
Would doing porn ( ie an explicit home video ) kill the FASHION  career of a Supermodel -( lets pick on Giselle for this  one )


Can we then conclude that the following consensus has been reached ?

If  a homevideo style sex tape of a Supermodel were released by someone else - It would not kill her career . However if the Supermodel herself  released the tape it might be career ending ....?

Garry k wrote:
Maybe that is a critical pont - If a celebrity elects to do porn they could be vilified ,,,however if the porn ies released without their consent then they are not vilified > However what would then stop an actress /model etc from creating the illusion that a tape was released without their conset ( but really they consented to it ) That way they could have their cake and eat it too .....

AS you are not aware of Tenysee  - you should google her ....Stunningly beautiful - I heard she married some superrich guy and retired . Who needs to work at all - when you are rich!!!!

We're talking about Supermodels continuing their careers as Supermodels - not leaving their Supermodel careers and ending up as trophy wives.

I think it's you that needs sleep, not Max V.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:

Go back to sleep , If they were the question would have been answered . Some speculation is required based on their examples of other  celebritries crossing  the line into porn.....

"Go back to sleep , If they were the question would have been answered"?!

Whut chu say, sucka?!  English, please.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Andrea Barnett wrote:

Excuse me JAY- but I wasnt really reffering to drug use rather the idea that there is no bad publicity. People said the coke incident would kill Kate Moss's career and its only gotten bigger. "ok?"

ANDREA barnett
FORMER MODEL

Precisely my point - stick to the subject in the o.p.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:

You are not  going to see porn on commercial televsion that can be viewed by children ( for one thing they would ahve to take soem of the violence off the air to make room for it . and who wants that ! ( LOL )

Hey Garry, my man!  Where'd you learn to spell - Ebonics U.?

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:

Oh give me a break - those arent snuff videos . thsoe videos ( showing the killing and decapition of hostages ) are made to psychologically demoralize the" enemy "

Its really just an just an extension of what the first Crusaders saw when they entered the holy land - the heads of slaughtered Christians on poles .......

Garry Garry Garry - the muslims under the caliphate ruling at the time of the first Crusades were well known for their tolerance of other religions.  It was the Crusaders who slaughtered every non-Christian they could find when they finally entered Jerusalem.

Like your views on the fashion industry and modeling, you have your history backwards.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:

Maybe that is a critical pont - If a celebrity elects to do porn they could be vilified ,,,however if the porn ies released without their consent then they are not vilified > However what would then stop an actress /model etc from creating the illusion that a tape was released without their conset ( but really they consented to it ) That way they could have their cake and eat it too .....

Garry - read back on what you have written above and you have actually reaffirmed the point I was trying to make instead of shooting it down.  Thank you!

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Garry k wrote:
Lurid Innuendos  about the Fashion and Modelling industries --You are TOO FUNNY!

You are obvsiouly an outsider (but a  well read one ) looking in ....

At best the fashion World is a refelction of the non fashion World ( some or it pretty-some not so pretty )

At worst...Well you Im sure  can guess  what happens when people have too much money , time on their hands ,opportunites to indulge themself and meet their needs etc ( you can guess that right ?)

Wow - that's an obvious attempt to "get my goat". 

I AM well aware of the goings-on behind closed doors in the fashion industry.  Your little "fishing expedition" has reacquainted me with that unsavory facet of the industry - although not in the way you intend.

As far as being an "outsider" - I invite everyone who comes across this thread to compare our respective portfolios and let THEM judge who the outsider is.

You really are "special", Garry.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER