My EXCLUSIVE 2009 Interview With Kagney Linn Karter

Some of you have wondered just what it is I do . . . well, one of the things I do sometimes is interview pornstars. Yes, Porn Stars. Life is hard . . .

This is a video interview I shot in late 2009 with Kagney Linn Karter, whose star was just starting to rise in a big way. It was my first experiment with "green screen", and unfortunately Kagney's shirt was a similar shade of green, so she had to wear that horrible black thing over her magnificent rack (I should point out that Kagney was more than willing to do the interview topless, but my director bagged the idea -- it wouldn't get past YouTube censors. But they are . . . truly . . . magnificent, up close.)

Kagney's as sweet as you could ask for, very personable and enthusiastic. I'll be posting more of my interviews (and publishing the ones I do off-camera) as time permits, but this one was just too cool to pass up.

Ian's Advice: Adventures In E-Dating

Got my first real advice question! This comes in from one of my fans:

Dear Ian,

I spent an amazing week with a guy I met on the internet in March, he came back the end of May and spent the weekend at his friend’s house, where I stayed with him. We didn't even wait until I got in the house before we were undressing each other, spent 4 fantastic days together . . . and I haven't heard from him since. How can two people be that sexually compatible, enjoy doing the same things together (I understand and find his quirkiness endearing) and still not connect? We want the same things in life, he tells me he wants me to go to Jamaica with him at the end of the summer, and yet he has not called me yet. Oh yeah, I believe his marriage has been over for 3 years but they are still living in the same big house because the market tanked and it hasn't sold yet., so the divorce is not final. Info I did not know when I met him and I don't believe he knows I know. I don’t even mind that . . . but no call?

Am I just incredibly oblivious to the fact that 'he's just not that into me' or do guys actually get scared because they found the right one but cannot have any relationship with because 1) they are married still, and 2) they live 13 hours away in another state? Now I wish I had never got myself involved and hurt. Tell me something that makes sense. – Laid and Confused

Part of the problem is the extent to which women conflate sex and love. Both are powerful, passionate emotions, but they're also very subtle, apt to fluctuate, and don't necessarily resonate the same way with men and women. For the guy in question, this was clearly about sex, not a relationship. Unless there's mega-clicking from the outset, it's difficult for a man to connect to a woman emotionally -- until he has sex with her. Then he weighs that experience against where he is in his life, and sees if the event was significant enough to make the investment in a relationship.

For most men, they can't even get that far without having sex. In the old days, courtship would allow that investment to be made within a rigorous architecture that allowed for that investment to be made a little at a time -- but it took forever, and often led to bitter feelings that could undermine the entire relationship (consider: in 1930, you're a man courting a woman for weeks before you even get to steal a kiss -- and that gets expensive. If she makes you wait until marriage, like you're supposed to, then you might wake up the day after your wedding and realize that you married a complete sexual dud -- but in 1930 there's a strict "no returns" policy. Bitterness and unhappiness ensue).

Our modern electronic courtship cuts out a lot of that time, but at the expense of the woman's ability to warm up slowly and build up enthusiasm for the event. Women are quicker to make an emotional investment in a relationship than a man, and traditionally the act of sexual union has been the ultimate investment. Since most on-line hook-ups are fueled by intrigue, excitement over something new, the potential of a new relationship, and plain ol' good-fashioned horniness, instead of a gradual, highly-regulated build-up like in olden days, the result is a lot of women getting their "hearts broken" in e-relationships that go physical instantly.

That's not to say that you should try to overcome your natural desire to parlay sexual intimacy into emotional intimacy, but be advised that going into an on-line hook-up with high expectations will undoubtedly lead to bitter disappointments. I know for a fact that casual sex can blossom into perfect, wonderful life-long romantic relationships -- I met my wife drunk and on the rebound in a bar, and our entire family is the result of a one-night-stand gone horribly -- but happily -- awry -- but those instances tend to be spontaneous and rare. Compounded with the natural advantage that men have over women when it comes to suppressing and compartmentalizing our emotions (often to the point of dangerous emotional constipation), the e-dating scene can seem bitterly unfair to women who go there.

And there is the issue of just what your expectations are in the first place: did you intend to just get your ashes hauled, or were you husband-hunting, or maybe somewhere in between? Making that decision and having the emotional discipline to stick to it is key to surviving the process. Of course you want plenty of flexibility to change your expectations if there's real spark and sizzle -- but be aware that a lot of the good "spark and sizzle" you feel with a guy is often the best part of him. The guys who rely heavily on "spark and sizzle" generally (but not always) end up having little else to invest in. Just as drop-dead gorgeous women, as a rule, are far more trouble for the average guy than he suspects.

My advice? He's obviously on his own journey, and you got a couple of good humpity days out of it. Keep channels open in case you want a rematch, but move on. Anyone living with his ex-wife is going to be damaged anyway, and you can likely find better lovers out there -- if you keep looking.

Hope that helps!

Ian Ironwood

When the Plan Cums Together: The A Team: A XXX Parody Gets An A!

I know I raved about Batman XXX: A Porn Parody last time – and with good reason. This week I’m raving about the new The A Team parody from Adam & Eve Pictures. I got a chance to get a sneak peek of the rough cut (porn hath its privileges) and I’m impressed. In a field full of poorly imagined parody concepts (The Golden Girls? Really? Really?) it’s refreshing to see such a strong release from a relative novice in the parody category.

Like Vivid’s Batman, The A Team A XXX Parody is A&E’s first big move into the parody market, and as sex movies go, this one is strong. Directed by veteran David Lord, the plot is delightfully formulaic, just like the real show’s, so much so that the performers occasionally break the fourth wall to point it out. There are plenty of self-referential gags in the flick that, if poorly handled, would have dragged it down; luckily, they use a light hand with it, so it’s funny, not belabored.

Performances are strong: in the four iconic male leads we get Randy Spears (in a ridiculous George Peppard-esque wig) playing “Cannibal”, Evan Stone (his trademark hair still short from his delightful portrayal of Kirk in Hustler’s Star Trek and Star Trek 2 parodies) playing “Ace” and looking more like Dirk Benedict than you could hope for; Tyler Knight (fresh from his hit Tyler’s Wood parody, also from Adam & Eve) as B.A. – he might not be quite as buff as Mr. T, but who the hell is? Lastly we get a surprisingly astute performance from “Morecock” (who else?) the allegedly insane pilot, played by Scott Lyons. For me, Lyon’s performance was a major highlight of the flick, with his pants on and off. His lengthy “sponge bath” from hottie mental health nurse Chastity Lynn was smokin’ – and Chastity sucks cock like a dream!

Rounding out the cast is Adam & Eve’s contract girl, Bree Olson, as Amy. You remember Amy? She was the token chick in the show, the “ace reporter” that they kept around as an unofficial “team member” even though she only shot a gun once that I remember. Usually, she’s either the moll or the hostage. In the parody, her ex’s (Seth Gamble) abduction by a biker gang is what motivates her to seek out the A Team. Bree’s always a joy to watch work – no one takes it up the butt with a big golden smile on her face like Bree – and she holds her own in the non-sex parts. Playing Amy isn’t a big stretch, but Bree handles it like a champ. Her final screw with Randy, after the inevitable rescue, seals the deal with an all-too-short anal scene with the wigged-up wonder.

And that brings me to one of my favorite things about this flick: Five out of five scenes are anal. A&E has a rep among fans as shying away from the back door action in favor of more vanilla fare, but if that’s the case then this is a big departure. Each of the gorgeous babes in this flick take it up the butt in style. Add to that the steamy Spanish-soaked interracial tryst between Tyler Knight and Luscious Lopez (playing the biker leader’s girlfriend), and when Knight lances that big, beautiful brown ass, you can almost hear interracial angels sing about the scene.

That’s about as exotic as the flick gets, with no big final orgy for a change (although there is a nice but unlikely strip-club threesome with Evan, Sophie Dee and McKenzie Lee) but that’s not the point. This is a straight-up sex parody made by folks who loved the original show. There’s even a version of the iconic van, Morecock going crazy with regularity (and with assault rifles – nice touch), BA getting drugged before flight, and Cannibal pretending to be an old Chinese guy that’s so comical, it’s more farcical than racially offensive – you could get away with shit like that in the 80s. Reagan, remember?

My only issue, actually is that Cannibal utters his signature “I love it when a plan comes together” line before the plan actually comes together – a minor point, and one well-within the bounds of the parody pornoverse.

Considering everything Adam & Eve got right on this one, it’s hard to hold that against them.

PREVIEW:


Release date is soon -- will let you know!

Holy Homage, Batman!

The cool thing about the new Batman parody released recently by Vivid isn't that a) Vivid has finally gotten on the parody bandwagon that's currently keeping the industry vibrant or b) the sex is gloriously hot, with such superbodies as Lexi Belle (Batgirl -- an outstanding casting selection by director Axel Braun) and Tori Black (femme fatale Catwoman, another perfect choice) . . . it's that Batman does what parody is supposed to do on all the levels.

The sex is hot -- the first scene, with a delightfully psychotic Riddler (played by Evan Stone), bangs his kidnapping victim (Bruce Wayne's fiancé) in exchange for better accommodations, is a lusty romp that has the added benefit of the performers staying in character. Every scene is that hot.

But the thing that's coolest about the flick is the fact that not just the performers stay in character, but the movie does as well. All too often a parody can venture into campiness and self-referential humor about the porn industry that falls flat outside of Chatsworth. Not this time -- the flick is campy, but it's Bat-campy. It follows the spirit of the original television show brilliantly, if one can use that term for a porn flick. The sets maintain the illusion that we are not seeing a hacked-together half-assed attempt at "spoofing batman" of the 1960s in the 21st century with anachronisms popping out all over; instead we're seeing actual 60s-styles in clothes, in decor, in cars, in language. The illusion ripples every now and then, but considering how farcical some parodies can be the effort is a welcome one.

Additionally, the script (while delightfully inane in places) seeks to re-create some of the better-known moments of the beloved show. Dale Dabone's dead-on Adam West impersonation includes a stop at a go-go club where he re-creates the "Batusi" (with a little post-Pulp Fiction tongue-in-cheek humor) for instance -- just before getting a club hummer by Alexis Texas in a beehive-ish 60s hairdo. Randy Spears is a wonderful Joker, and Tori Black was made to play Catwoman (think a slinky Julie Newmar who takes it anal).

Everyone has fun with the role -- and that's the cool thing. You can tell that everyone on the set was enjoying not just getting paid real money to have sex, like they do every day, but they were all happy making a really, really cool porn parody. The medium was helpful, of course -- 60s Batman lends itself to over-the-top performances and camp in a unique way (only Star Trek comes close -- and Evan Stone nailed Kirk in both of Hustler's parodies). But there was pride in the workmanship and it shows. It's sexy. It's confident. It's entertaining.

And that's what the parodies are: a return to porn as entertainment. Sure, we stroke to it, occasionally watch it at work, but when it comes to a very special "date night" the choices are all too often either Hardcore Butt Sluts #54 or Endless Sensual Interludes, complete with jazzy new-age music -- too hard or too soft. If your woman was reluctant to begin with, then the hard stuff is often an instant turn-off which she watches mostly to humor you, and the soft stuff, intended as "female friendly", just lacks the heat, intensity, and horniness as it tries to build some semblance of plot and the cinematographer tries to work out his artistic vision -- and that leaves most dudes as limp as a noodle and bored out of their minds.

But with the parodies, both sides can be equally entertained and aroused. You don't have to pay careful attention to the plot -- you know what's going on because you know the show. You can instead enjoy the cheesy lines, the over-acting, and the in-character play wholeheartedly, and still keep your woody. Batman XXX: A Porn Parody is thus far the high-water mark (Star Trek is an arguable contender, and there have been plenty of other worthy efforts in the last year.). And it's particularly telling that the flick has a "non-sex" version, with all of the lead-up but none of the excplicit stuff. So now you can not only watch it with your wife, but you can watch it with your mother-in-law safely, too!

The possibilities are staggering . . .

Porn: It's A Real Industry! Here are some stats

When I hear people dismiss my business as "just porn", it irritates me. And usually when people talk about the industry's stats, you don't find a lot of solid source material or reliable statistics to back up whatever claims they make. It doesn't help that most people use the words "alarming" and "insidious" when quoting the stats. They see the explosive growth of pornography, and the large number of people who admit to using it (and the likely larger number who won't admit it, even on an anonymous survey) as a bad thing. They see the thousands of workers in front of and behind the cameras as exploited and exploiters, and the money they make as somehow tainted. It doesn't matter to them that most of the people in this business are here of our own free will, we have kids to feed and bills to pay, and we pay plenty in taxes in a fairly heavily-regulated industry. "Porn people" aren't really working, apparently, from what the industry's critics say. Because sex isn't work, in their minds. Never mind the marketing, photography, advertising, etc. we pay for. Never mind that the vast majority of operations are simple "mom-and-pop" sites. None of that matters.

But here is a fairly neutral, fairly objective reporting on some actual stats, courtesy of OnLine MBA. (click to follow the link for the complete stats -- I suck at HTML). For any other industry, they would be hailed as a a healthy sign of vibrant economic expansion. The only really disturbing figure is the one about a child's first experience with porn (at age 11, according to the figures), but I can only hope that this is due to one or two utterly slack parents in the survey who have never been discreet, and are blowing the curve.

But other than that . . . Porn is a for-real-though industry.


Via: Online MBA

How To Talk To Your Girlfriend (or Wife) About Your Porn Hobby

Most women are afraid of porn.

I hate to say that in this enlightened age, but especially among the middle-aged and older, female sexual sensibilities have not quite caught up with men's, in general. Taught by a thousand sensationalist day-time talk shows and half a million women's magazine articles about various men's "porn addiction" and "sex addiction", they've been taught that viewing sexually explicit material is somehow deviant, a sign of mental illness, or morally abhorrent. So when they discover your secret cache of DVDs hiding in a Civil War DVD box set, or realize that you aren't working on a spreadsheet at the computer late at night, they freak out and often jump to conclusions about you, your relationship, and your fitness as a mate.

They don’t understand what a vital part of male sexuality erotica and masturbation are. When they accidentally find your movie stash, or – worse yet – bust you jerkin’ the gherkin, their first inclination is to freak out. Why? Because most women suffer from critical low self-esteem, and the slightest hint that they are not the sex goddesses they assume they are because they read Cosmo is a crippling blow. So when the inevitable does happen, it is best to be pre-prepared with your arguments, lest you wind up in couple's counseling prematurely.

For the complete article, including all 12 steps, click here.

Steve Jobs: Anti-Porn Crusader?

Disclaimer: I’m a PC guy, not a Mac guy. While many people around me use Macs every day, and associated iProducts, my sole contribution to Steve Jobs’ retirement fund is an iPod Shuffle I got as a gift. I like the Shuffle, but I’ve yet to iPurchase anything at the App Store.

And Steve Jobs just made that a lot easier to defend, in my Mac-heavy environment.

I work in porn – on the periphery, perhaps (no, that’s not me with the 12” ego on screen – sorry ladies!) – but the fact is I make my living because people like to be entertained about sex. Sometimes they might even masturbate because of something I’ve helped create. Now some desert mystics have proposed that sex is, indeed, a bad thing, but while there are certainly horrible things that happen sexually to people every day, in general I personally consider sex to be a Good Thing. A Good Adult Thing.

It might surprise you to know that people in “the Industry” are not all wild perverts ready to encourage promiscuity at every turn and convince a whole new generation of youngsters into habitual masturbators or sex criminals. Far from it: most parents associated with “the Industry” are actually far more aware of how sexualized our culture is than folks in the mainstream. We see the sexual “sizzle” not just in Cosmo and Maxim, but even in the cute Disney shows, and we are aware of how subtle and insidious the creeping mainstream sexualization is to our children.

Yes, people "in porn" have children, too. Daughters, even. Granddaughters, even. We love them as much as any parent could love a child, and want the best for them just as any other parent would. And while most of us would prefer not to see our children in "the Industry" when they grow up and are adults, we usually understand the nature of the term "adult", and understand that it implies a free and independent choice. Parenthetically, it's unlikely any of our children would end up in "the Industry" without us letting them know exactly what that means, the potential for exploitation, and the consequences associated with that free and independent choice. It's not that we're ashamed of what we do, most of us, it's that we know better than anyone outside of "the Industry" just what is possible, and most of us want our kids to have all the information about their career choices, whether it's porn, the military, or something sordid and fly-by-night like an App Store developer. Having daughters doesn't make us more callous to the less-savory aspects of "the Industry", it makes us even more sensitive to them. And it isn't just about "our little girls" -- our sons are just as much in our hearts and minds when we attempt to prolong their childhoods as long as possible. We are sensitive to sex in all of its mainstream manifestations, just like Tech Nerds are sensitive to digital technology. Hell, we usually give sex and our society a lot more conscious thought than the average parent does.

My kids will never have “Bratz” dolls, for instance, because I think that the styles and presentation of the toy encourage a premature introduction to the pressures of adult sexuality to its target demographic. Nor do I allow them to watch certain shows that are ostensibly about kids, but end up being all about the clothes and the boyfriends and the gossip. Those things tear at the essential innocence of our children long before they even get the glimmer of what a penis or a vagina is actually for. Being in “the Industry” has made me achingly aware just how brief the innocence of childhood is, and how eager society in general is to introduce our kids to sex prematurely. If I had to guess, I’d say that most people in “the Industry” feel the same way. We’re parents too, many of us, and while some folks might disagree with what we do for a living, the fact is that we are citizens doing legitimate, legal work in a well-regulated business in an effort to support our families. And most of us, I believe, try to do that with some sort of ethical and moral compass in hand. Just because we're "pornographers" doesn't make us any less morally guided people or responsible citizens -- or parents -- than other people.

Why don’t I go make a living doing something less tawdry, you ask? Because I’m good at what I do and I enjoy doing it. I like knowing that what I do contributes to grown-up people’s sexual happiness and general well-being. I enjoy putting out a quality product that makes people happy, gives them a little entertaining break from the stresses of everyday life, and, by Aphrodite, porn is a hell of a lot cheaper way to have fun than, say, nine holes of golf on a decent public course. I’m an adult in a free country making legal entertainment for other adults, and my product is both taxed and regulated. I don’t want any of my stuff shown to minors – ever. That’s the last thing I want. You could say I have strong moral objections to anyone doing that. Just as a responsible gun manufacturer or a pharmaceutical developer knows that there is a proper customer base for their products as well as those who should not have access to them, I know that kids should not have easy access to pornography. I’m all in favor of age verification and other mechanisms to reasonably restrict the ability of minors to view pornography.

But Steve Jobs wants an internet devoid of porn – and he said so.

Or, at least, he wants to “be” the internet of the future, via iPhone, iTouch and iPad, and he wants to make that internet as non-sexual as possible. I’ve already commented at length on Apple’s removal of all adult content from the App Store, but this recent email exchange between Jobs and a critic is telling. The man not only sees himself on a crusade against porn, like so many others, he sees himself justified, by virtue of his creation, to censor the content and restrict the free-flow of information that is the heart and soul of the internet. Only he’s rather selective in his judgment: violence of any sort doesn’t seem to be a big issue for him, just boobies.

Not that the Apps at the App Store were anything to write home about to begin with, sexually speaking. And it isn’t like you can’t access third-party porn via the net on an iPad or an iTouch – yet. But it’s the principal of the thing. Yes, as the brains behind the iPad Jobs has the right to restrict the data any way he chooses – that’s his right in a free market democracy. He can ignore the fact that porn has driven the success of the internet, including Apple, for decades. He can pass the inconvenient truth that the Mac is the choice of professional pornographers everywhere for creating their product -- that's a pretty small market, anyway. He can turn his back on the millions of full-grown adults, men and women, who have masturbated in front of Macs for years. He can decide, on his own, just what our kids should and shouldn’t be exposed to on his platform.

But the fact is, Apple risks a lot by doing so, and Google (who doesn’t mind making money off of masturbation one little bit) is salivating in the wings with Android and Chrome and other fun stuff that might not be as flashy (no pun intended) as Apple, but usually cheaper, more compatible and more . . . open. Not everyone is in love with the iPad, after all, and not just because of a lack of porn. But because people aren’t going to want to have to buy a second device to view their porn on, and the people will have their porn, after the iHype wears off and other companies copy the good stuff without the bad stuff from Apple I believe we'll see the iPad join the Newton (does anyone remember the Newton?) on the storage shelf of archaic technology. Jobs’ vision of a pornography free internet isn’t just bad business, it’s laughably naïve – and long-term Apple investors should remember that.

Until they do, I'm pricing Android phones and waiting for the first non-Apple pads to come out. I can wait. Having children has taught me patience -- and that being first kid on the block to have a shiny new toy isn't the same thing as an adult making an investment in a data appliance.