Hawk can refute the comments, but he really shouldn't make these embarrassing assertions that his porn is a riveting cultural reflection or societal commentary; it's a porno flick, for Christ's sake.

If we, as a people, tolerate the real Guantanamo and haven't closed the facility, then a porn flick is the least of our problems.

Gay porn and S/M imgery has always had an uncomfortably close relationship to fascist iconography. What's hypocritical is complaining that changing the title somehow changes the context. I saw bravo to Hawk for putting it out there in the open.

So, it's social commentary AND porn. There's a first for everything.

i have to admit, judging by the cover it looks hot.

two cocks up!

I know of a lot of people who lube up their dick to think about the "interplay of culture, politics, sexuality, and representation."

Hawk explains that alternative titles such as "The Detainee" or "Renegade Island" are trite. So, Gaytanamo isn't? Oh Owen, you're so punny!

But seriously...
This movie is problematic because it eroticizes the "BDSM"-reminiscent treatment of unconsenting prisoners of said prison. There's a big difference between a BDSM porn flick that's fictitious and one that's blatantly disrespectful, ignorant, and exploiting a real-life atrocity.

"For instance, those for whom Guantanamo does conjure up images of suffering and horror, might also invoke feelings of arousal and desire."

Owen Hawk would be hard pressed to find a worse argument to support his work. Yeah, let's pander to people who get off on other people's mind-boggling, only-to-real suffering and make a quick buck off it. How disgusting! Maybe there's room for this in a democracy, but there's also room for us to say that the above-cited argument is depraved and morally repulsive.

Either we have morals or we don't. It's not OK to get rich off the real, non-consensual suffering of people held PRISONER (fuck "detainee" and "detained") outside the law in a base foisted on a host country in no place to say "no." Zero legitimacy for Guantanamo, zero legitimacy for marketing ploys designed to cash in on the crimes against humanity that occur there because no world leaders have the balls to force the U.S. to close the base. We, thankfully, *can* have the balls to tell Owen Hawk to go fuck himself.

is that why the misappropriation of the black party has become such a turn-off??

The cover image is fetching but it belies what is surely underneath: a scene for scene remake of “Reform School Girls” or “Valley of the Dolls” meets “Caged”. All the “tops” will be Viagra versions of Richard Simmons and the “bottoms” will be apostles of Carson Kressley. Hot!

The porn industry is designed to capitalize on suffering. What else do you expect when you put abused, drugged out, money hungry and shameless people in a room together to fuck on film for a profit? Now they're going to have morals and not sensationalize a real atrocity? Yeah, it's Hawk who suddenly stripped the medium of its dignity.

Yes guys, you are right. Lets now revoke more freedom of speech, only this time instead of in the name of "security" lets do it in the name of "decency." Give me a break.

Let's NOT "revoke more freedom of speech", but let's remember that it's perfectly OK to criticize someone else's free speech as being a perverse display of callous profiteering masquerading as some sort of Serious Political Statement About Something. We don't have to celebrate speech just because it's said.

Sorry, but i am not officially OVER Owen. I mean, WTF? Anyone who really belives that
" For instance, those for whom Guantanamo does conjure up images of suffering and horror, might also invoke feelings of arousal and desire."
is no longer someone who turns me on.

JJ, give me a break. This is not about free speech. This is about common fucking decency, especially coming from the 'mos who have experienced their fair share of detention, exploitation, torture, and suffering.

Bubba:
Wait a second...
“The porn industry is designed to capitalize on suffering. What else do you expect when you put abused, drugged out, money hungry and shameless people in a room together to fuck on film for a profit?”

You obviously know nothing about the porn industry, and want to further your point of view by degrading the opponent. You’d very much be a friend of Anne Coulter, she uses the same tactics. Yes, there are some sleazy people in porn, much like any OTHER industry. But there are also some very respectable people as well, who run legitimate businesses. Not all models are “drugged out,” some have actually been in and run anti-drug campaigns. Not all models come from “abused” backgrounds, in fact some are from great families that support their choice and are very successful people in real life that get a kick out of being an exhibitionist. And about profiting: think for a moment about doing your work, for free or no profit? You wouldn’t get very far, so why is it a crime to you that porn makes a profit?

Argue your point bubba. Spuing insults is not going to get you anywhere.

Whatever y'all! I'm buying it.

You people on this board are a bunch of puritans. Of course gay leather porn borrows heavily from fascist iconography. This film definitely touches people with masochist urges. Boohoohoo, what's all this crap talk about capitalizing on? Have you seen the show Allo Allo? Is this awful and distasteful because they give a humorous and campy portrayal of the Nazi reign? Is it disgusting because they show some Nazis as funny flawed people?
Saying that porn is for drugged out abused people is a statement of ignorance and, possibly, jealousy.
You are a bunch of puritan WASPs.