inignoct wrote:
] ] Pornographer Larry Flynt says he bought nude photos of
] ] Pfc. Jessica Lynch to publish in Hustler magazine, but
] ] changed his mind because she's a "good kid" who became "a
] ] pawn for the government."
]
] People don't give Flynt enough credit (sometimes). Is it
] funny to anyone else that "Pornographer" is a title used by
] the media?

okay, after reading this article, I am beginning to find some proof in another one of my crazy theories. I predict that by 2010, nearly 90% of all young women will have nude photos or videos of themselves _somewhere_. If you look at two very important factors, you may agree:

o The explosion of Internet porn (and porn in general). It's everywhere. There are thousands, perhaps 10's of thousands of sites. Each with its own classes of fetish and appeal. Upon a non-scientific survey (ahem), I very rarely, if ever, see the same girl on more than one site. Which means that there are a lot of girls who are willing to take their clothes off publically.

o The amount of money being generated by these sites is astounding. After talking to several folks who work in the 'biz', I am amazed at the cash flow. Even after paying the 'models' several hundred dollars or even thousand dollars, they are still generating margins of 100% or more. Given this economic occurance, who can resist getting into this business?

So the likely story here is that young and poor Ms. Lynch needed some cash. Service buddies are either running a site or are in the loop on a site. Ms. Lynch poses and gets paid. Then gets shipped off for war, only to end up as one helluva marketable pawn. If Mr. Flynt is indeed not lying (not likely given Larry's track record), then this could bode poorly for the groups finding it acceptable to market Ms. Lynch to a starving American public desperate for something positive to point at in this wretched mess.

RE: CNN.com - Flynt won't publish topless Lynch photos - Nov. 11, 2003