Monday, February 21, 2011

"The Devil And Shelley Lubben" (A Whiteacre/Lee Production) -- Reloaded And Extended

It seems that Micheal Whiteacre and Lydia Lee have created a monster.

Their documentary series "The Devil And Shelley Lubben" has gotten plenty of rave reviews...and it's also  gotten banished from YouTube due to complaints from Ministress Lubben's peeps.

But, never say our duo doesn't react..they now have embedded permenant copies of their videos over at their site,, and they've made to embed codes available to anyone willing to share in the exposure of the many lies and deceptions.

And, they've even managed to create an extended version of Part 2, with additional testimony refuting Lubben's claims about rampant abuse in the industry.

Doing our part, here's the updated videos...and all thanks and credit go to Michael and Lydia for all they have done.

The Devil And Shelley Lubben: Episode 1
If you can see this text, you have Java Script disabled.

The Devil And Shelley Lubben: Episode 2 (extended)
If you can see this text, you have Java Script disabled.


  1. The fact that Ms. Lubben can tell that story about her Asian client, using racial slurs and racial prejudice in the telling of it, says A LOT about her and even more about the her audience. Nothing kills a person's credibility (IMO) faster than racial prejudice, but if you're talking to a crowd that doesn't care about prejudice racial or otherwise, then popularity just goes up.

    How many parts are they going to do in total?

  2. One thing I've noticed recently is the large stretch of open water Michael Weinstein has put between AHF and Lubben. Could it be that he's noticed her open homophobia and racism and concluded she might be a politically disadvantageous ally, given his core constituency?

    Not that he ever thinks in political terms, of course.

  3. @Aspasia -- Yeah, on top of everything else repellent about Ministress Lubben, the racism sticks out like a sore thumb. Not to mention, the silly excuse of "I couldn't use the condom because his dick was too small", she couldn't have simply refused him, or perhaps gotten a condom that could have fit him, or just had him pull out?? For someone who thinks she's such an expert on porn, she sure makes for a horrid sex worker.

    @Ernest -- Gee, you noticed, too?? Funny how Weinstein was so quick to endorse the Ministeress when she was such an asset to his program...but so quick to abandon her when the EF5 tornado hit the sewage plant and her real agenda was revealed. I wonder how long it will take for Gail Dines to see the light and back away similarly.

    Nice to see two old friends keeping up to date on things. Gives me hope that I haven't screwed this blog up too much. :-)


  4. Ooooh...@Aspasia -- I believe that Michael and Lydia/Julie have said that they have two or three more segments that they have to do in the doc series....including an updated segment with some behind-the-scenes details on the recent Cambridge debate and Ministeress Lubben's meltdowm and attempted spin job. I'm sure that when they are ready, they will share all the details.


  5. Awesome! I look forward to it. I just find it so interesting that she still wears such stereotypically "porny" makeup for someone who is so Xtian and SAVED from Teh Evol Pr0n!

  6. Ernest,

    Weinsein may or may not have dumped Lubben.

    Here's an excerpt from an email from Weinstein himself (which was later forwarded to me) AFTER my encounter with Lubben was posted on YouTube but BEFORE the documentary was released (and also before her Cambridge crack-up):

    "I have had the opportunity to watch the encounter with Shelley Lubben and Michael Whitacre.

    First, I am an openly gay man who has been active in gay rights for almost forty years. I obviously strongly disagree with Shelley's views on homosexuality. I also work closely with members of Congress and missionaries in various countries who share these views.

    Secondly, we do not support Pink Cross in any other area than our common position in support of condoms in porn. At virtually every opportunity, I have said that AHF is not opposed to pornography but only porn without condoms. We consider it a matter of settled law. On the other hand Shelley and Pink Cross want to shut the entire porn industry down. We have agreed to disagree on this and Shelley has honored that by not addressing here overall opposition to porn at press conferences that we have attended together.

    ... [W]e think that the porn industry is doing a terrible disservice to society in general, and young people in particular, by saying that the only kind of sex that is hot is unsafe.

    I hope that this clarifies where we are coming from. People of goodwill can disagree on this issue but character assassination by the porn industry of AHF or myself will not succeed because AHF's record of saving hundreds of thousands of lives is a matter of historical record."

    Not also that Weinstein, once again, makes the argument that THE CONTENT of non-condom porn is the problem -- that he doesn't like the message it sends.

    And yes, guys and gals, there are at least three more episodes (maybe more) of "The Devil And Shelley Lubben" to come, including one featuring Mr. Ernest Greene's commentary (which was previewed in our "Saints And Sinners" teaser video) in addition to more testimony from people who know/knew and have interacted with Lubben -- both in porn, and at other stages of her "journey."

    Stay tuned, and thanks for watching.

  7. Michael:

    That is interesting and clarifying indeed.

    Problem is, I don't believe a word of it.

    If Weinstein thought that Lubben was so toxic and so abhorrent to his mission of the condom mandate, then why in the hell was he so willing to use her and her PCF flunkies for his campaign?

    Maybe now that Lubben's star has shrunk so much he is willing to break her off....but that certainly wasn't the case before...and her antigay/fundamentalist positions were as out there then as now.

    Me thinks that Weinstein is engaging in the typical CYA to protect himself and AHF and their condom mandate campaign...and to inooculate more liberal folk who may be more suspectable to his message.

    As for the content of bareback porn??? Gee...most people have sex without condoms for time immortal. Why should all of a sudden they be forced to use them merely to satisfy his personal crusade?? It's one thing to recommend condoms as a prophalytic; it's quite another to require BY LAW people performing sex acts to use them.

    The issue with AHF isn't just the condom mandate. It's the exploitation of an overblown controversy to conduct a coup against performer choice and free will and their own right to protect themselves in their own way.

    Looking eagerly foreward to the remainder of the doc series.


  8. I love the part of the email where he writes, "I obviously strongly disagree with Shelley's views on homosexuality. I also work closely with members of Congress and missionaries in various countries who share these views."

    Yes, jerkweed, but your organization HAS TO work with the person who sits on that subcommittee, or the person who controls/administers the flow of supplies and resources in foreign lands. You didn't have to work with this lunatic -- you chose to as a matter of expedience.

    You know what expedience means, don't you Mr. Weinstein? It means pissing in your boots to keep your feet warm.

    Of course he'll throw her under the bus at some point -- that's what grandstanding opportunists like
    Weinstein do. When was the last time you saw him at the dais with Derrick Burts? Once Weinstein got the press he needed out of him, and after Burts' Rentboy ad (and the many holes in his story) surfaced, Weinstein moved on. He already chewed that gum.

    Lubben flavor gum must be leaving a really bad taste in the mouths of team AHF by now -- cheap and metallic, like sucking on a greasy coin.


  9. Weinstein can offer whatever tepid claims he cares to at this point regarding his continuing solidarity with Lubben on their single point of agreement and their "understanding" to avoid those irksome areas of where they can't find accord, such as her belief that he'll burn in hell for being gay and his that she's a homophobic moonbat, but when was the last time you saw this affable duo in public together? He can't disavow her openly after having embraced her so publicly in the past, but AHF's sputtering campaign needs no further baggage to weigh it down and she's definitely off the bus when it comes to media appearances. When AHF picketed the recent XBIZ awards neither Lubben nor any of her acolytes were anywhere to be seen.

    The strategic problem Weinstein shares with Gail Dines, who was lumbered with Lubben as a debate partner in her ill-fated turn at Oxford recently, is that neither can turn up a single active porn performer who supports any of their nonsensical positions. It's more than a minor inconvenience when the constituency you claim to be protecting won't touch you with a barbecue fork. So far, in all AHF's staged events, not one single working performer has stood up for them, yet another troublesome reality that undermines their claim to be the paladins of performer protection.

    But Weinstein, much as Dr. Peter Kerndt did in his PLoS diatribe last year, really tips his hand when in the email when he pretty much drops the sham of concern for performer health and gets down to the business of assailing porn content for sending out what he considers a socially irresponsible message regarding safer sex.

    Those who would be swayed by his insistence that there are no First Amendment concerns raised by his crusade would do well to re-read that paragraph until its meaning sinks in. As there is no statistical support for assertions that HIV tested porn performers are at unusual risk of contracting HIV in the workplace - assertions that underlie all the litigation AHF has stirred up around AIM, Cal-OSHA, County Health, Film LA, etc., - he's left with little recourse beyond copping to his broader agenda, which is to impose a certain world view on an independent entertainment medium.

    He and his organization give not a rat's ass about performer health. And all morally vacuous claims to the contrary aside, his beef is with porn itself, not with the way it's made. He wants it to sell condoms, one of many commercial interests that enriches AHF beyond all other HIV-AIDS service organizations.

    As Mr. Whitacre reminds in our attempts to fathom this increasingly bizarre controversy, follow the money.

  10. And speaking of money, AHF's long-sought goal of a state mandate to enforce condom use in porn grows more remote by the day as California's budget crisis brings new cut-backs in essential services. The kind of mandatory program for which Mr. Weinstein would love to see his organization contracted at some nice, seven-figure yearly sum could never make it out of committee in Sacramento in the current atmosphere, and the ever-more-desperate and preposterous theatrics to which he's resorted to shame the state into giving him a few million taxpayer dollars to police the behavior of a few hundred porn performers suggest that even he knows he's picked a loser of a cause this time.

    Nothing if not a pragmatist, watch for Weinstein to quietly take a hike on this whole deal sometime in the not too distant future. He'll continue to spout the same rhetoric when the opportunity presents itself, but AHF's tireless fund-raising efforts will soon be focused on more lucrative targets.

    Having bought into the mythology of the mighty porn barons with their zillions of taxable porno bucks from which the state would presumably have extorted the cash to fund his grand plans, he appears to finally be awakening to the truth that said bucks do not exist in what's left of the porn industry in this state and that the state itself has one foot in Chapter 11 and the other on a banana peel.

  11. Ernest:

    Excellent points....but I thought that Weinstein's main approach was not to use state powers of CalOHSA but the local powers of the LA County Health Department and the LA City Council via film permit laws to enforce his condom mandate. Although, I'm sure that that attempt won't get past a local judge, either.

    Also...Shelley Lubben is not a moonbat..she's a wingnut. "Moonbat" is the insult of cholce that right-wingers like to throw at lefties. Shelley being a rightwinger and all, she's far more deserving of the former term.

    Not saying that Ministeress Lubben isn't full of the crazaa...just clarifying the correct insult for her.


  12. Weinstein follows the money and there's more of it at the state level. The appeal to local authorities began after AHF had already been kicked down the steps of the state court in Oakland with their buddies at Cal-OSHA for trying to pry loose AIM's confidential medical records. It was a hail Mary that got them some more ink in the L.A. Times but the authority, if there is any, and the money, if there is any, is in Sacramento.

    Sorry for confusing a wing-nut with a moonbat. It's hard to keep these things sorted. Let's just say that we're dealing with people who might not pass for sane in a more sane political climate, and probably don't even in the one we have.

  13. Ernest: Point well taken on extremists on both sides.

    Quick Q: I would assume that the LA County really does NOT have the authority to order the LA Film Board to impose the condom mandate on porn shoots licensed in LA proper, and that Weinstein's gambit here is just more grandstanding and political kabuki. But, in the event that they do attempt to impose such a law, is there recourse to the courts to challenge such?? Or, would opponents have to go to the LA City Council themselves to lodge their protests??

    Just a procedural question, nothing less.


  14. Correct. Film L.A. is an independent agency that issues permits throughout the county and is very much a power unto itself. I don't know exactly who, if anyone, would care to go up against them, but I can't imagine any other agencies with one of the few profit generators left in local government.

    Film L.A. is in business to sell permits. They bring in millions every year doing so. They concern themselves with issues like street closures for filming and they do have some regulations in place where adult production is concerned, specifying that no nudity be visible from the street at a location for instance.

    However, Film L.A. is generally not at all interested in the content of what's shot or how it gets shot. What they want to know is that the producer carries the required liability insurance, knows and agrees to the standard regs and pays the fee. They rejected this preposterous demand instantly in a caustic tone familiar to anyone who has ever had to deal with them.

    This is a company town when it comes to the entertainment business in all its branches and Film L.A. is there to make sure the county gets a piece of the action and that the company gets whatever cooperation it pays for.

    If I had to think of a governmental agency with less motivation to throw a dog in this fight, it would be difficult.

    Basically, Weinstein has had the door slammed on his nose by every city and county agency on this thing, even including his pals at County Health. This city is broke and under harsh federal scrutiny for failure to remedy ongoing failures to provide necessary services to the community. Nobody down here wants to do more than say the right things to the press.

    Sacramento is where AHF's dimming hopes reside, but they're not going to have much luck up there either.

  15. Thanks for the prompt answer, Ernest.

    Of course, knowing Weinstein, he just might attempt an alliance with the Orly Taitz-led Birthers and other righties in his last ditch effort to save himself.

    If he recruited Lubben, he most certainly is desperate enough to go even more extreme.

    This should get real interesting when this all melts down in his face.


  16. I think the blowback from his association with Lubben has spoiled Weinstein's taste for wing-nut allies (got the right epithet this time at least). Remember that his most important constituencies lean toward the progressive side and while he talks a good game about working with those who disagree with him, he can't afford to take on too many toxic associations lest the Hollywood liberal money dry up.

    He's nothing if not calculating and I think he's about ready to write off this whole issue as more trouble than it's worth. He'll go on talking about it, but there are few doors left to knock on and when the Cal-OSHA thing gets sorted out in court, as I'm quite sure it eventually will, the music will stop and AHF won't have anyplace to sit.

    The problem really arises out of blind faith in the nonsense about how much money the porn industry really brings home. Even when things were good, those numbers were always wildly inflated. Now the idea of levying the producers to pay for contract regulation, which I'm sure was the original plan, is just a joke. There isn't enough spare cash left in the whole business to buy lunch for AHF's executive staff.

    The whole thing is a non-starter and pretty much everyone is tired of hearing about it.

    My guess is that before long, they won't have to.

  17. Yes, gentlemen, the anti-porn and condom peddler lobbies are increasingly desperate for all the reasons asserted above, and their actions bear this out.

    However, you forgot to mention another factor -- the imminent retirement of LA County DPH's Dr. Jonathan Fielding, who is reportedly to be succeeded by someone from San Francisco, who, if I'm not mistaken, helped establish St. James Infirmary. In San Francisco, public health officials use a different model: they actually try to WORK WITH the people and businesses in their jurisdiction. And the SF activists I've met despise Weinstein and his tactics, some vocally, and some "off-the-record." It's no coincidence that AHF is based in Hollywood, and not the City by the Bay.

    The clock is ticking, so the Weinstein and the rest of his "Hee Haw gang" of social engineers are making their last charge.

    As for the "blowback" Mr. Weinstein may be suffering due to his voluntary association with Mrs. Lubben, I'm here to ensure that their ill-starred alliance will receive even more attention in the coming weeks and months.

    Weinstein isn't the only one around here who knows how to throw media events shaming his opposition.