Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Michael Lucas on party and politics

Timothy Kincaid

October 24th, 2012

Porn king Michael Lucas has an op-Ed in the Advocate discussing why he is not (yet) a Republican.

Here’s the simple truth: I’m not a Republican. And here’s the less simple truth: I wish I could be.

I’m an intensely political person by nature, so it’s infuriating not to have a party that I can support. In many ways, that party should be the GOP. As an entrepreneur and an individualist, I am drawn to the Republicans’ hands-off approach to fiscal policy. But although I believe that government should not interfere with business, I believe just as strongly that religion has no business in government.

Lucas’ perspectives are probably more common than many bloggers and blog readers suspect.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

tim
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

If the GOP actually embraced a platform of real individual freedom – it would win in a landslide.

I do find it interesting that he refuses to vote Republican at all – what about a pro-gay, pro-choice Republican? There are still one or two out there.

Sami
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

Republicans are for freedom only if you’re a white, male, straight rich Christian. Otherwise they’re pure fascists. It’s mind-boggling how many idiots continue to fall for that lie.

From what I read his only gripe with the GOP is that your list is too long. He’s perfectly happy with a party that only cares about the rich:

I have limited sympathy for Americans who feel entitled to a larger share of what I’ve earned.

“I’ve got mine so **** the rest of you! If you weren’t stupid and lazy you’d be rich like me!”

He’d fit in just fine with Romney and the rest of the GOP if it weren’t for that nagging little detail that they consider him an abomination.

What does this guy have to complain about exactly? He hasn’t been kicked out of the gay community, no one took away his gay card and made him go marry a woman. He’s simply sick of the gay community bashing him for his political views. Well sorry that’s what happens when you have a political view someone else finds revolting, they bash it. Just because you share the same sxuality as us doesn’t mean we’re gonna be any less harsh than we would with a straight person.

Robert
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

Having read the entire article, I can see why you only excerpted a very very small bit. The rest of it makes him look like an uncaring insensitive ahole. And I hardly believe the ideals of a porn king are all that important in our society, It’s a shame that those who make their money off the backs of others, paying them VERY little so he can amass a fortune is considered a voice to listen to.

Timothy Kincaid
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

Robert,

Please clarify for us: how much does Lucas pay his employees? And how, exactly, do you know that it is “VERY little”?

Robert
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

My former room mate was a lawyer for Lucas Entertainment and represented him many times over the past 20 years.

I also, at one time dated different models from Lucas, and I know what they made, and what the conditions were.

Timothy Kincaid
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

Thanks for clarifying.

Palmer
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

On average a male porn performer earns $500 per day. That’s for gay porn, straight porn even less.

Now the niche market stuff, like gay-for-pay can make more at those sites where supposedly hetero boys screw around with each other can make $1000, maybe more.

Now name performers can make a lot more but only in the thousands.

And since these aren’t union jobs there are no residuals.

I’m a member of S.A.G./A.F.T.R.A. just to let you know.

Donny D.
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

Timothy Kincaid wrote,

Lucas’ perspectives are probably more common than many bloggers and blog readers suspect.

In regard to those that you excerpted in your post, that is almost certainly correct, given that in the last two national elections, LGBT people voted 31% Republican, if I don’t have those figures wrong. Even if I do and they’re somewhat lower, you still are incredibly likely to be right about this.

MattNYC
October 24th, 2012 | LINK

Considering how much Lucas hates Muslims and believes Israelis can never do harm, I find it amazing that he does not support the “No such thing as a good Muslim” GOP…

JohnAGJ
October 25th, 2012 | LINK

Never thought I’d find myself agreeing with a porn king like Lucas, but life is full of surprises I guess. It would be nice to actually debate the most important issues that matter to this country without the nonsense from the religious right interfering.

Travis
October 25th, 2012 | LINK

So who is right, Palmer or Robert? They have conflicting views on how much models are paid.

By my math, $500/day * 2 days/week gives about 50K annual income. Which would put them in the top 25% of income earners in the US and on par with someone with a Bachelor’s degree. I don’t see how this qualifies as “VERY little” or a particularly onerous work environment.

Perhaps Lucas pays his models significnatly less than the average, but then why would any of the models work for him?

chiMaxx
October 26th, 2012 | LINK

Where the heck did you come up with 2 days/week?

Robert
October 26th, 2012 | LINK

Travis,

We are both correct. As Palmer noted the amount per day, you jump to a conclussion that all models film at least two days a week, and that they all make the upper scale. That would be a flase assumption.

Porn Actors do not make very much money at PORN. However, as Palmer stated, they certainly make a lot in the Pay For Gay industry (Yes, that means Hooker).

Many underpaid actors would indeed work for him at low wages as his films are quality made in production value, and as ssuch give those gay for pays a better chance at making the escort dollars.

Travis
October 26th, 2012 | LINK

I didn’t assume that they all make the upper scale, I assumed that they made the $500/day that Palmer indicated was the average. That is a reasonable assumption.

The 2 days/week was an arbitrary number to demonstrate my point. The rate at which models are paid is quite good compared to most of the rest of us slobs who work 5 days/week yet earn less on an annualized basis.

You are right to point out that the opportunities to work at such a generous rate may not be as frequent as 2 days/week, but that doesn’t mean that the rate they are being paid can be characterized as ‘VERY little’.

If Lucas is paying his models anywhere close to the amount that Palmer indicated was the industry average then they are being paid well for the time they are employed and describing that as amassing a fortune “off the backs of others” is inaccurate.

You have also pointed out that in addition to the monetary compensation that Lucas provides, models get the added benefit of enhanced income potential in their other endeavors. That sounds like win/win/win to me. It’s not suprising why models would work for him, even if he is the ahole you think he is.

Robert
October 26th, 2012 | LINK

Travis, as a former actor/model, the figure is paltry compared to the expenditures to make and produce the movie and the cost of purchase. One has to look at the industry, not the average americans salary, to discern if the pay is low or not. I.T. workers do not compare their salary to fry cooks for good reason.

Travis
October 27th, 2012 | LINK

Ironically, I’m an I.T. worker and one of my roommates is a cook, so I can’t actually get away from that comparison.

It makes me thankful that I get paid as much as I do, not complain that since I work for a multi-billion dollar company I should be paid even more.

Palmer
October 27th, 2012 | LINK

Travis,

I’m a character actor. Believe me, when I work the pay is incredible. Depending on the contract I make between $800-$1500 a day, BUT the problem is I only work at that rate 4 or 5 days a year. I survive on residuals and unemployment benefits. (Wish I hadn’t screwed up my callback to be in the American cast of The Office.)

Porn performers (I can’t call them actors) make most of their money either from regular jobs or as “models, masseurs and escorts”, NOT from working in front of the camera.

Now, the profit margin for porn is sky-high.

A S.A.G./A.F.T.R.A. production is considered ultra-low budget if the production costs is around $50,000-$100,000.

That sort of budget would be astronomical for a porn flick! Most porn requires less than $10,000 to make.

And that’s for the glossy stuff you can find in your local adult bookstore. Thanks to the internet many producers first put their stuff online and charge by the minute. When they have enough capital built up it goes onto dvd’s for sale. Several examples can be seen in the works of Dink Flamingo, Corbin Fisher and Randy Blue, who video most of their stuff in their own homes. Very low cost, to say the least.

An outlay of $10,000 to $15,000 for a good computer and editing software and you’ve got yourself a business.

Dvd’s cost little to produce. Between $.50 and $1.00 complete with graphics and even when they go into the remainder bin they’ll cost you $5.

And the performers receive nothing after that first payment.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.