Sensualswitch10
Verified
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 2,524
- Points
- 38
The guy tried to shut down TMF, not to mention made our community look creepy as fuck. Normally, I think this would be in very poor taste, but nevertheless:
The guy tried to shut down TMF, not to mention made our community look creepy as fuck. Normally, I think this would be in very poor taste, but nevertheless:
The guy tried to shut down TMF, not to mention made our community look creepy as fuck. Normally, I think this would be in very poor taste, but nevertheless:
I heard of this whole story years ago. I was talking to someone awhile ago who was very active in the community back in that day and they basically told me the ending of the movie before I ever even saw it, before it ever even came out, before it ever even was an idea. When I finally did see the documentary, it wasn't all that new or shocking to me.
Personally, I don't believe D'amato is dead. He is someone with a lot of money and resources and he probably faked his death to get away from the press and all the attention, and I don't blame him. He got a lot of negativity from all of this and it's probably incredibly stressful.
However, if he really is dead, I refuse to celebrate the loss of ANY human life, no matter how evil or wrong the person was while they were here on this earth. That kind of hatred and ugliness towards another person only would make me look ugly in the end, it doesn't serve me, and so I refuse to participate in it.
I heard of this whole story years ago. I was talking to someone awhile ago who was very active in the community back in that day and they basically told me the ending of the movie before I ever even saw it, before it ever even came out, before it ever even was an idea. When I finally did see the documentary, it wasn't all that new or shocking to me.
Personally, I don't believe D'amato is dead. He is someone with a lot of money and resources and he probably faked his death to get away from the press and all the attention, and I don't blame him. He got a lot of negativity from all of this and it's probably incredibly stressful.
However, if he really is dead, I refuse to celebrate the loss of ANY human life, no matter how evil or wrong the person was while they were here on this earth. That kind of hatred and ugliness towards another person only would make me look ugly in the end, it doesn't serve me, and so I refuse to participate in it.
His father was a founding partner in a law firm; that's how he funded his activities and was able to avoid repercussions for so long. As for faking his death, I'd consider that extremely unlikely. There were viewings scheduled at a funeral home today, according to his obituary.I'm not going to argue with your 1st and 3rd paragraphs at all.
Trust me, the guy thrived on negativity. He willingly stirred the pot. If he was stressed, then good; he preyed on young people and people he felt he could take advantage of. He dished out plenty of stress to them.
I don't know his financial situation. You may be right about him faking his death. That sounds like something he would do. He had quite a few internet personas other than Terri DiSisto.
His father was a founding partner in a law firm; that's how he funded his activities and was able to avoid repercussions for so long. As for faking his death, I'd consider that extremely unlikely. There were viewings scheduled at a funeral home today, according to his obituary.
I mean, maybe.. the guy was in his 40s when he was doing this shit. Was he still getting money from his dad? And I know plenty of poor lawyers.... questions, questions...
Poor lawyers whose fathers own a law firm?
I'm wondering if he either killed himself, or if someone killed him. The guy made so many enemies, I wouldn't be surprised if this was a homicide. Not that I'm going to lose any sleep over this POS
My money's on suicide. He spent so much time, money, and effort on blackmailing people so he wouldn't be "outed", and maybe the exposure from the movie was too much for him.
I don't know if he really cared about being outed. If he was that worried about his fetish being exposed I don't think he would've gone out of his way to lure tickle victims, then blackmail/bully them via the internet. If he wanted to keep a low profile, he would've let things go w/his tickle victims instead of drawing attention to himself by attacking them.
You'd think doing time in prison would teach him a lesson, but his showing up at the "Tickled" premiere and publicly arguing w/the filmmakers says to me he didn't care who knew about his fetish, and was willing to expose it in order to hurt people.
I wouldn't be surprised if he finally p***ed off the wrong person. Then again, this guy was so messed up, it could've been suicide. Who knows?
I don't know if he really cared about being outed. If he was that worried about his fetish being exposed I don't think he would've gone out of his way to lure tickle victims, then blackmail/bully them via the internet. If he wanted to keep a low profile, he would've let things go w/his tickle victims instead of drawing attention to himself by attacking them.
You'd think doing time in prison would teach him a lesson, but his showing up at the "Tickled" premiere and publicly arguing w/the filmmakers says to me he didn't care who knew about his fetish, and was willing to expose it in order to hurt people.
I wouldn't be surprised if he finally p***ed off the wrong person. Then again, this guy was so messed up, it could've been suicide. Who knows?
Like everything else that David Farrier presents in this documentary, what is not told about Richard Ivey tells the story of the lies of Farrier. It is the contention of Farrier that I shoot gay fetish material. He uses as his point of proof Richard Ivey. He presents him as a man who runs a “fetish site.” He shows Ivey interacting with a shirtless man in a restraint chair.
Before I get to why he would not talk to me, let’s talk about what Farrier did not tell you. Richard Ivey does indeed shoot people getting tickled. That is where the comparison ends. In the documentary you see Ivey tickle a shirtless man restrained in a chair. He then in a very sexual way plays with the man’s exposed nipples. Earlier I objected to the comparison and said the solution was easy. Show me anything I shot that as much as had a person’s shirt off, much less ant erotic contact. You could not because there is none. You will never see myself or anyone in the company touch anyone. It turns out that Richard Ivey is far more that a man who runs a tickle fetish company. He is an active participant in sexual activities of men who are restrained. Just a short trip to his twitter WARNING OFFENSIVE ADULT CONTENT: https://twitter.com/myfriendsfeet. You will see here countless example of Mr. Ivey among other things with a man’s foot in his mouth while the man masturbates. I am not trying to be crude or shocking here but this is what he compares what I have shot too. He makes Richard Ivey the good guy.
Ivey would not talk to me because he wanted nothing to get in the way with the windfall he expects being part of Farriers documentary. He could care less about the truth, all he cares about is the money. The money also is connected to his sex life. More money more men to put in his sex required for payment vice. That is the theme that runs throughout this sordid tale. Money and fame.
Yet Farrier has the audacity to compare the men who have worked for me as being part of this gay fetish exploitation. Does he tell the audience any of this? NO. Does he tell the NYTIMES they are shilling for a pornographer who will use them to sexually exploit other men? NO. Did he tell any of this to Magnolia Pictures? Only they know the answer to that. Did he tell any of this to HBO? Only they know the answer to that.
The movie shows he inherited a shit ton of money when his father passed. At the time of the movie being made, he had over 6 million in the bank.
I dont know how socially awkward a person can be if they have the guts to confront a movie director at an LA Q&A in front of many people and recorded live via fb.
He also had "tickle cells" set up in various low income areas of LA and Detroit to take advantage of young poor men. It is implied that he has made videos with children which is why hes so "it isnt pron!!"
So the self righteousness of people saying "i cant say im happy hes dead"... makes zero fucking sense to me.
I don't understand that, I mean even if you didn't like the guy, you should never say such things or wish death on anyone
Before we have any unnecessary Elvis sightings, we really should nip this "D'Amato's alive" business in the bud.
1) If anyone had the question of a faked death in mind, I really trust "Tickled" directors David Farrier and Dylan Reeve did, since they have skin, blood and bone in this game. I doubt they would have posted condolences so quickly had they suspected something.
2) But what if D'Amato fooled Farrier, Reeve and the NYT? You would have to remember that D'Amato used his cash flow for the power to sue or to threaten lawsuits. It seemed, perhaps, that was his only true power against those he felt threatened him. The movie found that he was receiving his wealth with basically no strings attached. That means that if D'Amato faked his own death, he would have to commit fraud to obtain the moneys he was already getting with little hassle. Otherwise, he would have to start all over again with nothing. Would that seem logical in his case?
3) D'Amato faking his own death would--in a digital age--be pretty tough to do, and especially since his face has already been shown across the country. It would be made even tougher if D'Amato had to bear the flood of allegations bound to come out, now that he's deceased, without lashing out. He really could not have operatives to do that for him without paying them (see #2).
No. I think he's passed.
We've independently verified the information to our satisfaction. We're not currently going to go into any more detail than that.
I don't understand that, I mean even if you didn't like the guy, you should never say such things or wish death on anyone