It's So Easy Video Discussion - Now Viewable on YouTube

[soon]

20 minutes ago, killuridols said:

The violence started as soon as they got together. By reading Axl's letters to her and the things he did to her after they got divorced (what Erin told to the mag), it looks to me that Axl was extremely jealous of her, to the point of being sick. I don't know if you are familiar with the Tom Zutaut stories about why Axl and him had not spoken in a long time after all Zutaut did for the band. It is related to Erin
Here's the link in case you want to check up, it's sort of a long story to post here: https://www.loudersound.com/features/guns-n-roses-the-making-of-chinese-democracy

Slash also mentioned the couple's problems in his book and Meegan (Slash gf now and then), who was Erin's best friend, testified in Erin's favor. When I say everybody knew, I really mean the whole band and the camp.

The bolded: I do not have it clear either but two things.... 1) I think it was mostly Niven's fears taking over any other rational explanation for this. He knew what was going on, he knew that Axl was dangerous and the relationship with Erin was going to end bad, sooner or later. Also, 1989, the year of OIAM and its own controversy. Did they need more awful things to have the band associated with? 2) I think BDSM was still seen as something that only "degenerates" engage with. The depiction of love in movies, videos, entertainment generally was not of people hitting each other or tying each other, acting like slaves. I don't know... if you check up on the romantic comedies and romantic movies of the time, you will see everything was more family oriented. BDSM was not something "normal" people would do. Like I said before, it is pretty easy (when you don't know much about these things) to lump DV, rape, BDSM, homosexuality and all things unknown into one box of "what is wrong" and "good people" don't do.

I didn't say it would be.... In my opinion, all of this is more related to the personal problem between Axl and Erin, their history as a couple is bad. Regardless of what it seems that nowadays they are cool with each other (don't know to which extent), I think it is not convenient for Axl to revolve so much in the past.

We have the new feminism fiercely fighting against violent and abusive guys. Honestly, I have no clue how come the #metoo movement has still not knocked on GN'R doors... In my opinion, they have edited this video to suit a situation where Erin does not look like a "battered beauty" and Axl does not look like a wife beater.

Lol, Im sorry about that. English is not my native language, I didn't know that a slap is only on the face .... I guess I meant a hit on the butt, yeah..... No, I have not seen him striking her in the face. The other thing he does is turn her around and grabs her by the bottoms. Also ties her hands up.

The other video that circulates over YouTube (the one we thought was the unreleased one) has other different scenes of bondage but I have not checked them in detail. Maybe it is on that one he slaps her on the face?

Haha, I don't know why it is still unclear for you

Think of a guy who regularly beats up his girlfriend and all of his friends, associates, bandmates, etc. know it. Not only that, he's got reported to police several times for doing so. And then he goes wanting to shoot a video where he's got this woman (who happens to be his real gf, the one he abuses in real life) all "pretty tied up, hangin' upside down" , with a ball in her mouth, ribbon on her eyes, and he is beside her, with a stick, spanking her........ what else do you need to make the connection?

Check up @tremolo's comment above, maybe you understand him better than me, lol...

 

Lol, to be clear: "Slap" could be "a slap on the wrist" or other things, but said alone "they were slapped", where I live, would mostly mean on the face.

I dont see a connection between DV and BDSM because they are two separate things.  Not that Im some BDSM representative. I can see the possibility that a manager would steer clear for that reason. But if dv was the reason; its even more of a hot topic now then it was then. I believe that most people - including those who have commented here about its previous censorship - believe that the risqué element is the depiction of BDSM?

I hate that this seems to have somehow become a conversation about displays of dv. That would be horrific if that was whats in the video. Im just curious why this video was withheld for 29 years, thats all.

[Blackstar]

3 hours ago, soon said:

Very intriguing take that this may not be the original video, or at least not the original final cut. Given SOYL's mysterious aspects this isn't too shocking as a possibility!

Niven said in the quote I posted that he didn't let the final edit be done. So there was a rough/demo edit, which probably is the one that has been on youtube for years. Maybe Niven himself leaked it later, or maybe it was someone else who happened to have a copy of the demo.

So, at least during Niven's time (i.e. till 1991) there was no final cut of the video. Unknown when it was done. In the interview with Eddie Trunk in 2006, Sebastian Bach said he had the video and that Del had given it to him.  I think the demo edit either was already on youtube by then or it surfaced shortly after that interview (I recently read a book released in 2007 and the author mentioned that he had watched it), so probably Bach was given a different version, the final one, which is maybe the one released now?

It doesn't seem to me that the demo edit on youtube contained more bondage scenes than the new one, they were rather less.

EDIT: Here is the excerpt from the Eddie Trunk interview:

Bach: Dude, I gotta mention, Del James gave me a copy, maybe he shouldn't have...of the "It's So Easy" video.

Axl: Oh, that's fine.

Bach: That's a good one. That's my favourite Guns N' Roses video.

Trunk: What's going on in there?

Bach: It's...

Axl: That's where I'm spanking Erin (Everly)...I'm spanking Sweet Child so...

Bach: There's an S&M, very quick shot at the end, oh man! But it's all like, you know...

Axl: Yeah, but the messed up part of that is: you remember Earl, you know the security guy I had?

Bach: Yeah, yeah.

Axl: So, Earl is this big huge black guy you know, and we went to the Pleasure Chest to buy the bondage gear for the video. But the guys behind the counter just seen me with this huge giant black guy and they think that...(laughs)...they're looking at me like: "Yeaah! You're one of us, it's cool! Thumbs up man! Right!" And I'm like...(laughs) that was messed up. They were like just..."Alright man. You rock dude!"

Bach: You're taking one for the team!

http://www.a-4-d.com/t7-2006-05xx-transcript-of-eddie-trunk-s-talk-with-axl-rose-and-sebastian-bach

From what Bach says here, it seems that the video he was given by Del had only one short S&M scene in the end, so it was a different edit from both the youtube demo version and the newly released version.

8 hours ago, tremolo said:

I think the big difference, more than the content is the context: Jane’s Addiction was a very artsy band, visually and sonically, with a strong femenine energy to them. So any sexual content could have been seen as that: art. In the case of gnr, they were the opposite, very macho, womanizers, aggressive, volatile, etc... under that scope, it would have been very easy for the media to give them hell for the s&m in the video, cause instead of beeing perceived as art, it would have been seen as a projection of the bad reputation they had back then.

Yes, GnR already had a reputation, but for Jane's Addiction that video was practically their debut. Before that they weren't known outside the L.A. clubs, so they had no reputation at all among a broad audience and they weren't associated with anything, good or bad.

9 hours ago, Tori72 said:

I don’t think sadomaso scenes would have been considered as consensual at the time. Just a gut feeling. I don’t think knowledge of what is going on wasn’t so wide spread in the general public. Also I think there’s a difference between those polished glamour sadomaso scenes in, like, Madonna videos from the time (that also got no air time on mtv) and the ISE scene. In ISE the scenes are far more sleazy and blunt.

About 3 years before there was the film 9 1/2 weeks, which had caused a big sensation because of scenes that were kinky (including some that can be considered S&M) for the standards of a commercial film of the time. It was also the peak of home video/renting movies on VHS (where I'm from people rented at least one movie a day) and there were older films, like "Story of O" that were widely known (I'm not mentioning more niche/art cinema films). I'm not saying that S&M stuff would be accepted by the average person, but it doesn't mean that many people weren't familiar with it to the point to be able to tell the difference between consensual and non consensual when they saw it on a video.

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by Blackstar

[TheSeeker]

1 hour ago, troccoli said:

You did not imagine that!

Not on VeVo sadly.

You're not wrong!

Not home video per se.  Just promo VHS to MTV and other outlets.  Though some fans in Spain got this when they bought Live Era:

http://www.troccolitm.com/VHSLiveEraSpain.html

Indeed there was a promo VHS tape (no idea why, a DVD would have made more sense).  Here it is:

http://www.troccolitm.com/vhsliverapro.html?1185673881734

Plus there is another one:

http://www.troccolitm.com/VidISEPro.html

Sadly YouTube will not let me post the video!

Could you try uploading the video for It's So Easy without the audio? Maybe that'll work

[killuridols]

7 minutes ago, soon said:

Lol, to be clear: "Slap" could be "a slap on the wrist" or other things, but said alone "they were slapped", where I live, would mostly mean on the face.

I dont see a connection between DV and BDSM because they are two separate things.  Not that Im some BDSM representative. I can see the possibility that a manager would steer clear for that reason. But if dv was the reason; its even more of a hot topic now then it was then. I believe that most people - including those who have commented here about its previous censorship - believe that the risqué element is the depiction of BDSM?

I hate that this seems to have somehow become a conversation about displays of dv. That would be horrific if that was whats in the video. Im just curious why this video was withheld for 29 years, thats all.

I know they are two separate things. BDSM is usually consensual and something couples, who are into it, enjoy. DV is just an aberration.

The connection is not "in the air". The connection was in Niven's mind, because of what was going on between Axl and Erin. Probably Niven knew much more than we think we know. Didn't he tape Axl and Erin having a fight and put that audio in a recording of his other band 'The Great White'?

Niven was foreseeing a situation where all of this would explode, and hey, it did not take 10 years to explode. By the end of 1992, Axl had already beaten up Stephanie and she was a high-profile model. Everything got out because of her. The topic was not as hot as now but the OJ Simpson case was all over the tabloids. It was a beginning.

People who believe the censorship was due to BDSM are probably ones who weren't around when it happened, or just saw the video now. Like I said and others said, the rumor back then was what we've been discussing now: "hide it because Erin will eventually use it to destroy you" . I trust my memory and my experience as a fan much more than the opinion of people who never knew about it, forgot about it, or didn't even know the video existed.

There's no DV in the video, in my opinion, but neither do we know the circumstances under which Erin did what she did. She may have been forced to do it, threatened to do it, begged to do it... we have no idea. It may look like BDSM on the outside, but it could be abuse behind closed doors.

Here I leave the link to the story in People's Magazine. I consider you should read it so you can get a bigger and better picture of what was going on. Unfortunately.

https://people.com/archive/cover-story-bye-bye-love-vol-42-no-3/

 

 

[soon]

23 minutes ago, killuridols said:

I know they are two separate things. BDSM is usually consensual and something couples, who are into it, enjoy. DV is just an aberration.

The connection is not "in the air". The connection was in Niven's mind, because of what was going on between Axl and Erin. Probably Niven knew much more than we think we know. Didn't he tape Axl and Erin having a fight and put that audio in a recording of his other band 'The Great White'?

Niven was foreseeing a situation where all of this would explode, and hey, it did not take 10 years to explode. By the end of 1992, Axl had already beaten up Stephanie and she was a high-profile model. Everything got out because of her. The topic was not as hot as now but the OJ Simpson case was all over the tabloids. It was a beginning.

People who believe the censorship was due to BDSM are probably ones who weren't around when it happened, or just saw the video now. Like I said and others said, the rumor back then was what we've been discussing now: "hide it because Erin will eventually use it to destroy you" . I trust my memory and my experience as a fan much more than the opinion of people who never knew about it, forgot about it, or didn't even know the video existed.

There's no DV in the video, in my opinion, but neither do we know the circumstances under which Erin did what she did. She may have been forced to do it, threatened to do it, begged to do it... we have no idea. It may look like BDSM on the outside, but it could be abuse behind closed doors.

Here I leave the link to the story in People's Magazine. I consider you should read it so you can get a bigger and better picture of what was going on. Unfortunately.

https://people.com/archive/cover-story-bye-bye-love-vol-42-no-3/

 

 

Thanks for link, I had mentioned above that I wanted to read it. Ive expressed an openness to all these possibilities you've stated. Well, Great White hadn't come up yet, but the rest. Lots of interesting takes on this video and its suspended release!

Edited May 28, 2018 by soon

[eggers]

8 hours ago, Setzer said:

YouTube compression. It won't be like that on the Blu-ray (and it probably won't be a 4K Blu-ray either though).

They finally gave up? What are you talking about? You have no idea how this stuff works. It was always in the plans to upload it on their channel too. We also recently got HD uploads of other videos on the channel.

That is not youtube compression in any way, that is outputting the final edit at a low bitrate.  None of their other recent HD updates have this problem (or anyone else's for that matter).

Edited May 28, 2018 by eggers

[rocknroll41]

2 hours ago, troccoli said:

You did not imagine that!

Not on VeVo sadly.

You're not wrong!

Not home video per se.  Just promo VHS to MTV and other outlets.  Though some fans in Spain got this when they bought Live Era:

http://www.troccolitm.com/VHSLiveEraSpain.html

Indeed there was a promo VHS tape (no idea why, a DVD would have made more sense).  Here it is:

http://www.troccolitm.com/vhsliverapro.html?1185673881734

Plus there is another one:

http://www.troccolitm.com/VidISEPro.html

Sadly YouTube will not let me post the video!

What's that first song listed on the Spanish promo tape for Live Era? I recognize Yesterdays, Estranged, November Rain, and WTTJ, but not the first song. I think it says Don't Cry, but can't tell for sure.

also, can someone explain to me why the new ISE video looks "sharper" than the other new HD restorations of the old video? Is it because they were able to transfer it straight to true 4K from the original mater tapes? And couldn't do that with the other videos or something?

Edited May 28, 2018 by rocknroll41

[fanfzero]

25 minutes ago, rocknroll41 said:

What's that first song listed on the Spanish promo tape for Live Era? I recognize Yesterdays, Estranged, November Rain, and WTTJ, but not the first song. I think it says Don't Cry, but can't tell for sure.

also, can someone explain to me why the new ISE video looks "sharper" than the other new HD restorations of the old video? Is it because they were able to transfer it straight to true 4K from the original mater tapes? And couldn't do that with the other videos or something?

If you click on the image it gets to its true resolution, yes, it's Don't Cry.

Because it seems to be a cheap upscaling instead of going to the original film roll as they did with ISE

[TheSeeker]

Just now, fanfzero said:

If you click on the image it gets to its true resolution, yes, it's Don't Cry.

Because it seems to be a cheap upscaling instead of going to the original film roll as they did with ISE

I'm going to guess all the other videos were shot on film and then edited/mastered on tape

So in order to make them HD, they'd have to have the original film elements from the video shoots - and then they'd have to rescan them and re-edit them to match the finished videos

Who knows if the original film reels were saved

[TheSeeker]

Actually you can see during the re-uploaded version of Sweet Child O Mine that there's 2 cameras that workers are using to shoot the band as they walk around the set - a standard video camera and what appears to be a 16mm film camera for the artsy "personal" shots

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by TheSeeker

[fanfzero]

4 minutes ago, TheSeeker said:

I'm going to guess all the other videos were shot on film and then edited/mastered on tape

So in order to make them HD, they'd have to have the original film elements from the video shoots - and then they'd have to rescan them and re-edit them to match the finished videos

Who knows if the original film reels were saved

True, I think only Don't cry, Estranged and NR were shot on film. There's also a trouble, maybe when they added all the special effects they rendered it in low resolution, so their only chance is to re-do all the special effects to get 4k.

This happens with The Lord Of The Rings, the original film was in 4k, but when they added all the effects they stored it in 2.5k

[Silverburst80]

That was a rather casual " i hit the bullseye every night" from Axl, reminded me of Mr Chow

 

[Setzer]

1 hour ago, fanfzero said:

True, I think only Don't cry, Estranged and NR were shot on film. There's also a trouble, maybe when they added all the special effects they rendered it in low resolution, so their only chance is to re-do all the special effects to get 4k.

This happens with The Lord Of The Rings, the original film was in 4k, but when they added all the effects they stored it in 2.5k

You Could Be Mine was definitely shot on film as well. Same thing goes for the other Illusion videos (save for Garden of Eden)
Parts of Live and Let Die looks like film too IIRC, but it's been a while since the last time I saw it.

[Blackstar]

3 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

If you read the interview Erin did with People magazine, it doesn't seem farfetched to question whether anything that happened in that relationship was truly consensual. If she was as scared of Axl as she says she was, then clearly it must have been very difficult/impossible for her to refuse when he ordered her to do BDSM. I would be hesitant to declare that this has nothing to do with domestic violence. 

Erin: I was afraid when he came in, when he left, when he wasn’t there....My fear was bigger than you can imagine.

That's a logical assumption to make. On the other hand, Erin listed a lot of things Axl did to her in that interview, as well as in her lawsuit; however, him forcing her into S&M wasn't one of them. So a question arises why wouldn't she include it in the accusations, as it was grave enough, if it had happened.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Blackstar

[troccoli]

5 hours ago, TheSeeker said:

Could you try uploading the video for It's So Easy without the audio? Maybe that'll work

I can try!

 

[NOVEMBER COMA]

17 hours ago, rocknroll41 said:

Just saw the video... Damn Erin looks so good in HD!

Assume she is the one with Axl tattooed on her ass? Also in the crowd at one point? 

[Scream of the Butterfly]

5 hours ago, Blackstar said:

That's a logical assumption to make. On the other hand, Erin listed a lot of things Axl did to her in that interview, as well as in her lawsuit; however, him forcing her into S&M wasn't one of them. So a question arises why wouldn't she include it in the accusations, as it was grave enough, if it had happened.

The records were sealed, so not much is known about her lawsuit (at least by me).

There is this quote from Rolling Stone magazine:

Everly herself claimed Axl sexually assaulted her. She described a day when Axl ordered her to take off a bathing suit she was wearing, after which he tied her hands to her ankles from behind, put masking tape over her mouth and a bandana around her eyes, and led her, naked into a closet, where she remained for several hours while Axl talked to a friend of hers in the living room.

Later, according to Everly, Axl untied her, picked her up and tied her, face down, to a convertible bed. And then, "he forced himself on me anally really hard. Really hard."

"Were you screaming?" she was asked.

"Yes."

"How long did that last?"

"I don't remember."

"What happened when it was over?"

"He took it out and stuck it in my mouth."

An unreleased version of the video for GN'R song "It's So Easy", directed by Englishman Nigel Dick features Everly in bondage gear, with a red ball in her mouth as Axl screams, "See me hit you! You fall down!" The singer, according to a former associate, went to some lengths to gather up the few existing copies of the tape after Everly went to court against him.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by Scream of the Butterfly

[Blackstar]

22 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

The records were sealed, so not much is known about her lawsuit (at least by me).

There is this quote from Rolling Stone magazine:

This was from her testimony for Stephanie's lawsuit (and apparently the records for that aren't sealed, since the magazine had access to the transcripts or at least to parts of them).

There were lengthier newspaper reports back in the day about Erin's own lawsuit and its content.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Blackstar

[killuridols]

10 hours ago, Blackstar said:

That's a logical assumption to make. On the other hand, Erin listed a lot of things Axl did to her in that interview, as well as in her lawsuit; however, him forcing her into S&M wasn't one of them. So a question arises why wouldn't she include it in the accusations, as it was grave enough, if it had happened.

Do you have access to the lawsuits or other documents pertaining to Erin's case against Axl?

Because you can't assume that a magazine will reproduce the entire accusations in one article of two pages.

[colonizedmind]

14 hours ago, TheSeeker said:

I'm going to guess all the other videos were shot on film and then edited/mastered on tape

So in order to make them HD, they'd have to have the original film elements from the video shoots - and then they'd have to rescan them and re-edit them to match the finished videos

Who knows if the original film reels were saved

Well the It's So Easy 1989 ones were  so my bets are - Everything is in that GNR Vault, for sure!

[Tori72]

20 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

If you read the interview Erin did with People magazine, it doesn't seem farfetched to question whether anything that happened in that relationship was truly consensual. If she was as scared of Axl as she says she was, then clearly it must have been very difficult/impossible for her to refuse when he ordered her to do BDSM. I would be hesitant to declare that this has nothing to do with domestic violence. 

Erin: I was afraid when he came in, when he left, when he wasn’t there....My fear was bigger than you can imagine.

 

16 hours ago, Blackstar said:

That's a logical assumption to make. On the other hand, Erin listed a lot of things Axl did to her in that interview, as well as in her lawsuit; however, him forcing her into S&M wasn't one of them. So a question arises why wouldn't she include it in the accusations, as it was grave enough, if it had happened.

 

11 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

The records were sealed, so not much is known about her lawsuit (at least by me).

There is this quote from Rolling Stone magazine:

Everly herself claimed Axl sexually assaulted her. She described a day when Axl ordered her to take off a bathing suit she was wearing, after which he tied her hands to her ankles from behind, put masking tape over her mouth and a bandana around her eyes, and led her, naked into a closet, where she remained for several hours while Axl talked to a friend of hers in the living room.

Later, according to Everly, Axl untied her, picked her up and tied her, face down, to a convertible bed. And then, "he forced himself on me anally really hard. Really hard."

"Were you screaming?" she was asked.

"Yes."

"How long did that last?"

"I don't remember."

"What happened when it was over?"

"He took it out and stuck it in my mouth."

An unreleased version of the video for GN'R song "It's So Easy", directed by Englishman Nigel Dick features Everly in bondage gear, with a red ball in her mouth as Axl screams, "See me hit you! You fall down!" The singer, according to a former associate, went to some lengths to gather up the few existing copies of the tape after Everly went to court against him.

 

 

Just to collect this into one post and to put it together.  The question as to why Erin didn’t list „forced into BDSM“  in court might be because she stated this within her accusations and tellings as quoted above. Being tied up, forced to do things, etc. 

9 1/2 weeks as an example why the general public would know about BDSM and that it is consensual doesn’t work in my opinion. The movie was seen as being sexy but also as abusive. The BDSM scene, as I recall it, was given as an example of how a partner (woman) can psychologically be forced into something she would not really feel comfortable with but she gives in because her partner is manipulative. Also the scene didn’t really come across as not being really consensual to me

So drawing those loose and somewhat random ends together, I’m still inclined to think that BDSM as a „practice“ or „game“ was not well known and was more associated with oppression of a manipulative (mostly) male partner. So it was mostly shocking and seen as violent. Regarding from what we know about how Erin felt during their relationship from things she said at court, violence as well as manipulation is pretty obvious.

So, the core of the discussion, why Niven would not have ISE released might be because of all those associations. I’m sure he knew how violent Axl’s and Erin’s relationship but even if he didn’t know or didn’t care about Erin, he did not want Axl to be associated with BDSM because of controversy and maybe even to not associate Axl with DV before it becomes public.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Tori72

[killuridols]

I agree with the whole of your post but I want to say something about this....

12 minutes ago, Tori72 said:

Just to collect this into one post and to put it together.  The question as to why Erin didn’t list „forced into BDSM“  in court might be because she stated this within her accusations and tellings as quoted above. Being tied up, forced to do things, etc. 

How do we really know that Erin did not talk about BDSM in her depositions? A magazine article, newspaper article are not legal documents-

There could be tons of things said and we still wouldn't know. Also, we don't know what Axl manifested about the accussations. I think he must have said something too, right?

 

 

 

 

 

[Tori72]

3 minutes ago, killuridols said:

I agree with the whole of your post but I want to say something about this....

How do we really know that Erin did not talk about BDSM in her depositions? A magazine article, newspaper article are not legal documents-

There could be tons of things said and we still wouldn't know. Also, we don't know what Axl manifested about the accussations. I think he must have said something too, right?

That’s true. We don’t have the whole court info.

As for Axl, I think I read somewhere that he didn’t give a comment and was aiming (succesfully) for an out of court settlement.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Tori72

[killuridols]

3 minutes ago, Tori72 said:

That’s true. We don’t have the whole court info.

As for Axl, I think I read somewhere that he didn’t give a comment and was aiming (succesfully) for an out of court settlement.

I don't know. He must have defended himself with something?

I have no idea how those settlement things work, never been in that situation so far (thankfully!)

[Blackstar]

Stephanie Seymour's lawsuit went to court and Erin testified as a witness. Before the civil case trial started, Stephanie's side asked for it to not be public and for the records to be sealed, but it was denied by the judge. Finally it was settled out of court with the details of the settlement undisclosed. So there are records of the procedure, but all we know is the excerpts Rolling Stone selected to publish in the 2000 article. We indeed don't know what Axl's defense was, if he took the stand, etc..

Erin's lawsuit didn't go to court, as far as we know, and it was settled directly out of court, so there are no testimonies and counter-claims there. The details of the settlement were also undisclosed.

12 hours ago, killuridols said:

Do you have access to the lawsuits or other documents pertaining to Erin's case against Axl?

Because you can't assume that a magazine will reproduce the entire accusations in one article of two pages.

The answer is in my post right above yours. So no, I don't have access to the documents of the lawsuit, but there were other articles in the press of the time about the content of Erin's lawsuit apart from the People magazine article. I think it's safe to assume that the journalists who wrote those articles had either access to the documents or were given a briefing about the lawsuit by Erin's lawyer; also, that the reports would contain the most despicable and the most sensational of the things Axl was accused of.  I don't know about you, but if I were the lawyer or the journalist and there was an accusation of Axl forcing Erin into S&M for the video, I would have considered it as one of the highlights of the case, since it would be appalling and moreover it involved the band.

The thread is about the ISE video specifically, and I just can't jump into conclusions that the scenes in it were actual DV, even more that there were deleted scenes etc. without evidence.

6 hours ago, Tori72 said:

9 1/2 weeks as an example why the general public would know about BDSM and that it is consensual doesn’t work in my opinion. The movie was seen as being sexy but also as abusive. The BDSM scene, as I recall it, was given as an example of how a partner (woman) can psychologically be forced into something she would not really feel comfortable with but she gives in because her partner is manipulative. Also the scene didn’t really come across as not being really consensual to me

So drawing those loose and somewhat random ends together, I’m still inclined to think that BDSM as a „practice“ or „game“ was not well known and was more associated with oppression of a manipulative (mostly) male partner. So it was mostly shocking and seen as violent. Regarding from what we know about how Erin felt during their relationship from things she said at court, violence as well as manipulation is pretty obvious.

So, the core of the discussion, why Niven would not have ISE released might be because of all those associations. I’m sure he knew how violent Axl’s and Erin’s relationship but even if he didn’t know or didn’t care about Erin, he did not want Axl to be associated with BDSM because of controversy and maybe even to not associate Axl with DV before it becomes public.

I see your point about 9 1/2 weeks (even though I don't remember the scene so well - it's been a very long time since I watched it). Just to clarify the bolded, are you saying that the scene came across to you as consensual? Because, if so,  that contradicts the sentence before the bolded.

As I said, though, there were other examples apart from 9 1/2 weeks.

About the video, supposing it was released in 1989-90: It wouldn't be aired on MTV, so people would have to buy or rent it in order to watch it. The DV issues were known to the band and the circle around it (Niven etc.) but still not outside it. The video itself would've been scandalous, as that thing wasn't something you saw in music videos, but, like I said, it wouldn't be something that would pop up on your TV. And, to the people not being unaware of the existence of S&M, I don't think it would give the impression that it wasn't consensual, as the scenes aren't really violent (I mean there is no innuendo of pain and suffering).

Anyway, I guess each of us speaks from her own experience and recollection of the era, the cultural environment etc. in regards to how the video would've been perceived.

 

Edited May 30, 2018 by Blackstar