The picture above is a slightly more explicit version, if only because of the question posed to film icon Hairy Studs — “Is your dick hard?” — than the image I posted on Facebook and Twitter in hopes of getting people to read this story. The person who asks the question is, ultimately, famed journalist Glenn Greenwald, who directed a series of porn films whose hero is a man with a 22-centimeter-schlong dick, Hairy Studs. (That’s the name of the character in the movie. I’m not sure if it’s also the name of the actor who plays Hairy Studs, though I would assume not.)
Greenwald’s career as a porn director dates to the early-2000’s, according to this story by the New York Daily News. “I’m 46 years old and, like most people, have lived a complicated and varied adult life,” Greenwald told the newspaper. “I didn’t manage my life from the age of 18 onward with the intention of being a family values U.S. senator. My personal life, like pretty much everyone’s, is complex and sometimes messy.”
If you think I shouldn’t be writing this story because it’s a personal attack on Greenwald, I’d ask you if you think Greenwald would have written a story about Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son, if he’d had been a porn entrepreneur in his early-30’s. How would Greenwald have reacted had Hunter Biden told him, “I didn’t manage my life from the age of 18 onward with the intention of being a family values U.S. senator. My personal life, like pretty much everyone’s, is complex and sometimes messy”? I’m guessing he would not have considered that exculpatory.
By the way, I believe that Greenwald’s exit from The Intercept was contrived for maximum PR impact and dollars for his new Substack blog — he claimed the publication wanted to censor a story he wrote about Hunter Biden, though it appears Greenwald conflates editing him with censoring him — but his reporting on Hunter’s business dealings in Ukraine and China is legitimate. I also think it’s legitimate to report on Hunter’s drug addiction, crack smoking and consorting with prostitutes. Why?
First, and in no particular order, personal behavior can often reveal character flaws. Second, if Hunter profited in his business dealings by using his father’s name, and he certainly appears to have, that’s news. Lastly, and specifically about Hunter’s crack smoking, that wouldn’t matter except for one thing: in 1994, then-Senator Joe Biden was a leading advocate and architect of a crime bill that resulted in untold numbers of Black men (and women) going to prison for smoking crack, or even marijuana. Yet Hunter never suffered any legal consequences for his drug problems, which is probably a good thing, but his father’s hypocrisy is off the charts.
Also, did Greenwald think it was inappropriate some years back for journalists to report on Anthony Weiner, aka Carlos Danger and a man who had close ties to Hillary Clinton, over his sexting of numerous young women? To be fair, in 2011 Greenwald criticized coverage about Weiner/Danger, saying it was a private matter between Weiner and his wife, Huma Abedin, who also had extremely close ties to Hillary. (The Economist argued forcibly to the contrary, in this article, titled, “It Matters.”)
However, Greenwald sure did like writing about the story, even as he said it should be off limits to the media.
And who could blame him? It was simply too delicious to ignore.
But let’s return to the topic of Greenwald’s career as a pornographer. Here’s an excerpt from the aforementioned Daily News story:
Greenwald was enjoying a career as a litigator when friend Jason Buchtel offered him a partnership in his consulting company, Master Notions Inc., back in 2002. Court papers show that one of the company’s clients was then known as HJ — short for “Hairy Jocks” — and that Greenwald was the one who negotiated their deal. Owner Peter Haas “had this pornographic company he wasn’t able to maintain,” Greenwald said.
Greenwald and Buchtel agreed to help Haas in return for 50% of the profits. In the two months the companies worked together, “Haas made more money than he ever made before in his entire life,” Master Notions’ filings say.
But Haas refused to pay the company its share of the profits, which led to a nasty legal battle. Haas said he called the deal off because Greenwald was “demanding changes to the content of the videos which were and are unacceptable.”
He also accused Greenwald of having bullied him into signing the deal, citing several twisted emails that he said were from Greenwald, whose email address was, “DomMascHry31.” In one, Greenwald allegedly called Haas “a little bitch” and “a good little whore.”
Greenwald said those emails were “completely fabricated” and “not written by me.”
“The case was settled in 2004. In a post on The Guardian website Wednesday, Greenwald said the deal came after he “threatened to retain a forensic expert to prove that the emails were forgeries.”
“The producer quickly settled the case by paying some substantial portion of what was owed, and granting the LLC the rights to use whatever it had obtained when consulting with him to start its own competing business,” he wrote.
The Toronto Sun reported in another 2013 story, headlined, “CBC pays former porn promoter for ‘spy scoop'”: “Before turning his attention to writing books targeting the U.S. George Bush administration and Republican politicians, Greenwald owned sites such as Hairy Jocks and Hairy Studs.”
That’s sort of interesting and revealing. Once an anti-GOP pornographer, Greenwald is now a “respectable” journalist who regularly appears on pro-Republican outlets like Newsmax and Fox TV, especially on Fascism Lite (though increasingly dark) host Tucker Carlson’s show. It’s almost as if Greenwald has no moral compass, or, more generously, his political and pornographic views have just shifted and matured with age.
In any case, I believe it’s entirely legitimate to write about Greenwald’s days as a porn entrepreneur, partly because I do think it speaks to possible character flaws. Don’t get me wrong. I have no objection to porn, as long as it’s not a snuff flick or involves pedophilia or trafficked or otherwise coerced actors and actresses. But if you’re going to direct porn, it should be good porn, and the Hairy Studs series was not good porn, at least based on this:
Here are a few lines from this 55-second outtake:
“How many centimeters is it?” (Answer: 22 centimeters)
“Do guys like your big dick?” (Answer: Guys do like his big dick.)
“Is your dick hard?” (Yes, it was very hard.)
I don’t know, but to me this just makes Greenwald somehow even more pathetic and money-grubbing than I had previously thought.
But there’s another matter worth pointing out. As I previously noted in these electronic pages, Greenwald previously used a shell firm called Enzuli Management LLC to hide his payments from The Intercept — at least $2 million — and the tech oligarch who owns it, Pierre Omidyar.
Well, it looks like he used a similarly-named LLC to operate his porn business.
Still not convinced this a legitimate story? Well, we’ll just have to agree to disagree, and if you got this far I have to believe it’s newsworthy, whether you admit it or not.