Ass-Clown Blogger Comes Out In Favor Of Girls Gone WildS

After watching the tape in question, Chad Garrison from the Riverfront Times has announced his support for the jury in the now-infamous Girls Gone Wild Jane Doe lawsuit. Once again, we are forced to review the meaning of consent.

To recap: a woman, identified only as Jane Doe, was dancing in the Rum Jungle bar in 2004, where a camera man from Girls Gone Wild was also in attendance. Doe wasn't shying away from the camera, but when men began to request she show her breasts, Doe refused and said simply "I can't." Another woman then pulled her shirt down, revealing her nipples to the camera. The short footage ended up on Girl's Gone Wild Sorority Orgy. Doe only found out about her inclusion on the tape when her husband's friend recognized her and informed her spouse over the phone. Doe sued Girls Gone Wild for $5 million - and lost.

Chad Garrison, a blogger at the Riverfront Times decided Jane Doe was probably a liar anyways and nominated her for his Ass Clown Of The Week award. After receiving angry emails (some of which were from Jezebel readers), his editor decided to write an open letter, nominating Garrison for his own award.

Now, the Ass Clown himself has a few choice words to say. He watched the tape and decided that, yes, the jury made the right decision:

1. Did Jane Doe appear dancing in a nightclub at approximately the 17:49 minute mark of Girls Gone Wild: Sorority Girl Orgy? Yes.

2. When confronted by the camera, did Jane Doe playfully lower her chest (revealing her cleavage), grab hold of her boobs and jiggle her bosom in the direction of the camera? Yes.

3. Did she then mouth the words: "I can't." Yes.

​4. Did Jane Doe then turn to the camera again, grab her breasts once more and again jiggle them? Yes.

5. Did Jane Doe then turn a third time to the camera and pull down her tank top, revealing more of her breasts? Yes.

6. Did at around that same moment another woman appear in the video and place her hands near the top of Jane Doe's tank-top? Yes.

7. Did the hands pull the tank top down revealing Jane Doe's nipples for approximately two seconds? Yes.

8. Did Jane Doe then turn to her friends and laugh following the incident? Yes.

9. Did Jane Doe's entire appearance in the film last less than 20 seconds? Yes.

10. Based on Jane Doe's appearance in the film, do you think she was wronged to the tune of $5 million? No.

Whew. That's a lot of points. But essentially, Garrison is arguing that Doe forfeited all control over over images of her naked body when she decided to dance in front of the camera. Doe's lawyer, Steve Evans, disagrees: "When the someone at Mantra decided to put her in the DVD, that's when the violation of privacy occurred," Evans told Garrison. "Our client's position is she was having fun dancing at a club, and someone pulled her top off. Even though something like that doesn't happen on regular basis, it didn't cause her alarm to call police. What caused alarm was finding it on DVD later." Furthermore, Evans says the cameraman didn't have anything on him identifying himself as an employee for Girls Gone Wild. The 20 second clip of Doe may seem minor to men like Garrison, but Doe ended up on a nationally-distributed porn flick without ever once signing a waver or even giving verbal consent. No matter how much she "played" to the camera, this is still wrong. And though she may not have pressed charges, grabbing another woman's shirt and pulling it down, after she already refused, is still sexual assault. It doesn't matter the gender of the assailant or their relationship. What happened to Jane Doe is not okay and by nominating her for his little contest, Garrison not only implied that Doe was never wronged, but also that she was at fault.

An Ass Clown's ReBUTTal: Girls Gone Wild, Jane Doe and Jezebel [RFT]
An Open Letter To Ass-Clown Voters And Chad Garrison Haters [RFT]

Related: Jury Decides Consent Is Not Required For Girls Gone Wild