Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Extreme Kidnapping featured in GQ Magazine!

We've been waiting for this feature to appear for awhile now, it hit the newstands last week, and its finally up on their website.  This was no small blurb or website mention, this was 4 full pages with pics.  E.K. is doing big things once again and will have more to talk about real soon.  Enjoy the article here >


toucanman said...


I have read about your company with great interest since I saw the articles in GQ recently ( and However, after reading those, a piece interviewing you in 2003 (, and listening to a Howard Stern interview ( with Mr. Magary, I had a few questions that I was wondering if you would be able to answer. I realize this must be a busy time for you with all the publicity coming from the article, but I was hoping you would be able to answer the questions from someone legitimately curious about your company.

In 2003 in your interview in the Metrotimes you stated that you would not use violence on your clients, even if they asked because you didn't want to cross one line for fear of then crossing even more lines:

" 'I don’t want to hurt anybody, even if they want to pay me to do it.'
'But I don’t have a problem with scaring the shit out of someone,' he adds with a smile. "

However, in his Howard Stern Interview, the Mr. Magary notes that at one point in his detention he was kicked in the stomach (which along with being violent, seems dangerous given the number of internal organs you could affect).

Clearly you care about risk because you also stated in the GQ articles that there are just some things that you are not willing to do because of the risks (putting someone over a fire basically). However, in your exchange with Drew you asked him if he'd be OK with stun guns, fire, being beaten with a trout, or battered with a summer sausage. These all seem like violence to varying degrees so I guess my question is:

What has changed between 2003 and now regarding your views on violence and why, and what do you do to ensure safety?

Mr. Magary in his article mentions that in response to your email stun gun question on whether or not he'd be OK with it, he responds "probably not". Howard Stern also remarked on his show that Mr. Magary didn't want to be stun gunned, and yet he was anyways. While he says he was not adamant about it, he nonetheless never said "OK" to being stun gunned. Why do something to someone that they clearly said no to? There seem to be fundamental trust issues associated with this, and while Mr. Magary seems to shake it off in his interview, shouldn't a line be drawn unless someone consents to something, especially in consideration of future clients who want to be certain as to what they are getting into?

Safe words: The GQ article says that some clients forego a safe word. However, I'm coming at this from my knowledge of the BDSM community where safe words always exist (at least in circles that are considered responsible). Whether or not people use them, there existence empowers people to be able to stop something when something truly becomes unsafe or uncomfortable. Why not have one for everyone and make it mandatory? How else would you know something is awry?

Finally, I was talking this over with a friend and he said "How does he make sure that someone doesn't use his service as a way to pull a prank or get back at someone?" and I'd be curious to hear your response.

Thank you for listening. I realize this was a long post, but I am legitimately curious to hear your responses.

A curious reader

Richie Reckless said...

Is this company contemplating branching out to Los Angles? If so, who might I approach for employment opportunities?

Adam Thick said...

Thanks for the super long list of questions. Let me try to answer them for you..
1. 2003 was a long time ago, and less than a year into the business, like any business, you are going to grow and make changes if you want to stay relevant. Our clients safety is and always has been our #1 priority.
2. Drews editor and boss arranged his adventure with his consent. Everything that happened to him was authorized. And "probably not" does not equate to 'no'. Neither does 'not being adamant' about it. Those responses don't equate to "clearly saying no."
3. We encourage ALL clients to take a safe word. It can't hurt and its just a good safety precaution. But sometimes people don't want a way out or to be tempted with a way out. The Deluxe exists for those people too.
4. Because we don't kidnap 3rd parties. You have to sign yourself up. We will only kidnap the individual who signs our paperwork. You can't sign someone else up. Its impossible.

Hope that clears things up for curious reader.