Why is there (nearly) always 1 ( not 2 , not 0 ) 'lesbian' scene in every American feature ? If this is supposed to be a couples market then haven't many of the straight women just been alienated ? For the most part these sapphic encounters seem to be just to fulfill an obligation . Normally they're the least interesting part of the movie , with absolutely zero heat , so why bother ? On top of that they must mess with the story ideas that people come up with , which I imagine is a right pain in the arse . Maybe g/g is cheaper ? Is that it ?
[Humorous rant] Because they are formulaic crap, quickly and carelessly produced, and as lacking in creativity as they are in heat? [/Humorous rant] I will now speculate inductively based upon a suitable sample space X. I believe this along with similar conventions is an effort to appeal to a broader audience. Different people like different thing. An effort is made to include a little bit of everything while limiting some elements to prevent the alienation of other groups. It is a compromise, people who like that stuff should be happy that they got their one scene and people who dislike it only have to endure one scene. As far as the straight women in the audience they are in the minority and I do not believe that their tastes are truly catered to, it is more a matter of not offending them and there is usually other stuff that is more offensive anyway. As far as plot goes the plots are usually not coherent anyway, but if that was important lesbians could be written in. As far as cost it is probably a wash as the same money could be used for g/g with a 50/50 split or b/g with a 25/75 split, if anything it could cost more compared to b/g with really inexpensive male talent. It could be an opportunity to get a specific lady in the movie and on the cover. It is interesting that features continue to pursue this strategy while all sex titles focus on ever-smaller niches and generally do not include lesbian scenes if they are outside the niche. Things have improved slightly though, features are now slightly relaxing other requirements such as the five scene rule and the ninety minute rule. Many features make it a point to include a three-way as well. I think that the routine way the scenes play out is more problematic than patterns in the individuals involved. The obligatory multi-person all female scene would be far less bothersome if it were interesting and compelling.
It's one of the de-facto standards in porn, I guess.
[Link]
Pocketcomb_Pimp Deactivated User
1921 Posts 7/03
Posted - Oct 21 2004 : 11:51AM
That's one law I'm glad is not enforced. Save that for features, but Gonzo is great cause it's raw nasty hetero sex. If you want Girl on girl, get No Mans Land, Dirty Girlz, or Nasty Girls.
If gonzo vids really did offer 'raw nasty hetero sex' I might watch more of them . For the most part they seem to be passionless exercises in contortion and hole filling . They're the WWE of porn . The g/g titles you mentioned sound pretty similar : think I'll stick to my good old Viv Thomas .
For the most part that's probably depressingly close to the truth . For the most part . But then I don't bother trying to watch anything but the best I can find .Yes Doctor .Yes , that thought occurred to me too . But the problem with that is the quality of the 'lesbian' content : it's shit ! I guess I just assumed that anyone who likes g/g would be interested in finding something a little better that's all . Maybe I'm being too kind to the average Joe ? If you dig lezbo stuff there are plenty of vids with 6 times as much content , and of a far higher quality too .That's not been my experience . The couple of women I've watch porn with both said the lezbo scene was the worst , and just proved to them that this porn stuff was all for men . I'd expected facials or anal to be the line in the sand , but it didn't turn out that way .But that's the problem with the whole attitude isn't it . Ah , it's only porn ! I suppose that means it doesn't matter if it's a sloppy job then ?! Frankly I prefer European features which don't always feel the need for that lady love special scene . Some of them also have fairly well developed plots and even some effort at coherence - feel the shock ! Mario Salieri , Alain Payet ... there are others . Maybe I'm just surprised that America is willing to settle for less .
I'm not at all surprised by that observation of yours.
This is one of the biggest conundrums in porn for me - so called 'couples' films, that have aspects that would turn off a lot of women. And one of the biggest - fake lesbian scenes. Fake as in you can tell within 10 seconds of watching, that these two women are straight, and have zero interest in each other. It's worse than watching a passionless B/G scene.
Now, occasionally, there are some lesbian scenes that look authentic enough, and I can stand watching them, though they're not my cup of tea. But the fake ones - I've got to fast forward, or feel my brain get fried.
My take is that these 'couples' films are really for the older gentleman, who'd like his porn to resemble a Playboy pictorial come to life. I also think the formula of one lesbian scene per film may also be attributable to what cable TV/ hotel deals will find acceptable for airing.
The only thing couple-oriented about couples films is that they won't be filled with endless rounds of DP's and name-calling, a la RLD and its ilk.
I'm really pleased to see this thread because I've always felt like a lone dissenting voice on the subject.
On the face of it, all this faux lesbianism in couples porn is completely nonsensical. However, I really don't see that ('couples porn') as anything more than a marketing term. Adult features are directed primarily at heterosexual men with a particular sensibility. This very board indicates that women do watch adult movies, but the overwhelming majority are still made with a male audience in mind. Nonetheless, this particular heterosexual male tends to find it quite boring - and it appears I'm not alone.
I've heard a number of explanations for the prevalence of g/g scenes over the years; for example that it appeals to a common male fantasy and that it's cheap/ easy to film. It's also been suggested that that this is a legacy of the sexploitation era - that the relative obscurity of the female genitals made such scenes a staple of adult cinema just prior to the emergence of theatrical hardcore. Unfortunately, I also think lurflurf is right to raise the issue of formulaic crap.
There's obviously a market for the lipstick lesbian stuff -and it's certainly not limited to lesbians (I know many men are devout Andrew Blake fans). However, I just don't see the need for it in every adult feature. In fact, it has me reaching for the remote control almost as quickly as guys jerking off!
Betty Crocker produces a fine product called "Hamburger Helper", which is cheap starch and flavouring to make cheap meat more filling and palatable.
Think of the one lesbian scene as "Porno Helper", where the girls who are there anyway will do a perfunctory, non-makeup destroying scene for very little extra money.
