well, my friend, it might take a sneak attack or the ol' Kobe Bryant approach (bend her over the chair and have at her). i don't think dick will try that on jane even though jane would complicit waving that ass in my face all the time. be careful there, Jane. so we'll just keep getting our kicks watching these porn chicks get reamed from end to end. if i protest to much just slap me, Jane ... i have it too good already.

Edited by - dicknjane on 1/29/2006 5:51:17 PM

[Link]

But there is a big difference between gay themes in mainstream features and porn.
A good mainstream feature that deals with the problems of gay people also appeals to straight people because it deals with universal problems and obstacles.
Porn simply deals with sex.
And as much as I want equal rights, love and happiness for gay people I don't want to watch gay porn.

Edited by - juha on 1/29/2006 6:46:10 PM

[Link]

Comstock Films:Real Life, Real People, Real Sex

[Link]

Steve Holmes

[Link]

Gentleman Jon

But anyway, I was speaking more in terms of attitudes toward homosexuality in a modern context, since homosexuality is really a modern concept anyway. Yes, there always was homosexuality, but not in the same sense that we think of it now. Centuries ago, there were no labels, stigmas, or stereotypes involved like there are now. The term "homosexual" didn't even exist until about a century ago, and it began right here in America. Before then, no one was called a "homosexual." You just had sex with whomever you had sex with. If you were a man who slept with a man, you were not called "gay," you were just a man who slept with a man, and there was no stigma attached. People just slept with whomever they wanted to sleep with.

But then, as time went on, the West created the label of "homosexual," and began attaching stigmas and stereotypes to it. This was not the case in the ancient world, which is why we cannot use the same argument for homosexuality when talking about the ancients as we do when we speak about it now. Although society was still patriarchical, it was completely different. Nowadays, with the influence of gender roles and prescribed standards of sexuality, it is totally unacceptable for men to be intimate, but is acceptable for women to be. This is what my friend was trying to say with her argument.

[Link]

If you consider these types of media outlets as “do not get a lot of media publication” then we are in agreement here.

[Link]

Answer your own questions, Tony. How gay are you ? You've shot guys with other guys, does that make you gay? Straight? Bi? Sucked many cocks yourself, Tony?

More importantly, I don't care about your answers, because it has no bearing on what I was talking about.

[Link]

You're kind of sexy when you're peeved, Skippy.

Comstock Films:Real Life, Real People, Real Sex

[Link]

But anyway, I am aware that just because I haven't seen these advertisements doesn't mean they don't exist. But apparently, if they are airing, they are only airing in certain markets and to certain demographics. For example, I know that the radio stations that I listen to would never air a commercial for "Brokeback Mountain," because it is not the type of movie that appeals to their listening demographic, although some other stations may play commercials for it all the time. I don't know, I just know I haven't heard or seen any. As for advertisements in magazines, I did only see one article about "Brokeback Mountain" in passing as I was browsing through a magazine in a supermarket line. I don't remember which magazine it was, and it wasn't the cover story either. As for "Brokeback Mountain" being "on covers of all type of industry rags," as you claim, I have not noticed this. In order for this to happen, I would think that they would have to manage to get "Brangelina" off the covers of them all first.

[Link]

The Hell if someone wants to watch at male passion there's a huge choice

About me I absolutely don't want to see that in a straight movie if there's male/male passion then it's not a straight porn movie.

Porn involves sexuality, especially MY sexuality ,I don't even like lesbian porn movies (with exceptions) i feel like a lurker , i don't belong to that world , I'm not a lesbian and most of lesbian women I know absolutely don't like males in their sexual encounters nor they like to be viewed by anybody not directly involved in their activity, I know this and i can't see those movies.

A question, may I choose to watch at straight porn without been considered omophobic?
I feel disturbed even when the camera goes to male muscles that turn me off instantly .

I have to say that a former girlfriend of mine did like to watch to gay movies , she found that very exciting that wasn't for me but it was fine in order to give her what she wanted.

EDIT Almost forgot In mainstream movies and in real life I've no problems dealing with gay people nor watching at them in a movies but that's a matter of a story not a matter of MY sexuality.

Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 1/30/2006 11:06:49 AM

[Link]

When you are working a woman towards anal sex, she really has to be comfortable with you. That involves dominating the sexual situation, getting her to let down her inhibitions and try something new. You have to pleasure her to get her to do this, make her feel beautiful and wanton, like she is the only one you want do this with. You may not like the word, but it involves dominating her sexually.

The only time this kind of thing doesn't apply is when the woman is more experienced than you are. She is dominating you, getting you try different things like anal sex. She is ruling the sexual situation using her body to stimulate and direct you. Woman also enjoy sexually dominating men and are often alot better at it than men.

Things may be different for you. I'm always thinking while having sex, feeling out the woman I'm with, seeing where we can take each other and what she'll let me do with her body.

[Link]

If she wants to be submissive, she has to lose power, if she has no power it's making not much sense. If she stays above you in real life, that may thrill you both.
But the problem is with playing this game in anal sex is that she has to be relaxed to enjoy and that means without fear and trusting you.

If you have given a woman an orgasm you may have noticed how strong contraction of the muscles down there are. If she has to cope with submission and fear these muscles tend to tense up and the pleasure thing is most likely not working. Maybe you know your woman for 10 years and this works for you both, but it's highly doubtful that it will work for the majority of woman.

But reading your comments it sounds like you just take an inexperienced woman, because she won't dominate you in your opinion and dominate her with anal sex.
Maybe this gives you some kind of satisfaction or even pleasure, but are you sure about her?

Or maybe your doing it right and gentle and the fantasy of dominating her is just in your head and in reality you are serving her.

Have you tried it the other way round, to see what it's like?

[Link]

Truth be told, BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN has begun to haunt my waking moments, as well. There I'll be, trying to shoot some little Asian waif in a schoolgirl outfit, & suddenly out of the corner of my eye, as if in a J-horror film, a handsome gay cowboy makes a leering face at me. I've been startled into dropping the camera so many times that my new nickname is "Ol' Butterfingers" & they're making me smoke only two bowls max before the shoot's over. How can I explain to them that's BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN that's scaring me? They'll think I'm CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Link]

You need to go back to your female friend because what she said really doesn't make much sense. [It's OK, nobody's perfect].

If patriarchy is more tolerant of displays of 'g/g' affection because of its alleged duty to cater to men's sexual fantasies, then what about those other sexual fantasies? Why only 'g/g' and not the others? I mean, we don't see het couples breaking out into anal sex or cowgirl on that nightclub dance floor, right?

I don't know about you, but patriarchy's doing a lousy job of catering to sexual fantasies if the goverment is obsessed with cracking down on adult porn, racking up obscenity convictions, etc.

Why do out lesbians, even 'lipstick' lesbians, suffer as much discrimination in today's society as gay men? "Don't ask / Don't tell" applies to all gay people - no mercy for lesbians. Gay marriage is banned almost everywhere in the US - no exceptions for lesbians. Greater tolerance for girl/girl display would lead to an easier life for actual 'girl/girl' couples, but that's not what's happening. So, one needs to question the original assumption: same-sex intimacy here is deemed more acceptable for women than for men.

I got a big laugh out of what your friend told you:

"She said that the only reason lesbian sex is seen as "sexy" is because we live in a patriarchical, male-supremist society. She then said that if the situation were reversed, and society was historically dominated by women rather men, it would not be lesbian sex, but gay male sex, that would thought of as "hot" or "sexy." "

Lots of women who love 'Brokeback Mountain' have said they are turned on by two men getting it on. The first hardcore American porn written by women was 'K/S', i.e. 'slash' - raw gay sex between Captain Kirk and Mister Spock. The nerve of those women, fantasizing incorrectly while patriarchy still rules! Didn't they get the memo that said they can't fantasize about 'b/b' until women rule over men?

Does your friend think that in a feminist society, lesbian sex will be seen as repulsive instead of sexy, and that heterosexual sex will be 'the hot thing'?

It's interesting that those who think they 'get' why straight men have lesbian fantasies almost never ask the straight men in question, but prefer to rely on high-falutin' gossip (or Howard Stern) instead.

Edited by - Sheldon on 1/31/2006 11:45:42 AM

[Link]

"She said that the only reason lesbian sex is seen as "sexy" is because we live in a patriarchical, male-supremist society. She then said that if the situation were reversed, and society was historically dominated by women rather men, it would not be lesbian sex, but gay male sex, that would thought of as "hot" or "sexy." "

But, the female Star Trek fans and the Brokeback fans who fantasize about male/male sex clearly THINK of male/male sex as "hot" or "sexy" - indeed, by the common definition of the word 'fantasize', there is no choice in the matter. And yet, we don't live in a matriarchy.

In the aforementioned passage, your friend did NOT say that lesbian sex is the only socially legitimated same-sex fantasy - she just said that the fantasy is "seen as 'sexy'" Seen by whom? She does not specify. That's not my fault!

You seem to think that there is a clear distinction between what is socially tolerable and what is socially acceptable. As a feminist, I reject that distinction on the grounds that the personal is political. In this case, what that means is that the social "catering-to" of personal (sexual) fantasies will have tangible implications in the real world for those people who provide the template for such fantasies.

Now, if this "catering-to" actually existed the way you claim it does, then lesbians in actuality would have more civil rights than gay men. Lesbians could wed, gay men not; lesbians could openly serve in the armed forces, gay men not, etc. But since this is not the case in the real world, your "catering-to" assumption is therefore mistaken.

You write, "Why is it acceptable to see lesbian scenes, whether they be full scenes or partial, in "straight" porn movies, but not gay male scenes?"

Well, it's certainly not because patriarchy deems 'g/g' acceptable but not 'b/b'! Porn's very existence is opposed by patriarchy via obscenity laws, stigmatization, etc. Until very recently, far fewer women watched porn. It was men who mostly went to the theaters and the adult section of the video stores. If those men were straight, they didn't care for 'b/b' (I'm just speaking generally) - if those men were gay, they didn't care for 'b/g'. As a result, the marketplace has been divvied up as follows: all gay male sex scenes exclusively for all-male product; and the rest - 'b/g','g/g' - exclusively for the straight male market.

Bottom line: there WOULD be a standard, cliched 'boy/boy' scene in otherwise straight porn productions if the female porn consumer had been a force to be reckoned with from the beginning. But that didn't happen - women porn consumers got off to a late start. And for THAT, you can blame the patriarchy!

"Girls Gone Wild" - truly popular, or just media hype? I never watched it more than once - all the kisses look fake, and I take a back seat to no one in my affection for convincing-looking 'g/g' fantasies. BTW, I authored the 'Sapphic Scorchers' page on the R.A.M.E (Rec.Arts.Movies.Erotica) website.

Edited by - Sheldon on 1/31/2006 5:00:00 PM

[Link]

I can't wait for the porn version called Bareback Mountain.

[Link]

this is just a question for you insiders from a pornster who really doesn't know. i'm not planning to go see Brokeback Mountain, i'm not planning on getting any "cowboy pornos" either, but why is it that the gay guy crowd gets shunned at the AVN Awards. it seems like it's really ok to be convincing in a girl-girl scene or a tranny scene but if you're in a straight guy-guy scene you're left out??? it seems somewhat discriminatory???

[Link]

"A male-dominated society looking upon two attractive women kissing as sexy does not mean that the same society acknowledges that behavior with any political sanction. To equate certain sexual standards to what is politically acceptable is outlandish."

No, it's common sense in addition to being in accordance with the mainstream feminist doctrine that I cited earlier. Also, your initial assumption is flawed: this male-dominated SOCIETY does not look upon two attractive women kissing as sexy. What has been definitively established from the data is that 'g/g' is favored by some people, not by a consensus across the board for our society, or even just for MEN across the board for our society.

What any society AS A WHOLE deems positive and attractive is not on the receiving end of persecution or discrimination - not in a democratic country, anyway.

"Also, I think your perspective on the issue totally overlooks the significant effects that a long history of socially ingrained sexual double standards has on the reason that lesbianism (or more specifically, "straight" women engaged in lesbian practices for the sexual entertainment of men) is looked upon with more approval than gay male affection, notwithstanding the political intricacies."

Again, your assumption is flawed: there is no LONG history of socially-ingrained double standards on this matter. This nation is over 200 years old; same-sex fantasies as an issue of mass public concern and curiosity does not predate the onset of the adult film and video industry - that's just 40 years, tops (give or take a few years).

Edited by - Sheldon on 2/1/2006 12:11:35 PM

[Link]

"There is still an interesting asymmetry between male and female porn consumers: heterosexual females tend to be considerably more tolerant of lesbian sex scenes than heterosexual males are of gay scenes. Why is this? I really have no idea, although it seems to fit with how, for instance, men's and women's magazines both tend to feature women on their covers. Female beauty seems to be the object of desire for both genders."

I believe that the greater willingness of women in general, and female porn consumers in particular, to explore same-sex intimacy is due to their being in touch with their inner bonobo. The bonobo is a chimpanzee-like ape living in the Congo (formerly Zaire) in a matriarchal society where all the females have sex with each other for fun, pleasure and love and only bother with males for the sake of maintaining the species. Of all the species in the animal kingdom, the bonobo is the one most closely related, genetically, to homo sapiens. [More on this you can get from author Frans de Waal.]. Feminist writers like Adrienne Rich have maintained that heterosexuality for women is not necessarily natural but imposed by patriarchy, so this would fit.

Tristram posted: "...porn producers will continue to put lesbian scenes into their movies since it pleases some men and will not scare off most females anyway, they will not put any gay scenes in their films since that would scare off the majority of the male porn viewers."

Porn producers may indeed do that but it would then be based on their incorrect perception of the fans. In bi videos, for example, I have calmly zapped through the boy/boy to get to the girl/girl. When you say 'scared away', do you mean male porn consumers are thrown into some sort of over-the-top panic, where the frightened hordes are jamming the streets, fleeing Godzilla while Tokyo collapses around them (again)? For what it's worth, most of the men who have posted here said they would rent porn that happened to have boy/boy action as long as the rest of it contained what they were really after.

For myself, I'd rent a porn tape with 5 boy/boy scenes if the 6th scene had Nina Hartley strapping on Daphne Rosen. But if all the scenes were boy/boy, I would make like a good Jew and celebrate pass over.

BTW, most porn producers are no longer putting in a token lesbian scene to round out their boy/girl videos. Which I like, because that saves me lots of money, enabling me to focus just on the 'all g/g' niche for my 'g/g' needs.

Note to KnoxGuy: I'm a student of history, that's how I know. Mass public concern and curiosity about same-sex fantasies was one of the defining features of the Sexual Revolution - a Sixties phenomenon. [That's also when the porn industry took off].

Edited by - Sheldon on 2/1/2006 12:57:05 PM

[Link]

Here is the solution

Edited by - de25ge on 2/1/2006 1:21:57 PM

[Link]

I think women have this desire to please their man. They've discovered that two chicks kissing is one easy way. I think, generally speaking, women bend over backwards much more to please a man than the other way around. Also... for the straight world... g/g doesn't have "real" penetration... so I think it's easier to handle.

As for the patriarch... doesn't everyone know... it's religion!

As for what's acceptable in porn.... doesn't everyone know... it's commerce... capitalism. Men buy more porn than women probably ever will. "Straight" or "Gay"... it's the male viewer to whom the companies are catering.... short of maybe a few small couples markets... but even there, it still has to be acceptable for the male. If straight guys start wanting to see more male passion in a scene... and the dollars speak as much, I'm sure the "straight" market would provide it. And I'd be more than happy to shoot Manuel and Mr. Pete in a make-out scene, whacking each other's rock hard cocks off. heehee. I'll give you a story alright! haha! Well, until then, I guess I just get to watch them rubbing their cocks together up some girl's asshole.

As for anal play... hardly a gay thing. I've found most men and women like this. And, sort of frustrates me when a man gets his wall up on this topic... "Oh, not me!"

[Link]

Now, I guess one could argue that maybe it wasn't publicly discussed until the sexual revolution but we don't know that for sure. I think we can look back at many civilations and see that gay sex was apart of their lives in one way or another.

[Link]

Comstock Films:Real Life, Real People, Real Sex

[Link]

I think that in adapting "Brokeback Mountain," Larry McMurtry, perhaps best known for "The Last Picture Show," was simply doing the same, exploring a "story" for all that it was worth, without enforcing his own point of view as a straight male, onto the material.

[Link]

Brokeback Mountain is possibly groundbreaking in that it'll make it easier for other film-makers to present gay subject-matter to more than a niche audience and it'll probably chip away at people's prejudices here and there, but it's not going to have straight guys en masse looking for a bit of cowboy lovin' mixed in with their girlie porn.

[Link]

Thanks for your interest. My self-published tome (an expansion of my film student essays in college, before I switched to music) came and went long ago, and due to the appearance of Nat Segaloff's excellent and definitive "Hurricane Billy: The Stormy Life And Films Of William Friedkin," the only such book (that I know of) written completely with Mr. Friedkin's authorization and direct involvement, I long since abandoned doing anything more ambitious with my admittedly inferior work. I've syndicated portions of it in the past in fanzines, and still consider Friedkin my mentor, as flawed as his body of work is - or, as he more elegantly calls it himself, his "collection of redeemed failures and unredeemed failures."

Edited by - Daniel Metcalf Public Relations on 2/1/2006 5:15:45 PM

[Link]

Edited by - Sheldon on 2/1/2006 9:39:03 PM

[Link]

For tens of millions of people, Howard Stern put the topic of 'girl/girl' fantasy on the map. The media sections of daily newspapers often warn their viewers of 'lesbian kisses' that will show up during the 'sweeps' period of the television season that networks use to artificially bolster the flagging ratings of their product. Jokes about that make the late-night talk show circuit.

That's the very ESSENCE of mass public concern and curiosity.

NY Senator Hillary Clinton was stigmatized as gay by the New York Post just for kissing Suha Arafat (now widow of Yasir)!

The only double standard that exists on same-sex perception applies to handholding. If two men are holding hands walking down the street in this country, they will be thought of as gay. If two women do likewise, they won't because women are "supposed" to be more emotional and touchy-feely. So, it's easier for lesbians to slip under the radar than it is for gay men.

[Link]