The porn icon/actor Jamie Gillis, who dated back to the Golden Era said that porn (he was referring to the straight variety) is homoerotic. He said it's mainly about dick. His quote, summing up the porn-watching experience was: "See dick. See dick spurt." Agree or disagree. Jamie died, by the way, in 2010.
I disagree, first off my dick exists and is with me averytime I have sex, thus no sex is possible without him, secondly I prefer creampies , no dick spurting at sight
The statement, whoever made it, starts from a basic truth and leaps to an unsupported conclusion. That truth is that many straight males want to see a male in porn, but the true reason is that the male performer acts as a stand in for the viewer. You know, the same thing that happens in mainstream movies. As for seeing 'dick spurt', I couldn't care less. If I'm the exception then where are all the cumshot compilations? It isn't even a category at my go-to online retailer.
Disagree, and even if I did, it wouldn't really matter. But if liking watching alpha-males having sex with beautiful women is homoerotic, then I'm the homo-est motherfucker up in this bitch.
I think there's an element of truth to Gillis' claim, one which all male porn fans would do well to examine. Most male porn fans sit alone in a darkened room and rub their penises as images of a naked man fucking a woman flash across their screen. They routinely hold off their orgasm until another man's penis ejaculates on the screen in front of them. I often see male porn fans making comments about the inherent "gayness" of sex acts like double-penetration, DA, or DV, without the slightest shred of self-awareness that they jerk off to the engorged naked penises of other men on a regular basis. My opinion is that human sexuality is a spectrum between gay and straight. The unwillingness of many straight porn-fans to admit they fall on anywhere except 100 percent straight on that spectrum is amusing to me.
I take that point with a truckload of salt. There is certainly truth to the concept that straight porn demands a hard penis (recall the Ron White joke Mr F linked to a few posts up). But since homoerotic is same sex, how can porn featuring binary sexual representation be considered homoerotic rather than heteroerotic? If porn featuring a man and woman is not heteroerotic, then what is? Or are we just to believe that heteroerotic porn doesn't exist? It doesn't work because if straight porn was truly catering to homoeroticism, why wouldn't they just make gay porn? Because it doesn't sell nearly as well. Because that's not what mainstream audiences of straight porn go for. If anything, I feel like straight porn is male-shy. Guys are disembodied and pretty much reduced to the dick. Virtually no other aspect of the male talent is as important. Meanwhile, the physical attributes and graceful aspects of the female which are focused on are multitudinous, truly. Anyhow, the penis is the symbol most porn consumers (men) vicariously identify with. It naturally must be featured in straight porn because that's the access point male viewers vicariously project themselves into. It's the role males superimpose themselves into. At least it would be less difficult to argue that male dominated sports like football and basketball are homoerotic. They don't even have naked women, and cheerleaders only get about 1/10th of the spotlight at best. But it's not homoerotic, with exception to those sports fans who may be gay.
I meant that in my view porn shows a fantasy where I imagine myself in it as one of the males in there, if any porn with a male is homoerotic (which implies that the viewer is interested in the man and his dick instead of the woman) than the only porn who isn't homoerotic would be Lesbian porn, but, here's the problem I don't like lez porn usually, I can't imagine myself as a woman , there's nothing arousing, I have no experience of having a clit licked and sucked ,I have no idea about the meaning of arousal on a woman's view , a wet pussy, a dripping wet vagina, I have none, there's nothing for me there. To me in a porn scene a dick is needed it is an avatar of mine , it act in its behalf. I can't ignore that I actually have a dick , I need a dick, my dick to enjoy sex.
As a gay woman, I get the idea of one on one b/g porn and I don't really see that as homoerotic. However, no matter how many times people say it's to "see how far a girl would go" or something like that, I'll never understand the fascination with people wanting more dicks than girls in their porn. It may be because I don't have as many straight male friends, but I don't know any man into women that also isn't into men that would want to DP their GF with their friend and have their balls rub together while doing so, or stand in a circle with a bunch of dudes jerking off around one girl. It may just be my world and people in it so I won't ever understand it, but from my prospective, it is pretty homoerotic when guys ask porn girls about gangbangs and the like. From the straight female prospective I get the appeal of wanting to be the center of attention, but for a guy, I really don't.
I'm not too sure where you are getting your info because the way you wrote it. You make it seem as though you are there when these men ejaculate. I don't think that's the case so I'm just going to assume you read other posters say these things.My spectrum must be off because I am sure that I'm 100% straight. I may enjoy watching a woman have sex with two men but that's because I'm watching a woman have sex. The number of males is not all that relevant because ultimately the men aren't having sex with each other but having sex exclusively with the woman. By your assumption. Hetero males would be okay if in a scene involving a woman and two men. The men would have sex with each other as well as with the woman. I very much doubt that you will get many hetero males to buy those types of movies. I seem to remember a few movies that had two males and one female where the males had sex with each other and with the woman but if memory serves me well. The bulk of the scene was dedicated to the tow guys having sex with each other with the woman taking a secondary role in the scene.
Aren't they? Are they? I think you need to think more broadly about sex. There is also the sexual relationship between you the spectator and those on screen, which is what the poster was referencing when addressing holding off on cumming.
I don't inhabit the on-screen male porn performer when I watch porn. I tend to watch as a voyeur/observer. Therefore from my viewpoint, porn is overly dick-centric. So, I can relate as to how lots of hetero porn will seem "homo-erotic" to a male viewer who is not projecting himself into the scene. I prefer to see women as much as possible; there are few directors/studios who shoot porn without making it look/feel like they are favoring the penis at the expense of showcasing the women. They are rare, often residing in the "fetish" sections. You really need multiple cameras, skilled camera operators, and good editing to do it properly. But, if most viewers are OK with (or actually prefer) the dick-centric way of presenting things, there's no compelling reason to make the extra effort to produce more woman-centric or more balanced depictions.
I don't agree with this part. I do enjoy watching straight porn more than lesbian porn, but it certainly isn't mainly about dick. For example, if there were a porn actress that I liked, even if she were fucking a really ugly guy with a weird looking dick, I'd still watch the scene. However, if the guy were very handsome with a great looking dick, if I thought the actress was unattractive, I wouldn't watch the scene. To me, it doesn't matter what the dick looks like or what the guy looks like - the guy just needs to be able to get it up and get a positive response out of the woman.
I don't understand gangbangs or blowbangs either. The thing for me is, when it comes to porn, if it's not something I'd want to participate in, why would I want to see it? That's not appealing to me. I assume a lot of guys would like to provide their stick in a gangbang or blowbang, but me? No way. I've never had sex that involved any more people than 1 female. Now, I won't make any insinuations about orientation deviating from hetero-normative behavior with regards to guys who are into gangbangs of multiple men against one woman. I think there must be something else to it going on there. Some humiliation domination aspect, where these guys enjoy degrading the woman. Look at how popular degrading women is in Japanese porn, e.g. bukakke. I don't think that suggests anything homoerotic about the guys into that. It's just not for me. I think typical American gangbangs in porn is kind of like Japanese male dominated bukakke. There's a herd mentality at play, and guys feed off the aggression in the air. I imagine it hearkens back to primal caveman days when gangbangs was probably pretty casual, and even in the world today there's tribes where this is still normal. I'm not judging that. It couldn't ever be so popular if there wasn't some natural impulse driving that behavior. Reason I don't like to attach the homoerotic label to that fetish is it I expect it definitely would be received with umbrage if not taken as outright insulting. Reiterating, there simply must be more to it. It's that aggressive frat-like fellowship? It has to have some kind of socially infectious effect. But the idea of sharing a female with other dudes turns me off, personally. MAYBE if I was in a very strong relationship, with a woman who was deeply spiritually connected with me and she had the fantasy of 2 guys tag teaming her, I might permit another guy. But I've never been in such a trusting or deep relationship with a female like that. I'm too jealous to share my girl like that.
BTW what do you ladies think about reverse gangbangs, multiple females taking on 1 guy? Wouldn't that be more or less as homoerotic as standard gangbangs? But homoeroticism among females seems a lot more socially acceptable.
Weird I don't see it that way at all. Maybe it's because from my experience, in the vast majority of porn seems to me that the woman occupies most of the screen. I would say at least 2/3 of the flesh that fills screens in porn is female. And largely, 3/4. Maybe it seems to you like most directors/studios favor the penis at the expense of showcasing the women because the penis is so disembodied. Whereas females must certainly occupy the majority of the screen and screen time in mainstream porn (and comparatively much more of them is luxuriated by the viewer, from their feet to their calves to their thighs, hips, pussy, ass, boobs, face, hair, hands, etc) that 1/3rd of the space occupied by men is mostly composed of the dick. Maybe it's because the dick is so isolated maybe that's why it seems to dominate? You say most directors/studios seem to favor the penis at the expense of showcasing the women, with exception for fetish niches - I'd say the exact opposite is true. The only ones I see that may focus more on the dick are the niche ones, and even then I can scarcely think of examples.
I can sorta relate to that underlined part. If the chick is not hot, then it's pretty much a worthless scene to me. Still, if a guy has a weird dick, like it looks fucked up or it's small, it's an inferior scene to me with less value. So the female is obviously the priority to me. But it's more of a hurdle to fully enjoy a scene if the male talent has a sick or small dick than otherwise. I can't project myself into that guy's position when his dick is so lame. As a rule, I don't enjoy porn if the guy's dick is smaller than mine. It's actually rather infuriating to see a scene with a smoking hot bombshell, take Alexis Texas for example, but seeing her pretty much only fuck average/small dicks. I'd rather just watch Alexis Texas in a solo scene with a toy, or with another female. While it accounts for a marginal share of my viewing, I much much rather enjoy watching lesbian porn than porn where the guy's dick is puny. lol It's like, I don't want to watch guys competing in junior varsity sports. I want to watch the A-team, the varsity, the pros. Pretty much every B/G Alexis Texas scene to me is a automatic slight disappointment cuz I'm always thinking "my dick is bigger than that dude's" and it's just a little aggravating. I want to be in the guy's place, obviously cuz he gets to fuck Alexis, but at the same time I don't want to be that guy cuz his dick is smaller than mine. So it kills the vicarious appeal.
I agree with pretty much everything you say, except I wouldn't want to bother with lesbian or solo masturbation scenes. They can be hot, but I don't have the patience for them. I'd much rather watch a girl working a dick or getting fucked in the mouth, ass, or pussy. The point is the sexiness of the woman, her looking hot sucking cock (especially sucking) and taking the cock in her other orifices. And, of course, taking the guy's load. Which does seem to be the main point in porn. If she's craving the guy's cum, to eat it or take a facial, it makes it especially horny. If the dick is ugly or weird looking it will ruin the scene. You want a large dick that looks good in her face, mouth, etc.
Yeah, you're right. Because in looking at the dick, and what is being done to it, you know the exact sensations that are being produced. You know those nerve-endings and how good that's gonna feel. If the object of your desire is a sexy, horny woman it's gonna excite the hell out of you. I think that gets to the heart of what people mean by "vicarious," a word that people keep on using in response to this post, which seems to be a vague word that doesn't explain it in an adequate way.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Aug 26 2016 : 5:52PM
Well when you have recent posts on the Mike Adriano thread talking about how Mike and John Strong 'have beautiful cocks' followed by 'but I'm not gay!' I think the question answers itself. Why the obession with big cocks if it is purely a question of the male performer being a sock puppet? Why is IR popular with white male viewers? Why is it straight identifying men who most watch transexual porn? There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I think for some people it's that large dicks tend to allow for more open penetration shots because the guy doesn't need to move in as much and thus will obscure the women less, so it's more about how a big cock functions visually and less about how it looks as such. Of course that doesn't cover people who are very specifically interested in certain big cocks.
Hazel Heart Interview
Posted - Aug 23 2016 : 4:22PM