[an old man dies, a little girl lives. fair trade.]

[Link]

Though, there are the Bellas, the isabel icees, the olympians, the few the proud ...

Edited by - skronker on 8/6/2006 4:31:55 AM

[Link]

Edited by - Ryan81 on 8/6/2006 5:04:15 AM

[Link]

My post concerns the reasons why fans bring so much pressure to bear on girls to push their limits, whether stated expressly or well-known in the industry (and, through the trickle-down effect, on this message board).

[Link]

On the other hand, there are girls who really do groove on it, and fans who can enjoy and appreciate their effort in a way that is not creepy. But what I get mostly, vibe-wise, from some of the fans is a real lack of maturity and a complete lack of biological comprehension. I pity their girlfriends, if they've even managed to get a fuck.

But, hey, I guess you gotta start somewhere. Maybe I'm jealous cos they didn't have fisting videos on the INternet when I was a kid --- because there was no Internet.

[Link]

"I'm paying good money to watch these girls, I want my money's worth"

[Link]

Edited by - skronker on 8/6/2006 5:23:05 AM

[Link]

Dan

[Link]

It may seem like "hounding", because we see it so much in these open forums that it looks like a single, congealed cacophony of "when are you gonna do anal" bleatings, but I agree with the poster who says that it is individual personal requests coming from different individuals.

I do think that porn has jaded many of us to the point where we expect every girl to engage in every circus act being performed, but that's where the bar is now and apparently many fans aren't completely satisified until their particular favorite girl is doing what they've seen other porn girls do.

And even if Girl X is over doing all sorts of depravity for your viewing pleasure, if you're not a fan of hers, it doesn't really matter what she does. People are still gonna want THIER porn sweetie to shove an anvil up her ass.

Some of the porn I see seems to have nothing to do with sex.

BSD

[Link]

If you don't want to play the game, don't suit up.

[Link]

Now I'll get off my soapbox.

[Link]

The point of this thread is not about whether porn is "realistic". Nor is it about whether porn's lack of realism is a defect. I don't think porn is realistic, but that doesn't bother me or make it defective for me. What bothers me is something else.

<sp>

Edited by - bob on 8/8/2006 8:34:05 PM

[Link]

Some people ask if porn has "jumped the shark"? I say yes it has. I watch more and more porn from the late 1980s, early 1990s.

[Link]

In a few cases, usually when the starlet in question is not an ADTer, I've even come to thoroughly enjoy it when certain posters go off the deep end because a girl won't succumb to their favourite fetish.
Seriously, once you stop arguing with them and just listen to them howling in impotent rage, it can be strangely entertaining.

[Link]

Is the bleating some kind of displaced control or projection thing..."You know, if she were in my bed she'd do what I wanted" or maybe it's a love thing "If she really loved me she'd do what I wanted." Veruca Salt has nothing on a fanboy.

I'm just mostly grateful when someone does something on film that they seem to enjoy that turns me on.

[Link]

Porn seems extremely realistic to me.

[Link]

[an old man dies, a little girl lives. fair trade.]

[Link]

The reciever took the money to play the game and all that comes with being a WR in the NFL for a season or length of contract. The porn star negotiates whichever acts on a per scene basis.

[Link]

And neither is it realistic to expect some woman I just met to join me and 7 or 8 guys from the corner bar in a blow-bang and ritual cumbath ... I think that's what the comment meant.

[Link]

Edited by - skronker on 8/6/2006 11:05:34 PM

[Link]

Of course porn " is what it is," every piece of film/video is a documentary of something. But it can also be a stylized representation of the thing it documents. Ninn's stuff is extremely processed. It's not sex in any way I've ever experienced -- he does lots of post-production -- so while, yes, there is fucking, it's rendered for the viewer in a hyper-stylized manner. It is "what it is," but it's not very "real."

Anyway, this is a separate discussion, isn't it?

Edited by - skronker on 8/6/2006 11:20:09 PM

Edited by - skronker on 8/6/2006 11:22:47 PM

[Link]

Not that Tony doesn't, mind you -- he's just being difficult.

[Link]

(They're not hassling me, either, but I think you get my drift.)

[Link]

To me girls not doing anal or swallowing is like a restuarant where the best dishes are not yet available so I have to settle for something less yummy... or more likely I just leave.

[Link]

If what a bunch of wankers write on a porn board is enough to make a girl seriously consider doing something she's uncomfortable with, she's not going to stand much of a chance standing up to the pressure from the many bastards running around playing directors, agents, etc.
So she's pretty much gonna be screwed, no matter what any number of whiners say.

IMO, girls like that shouldn't be in porn in the first place.
But what can you do? It's their choice, not mine.

[Link]

[passion of the pisschrist]

[Link]

Bob has correctly ascertained that my comments regarding football are sarcastic. My comments regarding "porn reality" are not. I will try to better explain myself.

When you watch a movie like TITANIC or STAR WARS, what do you see? Do you see a plywood and paint mockup in six inches of water, on a cliff perched over the ocean, or do you see a 900 foot ocean-liner steaming across the North Atlantic? Do you see plastic models thrown together from disposable razor handles hanging from fishline, or interstellar rocketships hurling through the void of space? No smartie-pants, I'm too sophisticated for all that pop entertainment bullshit, just an honest answer about film's power to deceive, and our eagerness to be deceived by it.

Now what do we see when we watch porn? We see people having sex for the express purpose of making a visual record. Michael Ninn employs an array of camera tricks and post-production effects to give this a certain feel, I use a documentary conceit, and others have their own approach, but none of this changes or even obscures the basic fact that we never forget what we are seeing when we watch porn: we see people having sex for the express purpose of making a visual record. The fact of this vastly overwhelms any fiction that may find its way into the production, either by accident or design.

(Some may point to pornography's dearth of production resources and talent as the cause of this – porn director's can't direct/porn actors can't act – but I suspect even if they wrapped inside of the most lavishly produced and expertly executed production, that real sex acts would be no less shattering to cinematic illusion.)

That we are seeing people having sex for the express purpose of making a visual record also becomes the overwhelming factor in how we interpret what we see. Do the players look like they're really enjoying themselves? Is the starlet really having an orgasm. Is she really squirting, or is it just piss? (Reverse that for Joey.)

We scan for evidence of consensualality; that the players – especially the women – want to be getting fucked on camera as much as we want to watch them get fucked. Is she really the sort of girl who should be doing porn, or would she be better off working at Walmart? Does she really like getting roughed up, or is she just paying her dues. Does she really love the taste of her own shit on his cock, or is she just doing it for another $100? (No cuts please, if there's a chance he wiped is dick off it'll ruin it for me.)

Not interested in real pleasure? Given up on consensuality? How about some painful anal? How about some scenes where the girl cries or retches or vomits? You can't fake that! That's real ! Michael Ninn, the master of "unreal porn" puts out-takes on his website showing his starlet coming unglued over rough treatment (Or was it all faked? OooOooo!)

And of course the pop. What's porn without the pop! And if he pops in her puss or her ass, let's have her squeeze it back out to be sure. If he pops in her mouth, let's have her gargle a bit before swallowing it down. (Open wide sweetie, we want to see your fillings!) But again, no camera cuts please! We don't want any fake semen tricks – it just wouldn't be the same! (Boasts JCM, “all of the orgasms and all of the semen is real ”)

And what does that have to do with "unending pesting"? Well maybe it's just me, but I think once you've seen Evel Knievel jump over box of rattlesnakes and two mountain lions, the next time I'm only going to be happy if he adds another cougar.

Edited by - tonyc on 8/7/2006 1:06:47 PM

[Link]

Thank you sincerely for providing a straightforward and articulate statement of your thoughts.

Now, back to mine . . .

TonyC wrote:

As BustdownGal wrote in this thread:

If a man has heard a lot of "No's" from his female partners (or hasn't had any female partners, in which case an implicit and all-encompassing "No" looms large), the allure of the fantasy woman who never says "No" (or who says "No" to much less) can be strong. And sometimes, as Derek117 and Loraine have observed, the frustration of desire leads to feelings of anger and the impulse to exercise power and experience a sense of control over women, if only through the proxy of voyeurism.

In my view, these feelings are often acted out on ADT -- among other ways in the pressuring of porn girls that takes place here.

<typos>

Edited by - bob on 8/8/2006 1:34:33 AM

[Link]

[passion of the pisschrist]

[Link]

So maybe Bob has really answered his own question here--perhaps fans ask performers to do all these circus acts because it is part of this (increasingly angry) male fantasy game of reversal and violation--and girls who don't play the game by the imaginary rules draw the self-righteous ire of the boys on the rail.

But I'm not sure this has much to do with imagining a "woman with no sexual limits." This is a potent idea in a lot of erotica, to be sure, but only as long as the loss of limitations suits the male fantasy. When it stops working itself out for the advantage of the male, it stops working. For example, for a female to unfetter herself sexually, she would do so in order to express her own need for sexual fulfillment and pleasure; and therefore, they might assert control, make demands, etc. The women in porn usually only find fulfillment in male pleasure.

Mind you, porn doesn't have to be this way--and a lot of classic hardcore looked at these questions in much more gender inclusive ways--those "education of a virgin" stories were shoot with the male viewers in mind too, but they made an assumption that the male takes delight in teaching girls about sexual pleasure, and that orgasmic girls are a happy reflection on the men involved.

I've virtually given up on erotica to project some thoughtful transformation of our sexual mores. It seems to me now to have become this deeply reactionary genre, reflecting almost a Puritanical mindset full of "sluts" and "filth" and unspeakable acts. Do you know the old Jim Carroll song with the lines:

You know, when they've got nothing to give,
They only part their legs for what's negative.

That's how I'm feeling about hardcore these days.

[Link]

Edited by - tonyc on 8/8/2006 9:29:13 AM

[Link]

Edited by - lindi on 8/8/2006 11:05:51 AM

[Link]