All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 414 > Vertical cumshot facial -- looks COOL
AuthorPost
Randomizer
Member

234 Posts
6/08
Posted - May 26 2009 : 3:01AM
I recently saw something rare -- that I could actually call "innovative", in terms of porn.
For the money shot at the end, with the girl kneeling, the guy intentionally stood above her face and aimed his dick absolutely straight up in the air and pulled the trigger, resulting in a cumshot the shot upwards and rained down on her face and tits in a way that actually looked VERY cool. Some of it landed on his own hand/cock/balls, but it quickly dripped down on her.
I think the next generation of "showoff" male stars would be wise to adopt this kind of thing as a trademark style, the way Rocco in his prime always added visual flair to his scenes.
JONNYESS
Member

217 Posts
12/06
Posted - May 27 2009 : 6:58AM
Would be nice, but not gonna happen in our lifetime.
Males have had enough trouble historically with DIRECT HITS from point blank, let alone the ejaculatrickery you describe
Cuddly Wombat
Senior Member

Just another bare bum in the shiower
1739 Posts
12/04
Posted - May 27 2009 : 7:15AM
Sounds like the creative seminal art that Private used to get up to a lot in their magazines.
However, there is always a real risk that there will only be a pathetic dribble trickling down the side of the shaft.
I always believe that the safest option is to press the head of the cock against an outside corner of the girl's mouth - that way the girl will at least get some cum on her face and the scene isn't ruined by a small load or a foul shot. That technique also looks spectacular when the guy shoots a heay load, as there is a huge trail of cum across one cheek from mouth to ear. It also has the benefit of avoiding her eyes.
NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08
Posted - May 27 2009 : 11:52PM
Or you could just cum in her mouth...
LubeNLuv
Senior Member

1854 Posts
3/06
Posted - May 28 2009 : 12:22AM
Why are so many straight guys so fixated on male ejaculate, let alone watching a guy masturbate himself to completion? I sometimes wonder if I clicked on the wrong forum.
 
cand86
Member

164 Posts
8/08
Posted - May 28 2009 : 1:33AM
Damn, that does sound pretty cool. I agree that the fear of not having a good amount of cum or an impressive shooting probably keep performers from doing it, but still, it sounds awesome.
So where is it that we can see this cool vertical cumshot? You didn't say.
JONNYESS
Member

217 Posts
12/06
Posted - May 28 2009 : 7:11PM
I'm confident I'm speaking somewhat autonomously in stating that the fixation for the hetero male ejaculate regards only as it involves the participation, active or passive, of the female of particular fantasy. The male orgasm, as the apex of our own selfish pleasure, provides an easy focal point for voyeuristic activity as well.
Regarding the "...masturbating himself to completion...", there are scores of threads on this forum expressing increasing disgust and dismay at the prevalence of this practice at the culmination of an otherwise erotic and stimulating scene.
In the context of both freedom of choice and ignorance of your own personal preferences, I defer commentary on any self-doubts you may have as to your choice of forums.
stinkfist
Senior Member

Subterfuge......
7401 Posts
4/07
Posted - May 28 2009 : 8:05PM
Did Peter North not do this type of cumshot a few times in his movies.
LubeNLuv
Senior Member

1854 Posts
3/06
Posted - May 28 2009 : 9:04PM
So summary: You get off on watching the guy cum in porn scenes or not?
I get off more on watching a woman being fucked (dick, toy, whatever) and having a convincing sounding/looking orgasm. It doesn't matter to me if it's real or not as it is a performance, but I do find some performers more convincing than others.
So how is the focus on the male penis spewing ejaculate any more arousing to the hetero male than the female form being penetrated?
I've heard people say that they like seeing the woman "accepting the cum" as a sign of submission or even degradation, and of course we've all heard about needing to see the male ejaculate as some form of 'proof' that the scene wasn't faked. But lets say you could show this without ever introducing a cock into the field of view of the screen....would this be deemed acceptable? Or is it the view of the cock itself that makes the scene satisfying for you?
Why is the cock actively being manipulated (usually by the male peformer himself) to ejaculate such a necessary component of a satisfying sex scene? If the absence of this makes the scene "not strokeworthy," but the inclusion makes it so.....how is this about the woman?
fu_q All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

Marv Montag (@PornOfYore)
2506 Posts
2/09
Posted - May 28 2009 : 9:36PM
Which DVD was this in? It sounds cool.
fu_q All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

Marv Montag (@PornOfYore)
2506 Posts
2/09
Posted - May 28 2009 : 9:43PM
For me, it's about the completion of the sex act and knowing what it feels like to orgasm and ejaculate like that.
It's also about the visual of the actress getting hosed down, etc., etc.
I wouldn't worry about it so much, though--it would probably require more introspection than it's really worth.
If you (one) like it, just sit back, enjoy it, and don't sweat the small stuff.


Edited by - fu_q on 5/28/2009 9:47:14 PM

JONNYESS
Member

217 Posts
12/06
Posted - May 28 2009 : 10:01PM
^
In order of your questions:
1) No. The male orgasm as "accepted" by the female is the culimination of the typical hetero male viewing pleasure. Males inclined towards bi-sexuality probably find the male orgasm in and of itself the end-all, with or WITHOUT female involvement. I cannot speak confidently for this cross-section.
2) Focus on ejaculation isnt NECESSARILY more arousing to the hetero male than the female being penetrated, contingent upon the male finding the act of itself pleasurable via personal experience. Again speaking for the masses, the male climax itself is - with limited exception, almost ALWAYS immensely pleasurable...with or even without female accompaniment. Thus, a visual of a healthy male spouting fountains of pleasure at the hand or mouth of an encouraging starlet is considerably more pleasurable than the act of penetration itself, which is in this regard, an extension of foreplay.
3) Your provocative concept of male climax without some "proof" would not be acceptable to me from a pleasure-voyeur perspective. Sorry, but it's too late and we've become jaded - we've all seen too many premiere female starlets on the receiving end of too many spectacularly cascading male orgasms to go back now. The view of the spewing cock itself is not necessarily mandatory for maximum viewing pleasure, but observing the female's reception of same is abolutely mandatory. We've all cringed in horror at the clueless producer who elects to focus on the guy's hidesouly distorted O-face right during the very throes of orgasm, while the female object of our affections works her magic just below viewable camera range. As a matter of fact, some memorable scenes to me have been where the guy's cock is throbbing just off-camera, yet the female is still seen enthusiastically receiving her payload.
4) The cock being "...actively manipulated to ejaculate..." is such a necessary component of a satisfying sex scene because in real life - THAT'S HOW IT WORKS!!!. Without manipulation, it's effectively nocturnal emmission. (NOT HOT, unless the bed is surrounded by a bevy of fascinated females in provocative attire with their first views of the male mechanics - but I digress..)
The "usually by the male performer himself" is a point of increasing consternation as stated earlier. In cases like this, I still tend to focus on the female to the extent possible.
On the other hand, if the male's pleasure is not directly proportionate to at least passive involvement by one or more on-screen females, this concept is lost on me...
LubeNLuv
Senior Member

1854 Posts
3/06
Posted - May 28 2009 : 10:47PM

^
"4) The cock being "...actively manipulated to ejaculate..." is such a necessary component of a satisfying sex scene because in real life - THAT'S HOW IT WORKS!!!. Without manipulation, it's effectively nocturnal emmission. (NOT HOT, unless the bed is surrounded by a bevy of fascinated females in provocative attire with their first views of the male mechanics - but I digress..) "
I was specifically referring to self-manipulation. Is this how this works in real life? Because if so, I fucked up fucking 101. I never jack myself off to orgasm with my wife or any other partner. I have jacked myself off when masturbating solo, sometimes with an audience. But not during sexual intercourse or oral sex.
So maybe I'm the abnormal one....who knew?
fu_q All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

Marv Montag (@PornOfYore)
2506 Posts
2/09
Posted - May 28 2009 : 10:49PM
I have--not often, but under some circumstances, I have done it.
JONNYESS
Member

217 Posts
12/06
Posted - May 28 2009 : 11:08PM
^ Same here.
Rare event for sure, but memorable for its relative infrequency or unique circumstances
 
RealHardSex
Member

50 Posts
1/09
Posted - May 29 2009 : 12:08AM
I'm calling TROLL!
LubeNLuv
Senior Member

1854 Posts
3/06
Posted - May 29 2009 : 8:40AM
No no...we are talking about humans jacking off to come as being ubiquitous in porn scenes. Not trolls, although they may be doing likewise. I don't profess to ever seeing any troll porn....well, except for the stuff Ron did in his later years.
fu_q All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

Marv Montag (@PornOfYore)
2506 Posts
2/09
Posted - May 29 2009 : 10:22AM
^



Jump To: