Although I believe the precious "No condom!" fetishists would eventually recover if L.A. porn went all-condom, I wonder what it would be like if they started using female condoms on sets? I've used them quite often over the years. Your thoughts? There may actually be a few of you who don't know about these. They are just what they sound like. Imagine a male condom, double the size, put a ring at both ends. They seem to be used more outside the U.S. I haven't seen them for sale in many CVS's here, but I can easily order them from Undercover Condoms. There seems to be only 1 company that makes them. I have found them to be very useful when a dude is having trouble with a male condom. I've converted a few dudes, I think. I've seen a lot of annoying male condom moments over the years. With a female condom the dude is less hampered. He doesn't have to be rock hard to penetrate. If you're a size queen like I am sometimes, you're going to run into hardness problems. In the real world, it just takes a lot more work and blood to get a giant dick hard than a wee one. With a male condom, a dude has to be like 95% hard or it's gonna start to fall off. With a female condom, all I have to be is the owner of a jug of lube. The result for me and my male partners has been less wood trouble. Male condoms do block sensation. I get it. I know I don't want my clit covered by a tight plastic shield when I'm getting licked, so I empathize with dudes. Aesthetically, though, I don't know how it would be on video. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a femdom in a porno. Let me go look...
Ok I found a couple of amateur scenes using femdoms on google. Only looked at the first 2 pages of results tho. Anyone know of any pro scenes with female condoms?
I'm still not 100% sure on what a female condom actually looks like. Would you mind putting one on and taking a few pics that you could post here? Any help would be appreciated!
I used them quite a bit when I was a pro. Guys that like to watch the action didn't like them, but guys that just wanted it to feel good liked them a lot better. I would guess, just from that personal experience, that they don't look appealing to the generic male fantasy. Dude - imagine a sandwich baggie with a clear plastic ring around it hanging outta the pussy. That's what they look like once inserted. When the penis is in play, it looks like a penis in the middle of a sandwich baggie with a clear plastic ring around it, with lube.
Seems like a viable option though most guys obviously don't know what the hell a female condom is and would get kind of freaked. I thought it would be for lesbians. Otherwise it's good if there's more options to protection so people won't think it's so bad they say 'fuck it'. In porn, I always associate condoms with mainstream or really amateurish gonzo, boring stuff. And porn is probably the safest way to indulge in unprotected perversion with multiple partners since everyone gets tested every other week (and shower before and after, and in most cases aren't drunk or high). If condoms become standard in LA porn then I hope guys like Manuel Ferrara move back home where the legislators don't waste time trying to kill porn....
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 24 2012 : 2:30AM
Manuel would hardly have to return to Europe to keep shooting. BTW Bang Bros became one of the, if not the biggest porn websites in the world and the majority of their stuff was shot with condoms.
We're talking about sex here, du'. There are few sloppier acts. I don't think William H. ever said "Hey guys, stop that, it's getting a little sloppy in here."
I'm talking about the sloppy visual, not the sloppiness of the sex act. Porn watchers want to see penetration. If not, we'd all just watch cable soft porn. Penetration via condom use is still easy to see the woman's pussy lips stretching around the shaft. Female condoms would obscure most of the penetration shots because the baggie concept is obscuring her vaginal/anal opening.
Speak for yourself. It's just that Porn Factories Inc. have trained/brainwashed all the directors to concentrate on shooting penetration, which has trickled down to the viewers' expectations. There are many popular women in porn who have never done softcore or even solo for that matter. If you watch porn for the women (which I do) you have to tolerate the penetration obsession, whether you want to or not, because there is little alternative product available featuring the women I want to see. So don't assume you speak for all porn watchers. Actually I posted in another condom thread that condoms would be good for porn because it would force the directors to finally quit the obsession with penetration closeups and learn some better variety of camera positions/angles. Maybe we'd get more professional shooters and fewer hacks. Or at least we can hope for that.
I don't speak for myself, I speak for likely 95% of the porn viewers in the market. If penetration weren't a big deal, you'd not see it. Porn isn't that refined of a medium. They show what sells. Facials, penetration and closeups sell DVD's or they wouldn't be shooting them in almost every single porn flick on the market.
That is a circular argument. It sells because people buy what they are fed, and they are being fed facials, penetration, and closeups. They are being fed those things because that is the present-day porn formula which all producers follow because it's easy and lazy and it's what everyone else is doing; not because of any market research of what people actually prefer. I totally agree about "unrefined". The producers and the consumers are unrefined, but some of us want something other than the standard fare. Edited by - ninja1 on 1/26/2012 12:31:43 PM
Absolutely ridiculous. The industry didn't train me to expect real fucking in a porn movie. The idea that a person would need to be "corrupted" by the porn industry in order to come up with the idea of hardcore porn is just bizarre.
Now everybody has their own ideas about how much penetration and how many closeups is/are too much but without real sex, you might as well forget about porn. That's the whole point. It may not be to you but for most people, it very obviously is.
So in your opinion, what is porn supposed to be? Of all of the complaints I've seen here when we have threads asking people what they dislike in porn, I haven't yet seen anyone complain that there aren't enough rubbers in porn. And I've only seen one or two actually complaining about penetration. They might complain about the way it's shot but that's not the same thing. I'm pretty sure people don't want fake penetration and rubbers ruining every shot. Edited by - randomprecision on 1/26/2012 12:43:39 PM
@RP My complaints are about the obsession with shooting closeups of penetration, at the expense of other/better/varied camera positions and angles. That's all. I honestly think the viewing audience has been "dumbed down"; that there are many viewers who like the closeups just because that's what they have come to expect in porn, because they've been fed a steady diet of that stuff. That's it in a nutshell.
Well it's (supposed to be) a free country. Pornographers should be free to make whatever they want. I complain about some things as much as anyone else but I would never want them to be forced by law to see things my way.
^To be clear, I'm not arguing for mandatory condoms. I was just talking about the aesthetics and taking the opportunity to gripe. The ugliness of condoms might make the directors back away from the close-ups.
I happened to to be involved in a scene with a female talent that wore one, and it was very uncomfortable, actually is was horrible, i felt like i was hitting a wall. But that's just me, someone might had a better experience than me, but it was bad.
Posted - Jan 23 2012 : 9:40AM
