Porn for Beginners?
Some few weeks ago I came across this exchange on a thread about women and porn in Violet Blue’s section of the J.T. Stockroom Forums:
Opined Sage:
“What about all those dime-store “Romance” novels? Those are porn, just wrapped up in a cute, easy to digest form. I remember getting my hands on one of those when I was 15, way before I even knew what porn was, and just getting aroused out of my mind at some of the sex scenes in those books. Sad that some women never get farther along in their sexuality than the watered down versions in romance novels.
“I love porn- I think that, with everything, it just depends on how you approach it. Sure, there’s girls in porn who are being victimized by the people who make the porn, but that boils down to a problem of education- these girls just didn’t know what they were getting into. Personally, I love porn! I think most women have huge hang-ups about their bodies and their own sexuality, and so porn becomes taboo because “If s/he really loved me he’d stop looking at porn and pay attention to me!” The problem of misunderstanding between sexual partners compounds into a hatred of porn, because porn is then seen as a wedge driving partners apart. The porn watcher feels ashamed, because they don’t see anything wrong with porn, and the other person in the relationship feels angry and neglected because they don’t understand the fun, playful aspect that comes with watching porn.”
I had a lot to say about this post, most of it not very nice, but I held my tongue. My dear friend Ell did not:
Sage, I don’t know if I’m misunderstanding you on the romance thing - forgive me if I am. I think I could safely say that the majority of those “romance novels” are better crafted, with greater respect for the reader than most porn DVD’s. If they represent some kind of “watered down” version of sexuality it certainly sells well. I’m not sure if sexuality exists on a continuum — that you need to move from soft core romance to more explicit versions to achieve some kind of sexual growth or saying that you don’t enjoy a lot of porn is somehow because you’re less sexually advanced, adventurous or insecure. I’m almost sure that readers of romance are able to have and do have really good and wild sex. I think I get a bit disappointed with porn because it very rarely depicts anything that’s as good as the sex I have in my bedroom.
“In the last couple of years I think I like the idea of porn, more than I like most porn I’ve watched to be honest”
(On of the reasons I like Ell so much is because she can express herself with a gentle resolve that challenges people’s ideas without attacking them personally. I wish I could be more like her.)
This exchange has been rattling around in my brain, knocking things loose until today when I visited Ms.Naughty’s blog. Her entry is ostensibly a warm review for Candida Royalle’s Eyes of Desire, but it’s got a few sharp words for the phrase “Good for couples and beginners”. Says Ms. Naughty:
“Candida’s films feature fairly vanilla sex, and she’s less interested in close-up, gynecological shots than she is in depicting realistic, emotionally engaged sex. Not many other porn filmmakers do this, so I always wonder why reviewers consistently expect her to create the same stuff as everybody else.
“I also frequently read the comment that the film is “Good for couples and beginners.” I find the phrase rather irksome, to be honest, because it’s always said in a slightly condescending manner. As if we girlies can’t handle the heat, or maybe the people who will enjoy this type of film are not grown up enough yet to enjoy the refined adult tastes of gonzo anal destruction…
“Perhaps it’s just me. I’ve seen far too much porn in the last few years and now all I want to see in a porn film is something different and engaging. It’s entirely possible that some women will find Eyes of Desire to be boring because it’s so vanilla. That’s fine. But I liked it, and I would recommend it - even if you’re not a beginner or a couple…”
Amen, Ms.Naughty, Amen.
Perhaps (perhaps) Candida Royalle’s films (or dime store romance novels) are a little like wine spritzer, or a dacquari, or some other sort of “girlie drink” with a paper parasol in it.
Perhaps. And maybe that’s not to everyone’s taste.
But it does not follow that “the hard stuff” is comparable to a 20 year-old single malt scotch, or even a bottle of cheap red table wine.
I’ll leave the rest of the analogy to you, dear readers; I don’t trust myself to continue. I don’t have Ell’s gift for gentleness, and I don’t want to insult anyone over their taste in porn. Not today at least….;-)
May 4th, 2006 at 12:02 am
Hi Tony. Thanks for your comments. They’ve inspired a fairly introspective blog entry regarding me having an inferiority complex about being vanilla and boring. But vanilla girls are people too
May 4th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Hello Ms. Naughty! I just ran over and read your post.
One of the things that’s been interesting and gratifying about our work is that it has been warmly received both by people who find porn boring and/or offputing, as well as by people who enthusiastically imbibe “the hard stuff”. One of X&D’s five-star reviews came from a fellow who’s just finished his 2000th porn review, including a lot of raves for things I find absolutely inscrutable. (He gave M&J 4.5 stars too.)
In the studies we did leading up to our commercially released couples, we filmed people doing things like fisting and anal sex, and it’s mostly by chance that these first nine films we have in the can don’t have anything too outrageous. (Except perhaps Tina’s 30 mnute continuous orgasm.)
It will be interesting to see what the reaction is when/if Comstock Films works with people whose sexual practices are a little more exotic. My hope is that we can make that as interesting and exciting for “vanilla people” like you, as X&D and M&J were for Mr. 2000 porn reviews.
May 11th, 2006 at 11:55 pm
Gut rot gonzo!