Why can't porn be tasteful?

I think porn objectifies men as much as women. However, like most adults, I know the difference between fact and fiction. I don't expect raindeer to fly, just because I saw it on TV. Neither do I expect a woman to orgasm from sucking my toes, just because I saw it in a video.

 

Just when I thought i might have been the weird one.

 

porn isnt tastefull, its not made for a tasteful audience. happy hunting

 

I have two thoughts. Normal sex does not photograph well. and There were several lines of porn made for women by women. Both hetero and lesbian. They had intersting storylines as well as hot sex scenes. Little or no external ejacutlation. Some claimed that all the women's orgasms were real. Good Vibrations and other woman oriented sex stores offers these brands.

 

watch snakes on a plane.

 

Watch SBS on the weekends around 2am ....they usuallly have some kind of cheeky yet arty movie on LOL *loves SBS*
OR look up cartoon sex - no matter how degrading/dirty/whatever it is, it doesn't matter coz they aren't real!!

 

I remember Red Shoe Diaries, and that explains why Fox is always watching porn on the x-files in his office, haha.

But here's my fantasy. I think friends should swap porn. Videotape yourself having sex, swap it for another friends tape. I don't want to see storylines in porn, but porn sex to me is generally cheesy, if not over the top. So I'd like to see what you're asking for as well OP. I've been toying around with the idea of making our own porn, because porn on t.v. just doesn't do it for me. R rated movies are generally more arousing than movies based on sex. Such as Unfaithful. That's a good sexy movie.

 

making your own porn completly changes your views on what porn should be. i think everyone in the entire world should make at least one porn of themselves/their partner. and yes, deffinately trade it with friends

 

I have to say that different porn is made for different audiences. Alot of men are not wacthing this stuff with a girl. They are alone and whacking to it. that kind of porn tends to be degrading and hard core.
The kind of porn you watch with your girl will be more softcore and maybe even have a story line. Like showtime porn.
Gay porn is for gays and so on.
Just know what you are watching and who its meant for.

 

What is "objectification" anyway?

Does porn portray women as 'sex objects'?

Do gangster movies portray men as 'killing objects'?

Does boxing portray men as 'fighting objects'?

Does athletics present people as 'running objects'?

Is any woman really so dumb that she would watch two men boxing on TV, and draw the conclusion that men exist solely for the purpose of fighting?

I think objectification is just an expression used by people who don't like porn to try and rationalise their baseless argument. If porno movies were somehow 'bad' then the only men who enjoyed them would be 'bad' men. Since the vast majority of men enjoy them, that would mean that porn was appealing to the 'bad' side of every man. In other words, normal human sexuality must be 'bad'.

Humans are far from perfect. We're flawed in many ways and have many evil ways that we are born with, based on self-interest and lack of regard for others. But the desire to procreate is the most essential and fundamental desire to any species, and could never be considered a failing. It's true that it sometimes causes people to do bad things, but so does love, and nobody says that love is a bad thing!

 

Your ability to twist logic to your own convenience astounds me.

I never once considered sex a failing. Its these completely unrealistic and objectifying sex scenes (which is pretty much unescapable) which does anything but motivate procreation.

First, realise that i'm not saying there isn't a place for these videos. They just dominate the market. Variety is the spice of life. Secondly, realise i'm not talking about bondage (where the rules are set), or fetish. I'm talking about normal girl next door types, turned slut, nothing more, just slut. Sexual service unit.

I love porn. If there was more of the porn that i liked, i would watch it, and often. You entirely missed the point of a very basic argument.

I completely disagree. Sorry, this is a little bit of a rationalisation, but the modern mainstream porno is made for lonely, insecure, single for life type men.

As for your objectivication analogy. If a gangster movie is portraying reality, then so be it. In Athletics, the participators are runners, that is reality. But i've never and never hope to have any sort of sex i see in modern porn. Its not realistic and it doesn't represent "normal human sexuality".

Anyway, to cap off, this isn't necessarily "world changing" material and i don't know why i care so much. I have a problem. I argue incessantly with people who i know are full of shit anyway.

 

Yeah, i know what you mean. I don't think porn is harmful for the fact that its going to "warp minds" or anything. But all i can think of when i'm watching one of those unrealistic sex scenes is, "As if this would ever happen in real life". Its hard to get aroused when thats all you're thinking.

I don't think any pron is immoral, just personally, i don't get off on what i don't consider to be real.

 

Mr Field,

Porn is not supposed to reflect real life. It's supposed to reflect people's sexual desires, which includes a lot of fantasy.

But "script" aside, I don't see what is unrealistic about people having sex on camera. Yeah, there's probably a lot more fake moaning, but other than that, these people are doing things that are done with or without a camera. The only difference is you'll get more kinky types of sex in porn to appeal to people's fetishes.

I don't really see why you see porn as so different to reality. I mean, when you have sex, you put your penis in the girl, right? What's the big difference?

 

Again, i disagree. The market is lonely, dirty men. Not everyday guys. It certainly doesn't reflect my fantasy

I never said anything of the sort. Its the way in which they do it that is unrealistic. I would like to see a guy caress a girl and actually enjoy what hes doing instead of just sitting there going in and out while the girl moans extatically for no apparent reason.

I don't know why i should repeat myself, but again, the sex in porn is generally not kinky. Kinky is different to dirty and degrading. Kinky is passionate, kinky is weird, kinky is people's true desires. Mainstream porn is dry and all about dispassionate men being serviced by sluts.

I caress her, i drink her like wine, i see her as the most precious thing in the universe. My hands are constantly moving around her body, i kiss her passionately at every orgasmic peak, I press her hard against my body. I ask her what she wants to do. Whatever she lets me do i let her do in return. She dominates i as much as i dominate her. I don't just move my hips back and forward, i rotate, i change speeds, i build up, feel her electricity. I finger her, i get creative, i bite her nipples and she giggles. She bites and licks my ears while rubbing her hands through my hair. She doesn't have a naughty, slutty look on her face. What she is doing isn't naughty or dirty at all, it is the most natural thing in the world...and we don't pretend otherwise

That is the big difference dizzy.

 

Lying,

I seem to be repeatedly misunderstanding you, so sorry about that. I've really been struggling to understand your perspective so you'll have to bear with me as I make speculations.

After reading what you said above, I think I get it this time (I hope). I would say your criticism of mainstream porn can be separated into the three distinct arguments:

YOUR PROBLEM WITH PORN
1. Porn pays no attention to the subtleties of sex. It's saturated with the most 'hardcore' and visually striking elements of sex (penetration, genitalia and intercourse), while completely overlooking 'foreplay', and the pleasures that come from slower, softer more sensual contact. In other words, porn is crass, puerile, and lacking all discretion.

2. Porn places all its focus on showcasing the women (what the women show, what the women do, and what is done to the women) and fails to convey a sense of interaction and excitement between the woman and the man, or to allow the viewer to relate to the sensations and pleasure the man is experiencing. More often than not, the man in the scene is nondescript, with a trivial role.

3. Women in porn are all sluts.

In response to these three criticisms (assuming I have adequately summarised your feelings), I would like to offer the following answers:

IN RESPONSE...
1. Now I think about it, you are right and I entirely agree. Porn does tend to feature a lot less foreplay and tenderness, and a lot more hardcore fucking. And I guess it's a shame that there isn't more subtlety in porn. But personally, I enjoy it all, whether it's hard or subtle, and there is plenty of "real" sex out there, with a lot of tenderness and subtlety; it's just a lot less frequent that you encounter it.

I think this comes down to the following two reasons:

a) Unfortunately, there are a very large number of men who have no notion of foreplay and tenderness. They just want to put their dick in a woman and that's about it. Porn reflects this because this is what a large proportion of it makers (and audience) are like. I (and obviously you) think the best porn has a bit of everything, but most just like to cut to "the good bits".

b) Hardcore penetration is more commercially competitive because it's visually striking and easier to promote, while the more intimate and subtle elements of sex do not grab people's attention, and are much harder to categorise, harder to communicate (www.tenderlycaressingherthighswiththetipsofmyfingers-whores.com), harder to film, and ina nutshell harder to sell.

2. As for all the focus being on the women, this is something that I think most men want. I personally do not like to see men in porn — the less I see, the better! This is why I don't watch hetero movies too much and rather stick mainly to pictures and lesbian stuff. If there's a man's hand, or tongue, or penis in the shot, I can tolerate that because my imagination can pretend it's my own. However, the sight of another man's face licking a woman's clitoris usually puts me right off. I feel like my intimacy with the woman is being invaded by a third person! From conversations with other people, I believe that this is the way the majority of men feel about this issue, and therefore the fact that most men in porn are faceless and peripheral is probably quite deliberate.

3. Well, yes I agree there. As far as western porn is concerned, all the women are sluts. That is just the way things are, unfortunately. I don't know whether that's just what most men like to see, or whether only sluts will do porno (probably the latter), but it is very rare I find a western porn website with normal-looking women who do not look like sluts — even rarer to find one with good photography and lighting, making the images look natural, more believable and less like a porn set. But when I do, it is always a delight!

Personally, the majority of my favourite porn is Japanese, and the vast majority of women in East Asian porn are definitely not slutty (or at least they don't appear to be). There is also a much more even balance between male and female domination in East Asian porn, and you see a lot more men tied up. (But I guess you either like East Asian chicks or you don't. And I love 'em!)

 

I'd have to say I see a lot of sense in many of your points but i wouldn't ever discount a market for sensual, natural, "equal" sex. I'm not particularly advocating that the man be in many of the shots but rather that he at least act natural instead of just standing or sitting there going "oh yeah". I mean, as much as his body is absent from the shot, you're still seeing his penis, so i don't see why his hands couldn't be in there too.

Also, i don't think close up penetration shots are entirely necessary for arousal. When you're having sex, are you watching your penis as it goes in and out?

Then there is the typical porno man. An unnatural, steroidal build, flat top or mullet haircut, tattoos, if not extremely fat or nasty looking like Ron Jeremy. I think there could be more, young, skinny, slightly feminine looking guys (even nerdy). They're definitely more attractive to look at, and i'd rather see a nice guy getting it than some brutish alpha male type.

And your above point, i completely disagree with that one. Next time you watch a soft, tasteful lesbian porno, observe how delicately they shoot and choreograph the foreplay and more intimate parts of sex.

But i understand what you're saying and i think its unfortunate. I have heard women saying that a lot of men don't care about foreplay and just want to stick it in. But maybe if they made porn a little more tasteful, men might just learn a thing or two. Its in our best interest to learn how to please a woman.

 

There are a lot of prejudices toward men, women, sex, porn, and porn-watchers by the initiator of this thread that I'm repulsed by...

I don't know what objectification means, nor do I think women are sacred. I also don't know what "dirty" men means.

But the porn you're looking for exists, actually. I don't know where you live but here in New York the few stores that survive the wrath of our ever-more conservative society have shelves dedicated to amateur porn. Many of them performed by couples. Doesn't get more "realistic" than that.

 

This is especially true as more women/couples are becoming open to pornography, the demand for erotic over hardcore is slowly climbing. It just hasn't reached the point where it's as profitable as main stream porn or at the very least, the industry doesn't see it as just as profitable yet.

When I worked at a sex shop, we used to get a good deal of folk coming in wanting something more tasteful than the norm and even though we kept asking and asking the management to bring something in like that because we knew we could sell the shit out of it, the management never bothered. It's a real shame.

 

I ve got a theory that the porn industry is actually owned by fundamentalists from the Religous Right.
Sort of "Ok we'll let this stuff happen, but we'll make it like parody and marginalise the people in it".

I mean most porn is like a close up of Ron Jeremy's ( a fat 55year old)dick and arse and as its bouncing up and down on about one inch square of some girls pussy.

Beautiful women like tera patrick make themselves look ridiculous with cheap blatantly fake tits.They put on huge levels of make up and fuck in cliched "porno style" scenes complete with the type of talk u'd be hard pushed to see outside of porno.

The so called stars are usually around for 2 years max , and generally look much less aroused than the reality porn amateur girls doing their first scene.

The sex often looks fake , and its seems the scenes seem so stamina draining that u get the feeling the girls have gone numb on the inside.

Why do the guys always fuck doggy style with their one leg out to show the penetration?

Personally I cant believe a single film costs anything like the 100k usd they claim to make.

There is well done porn , but theres a huge amount of bad.
And its the big companies that produce amongst the worst.

I think porn should be more like the art photography of say some of the Emmanuelle films.These were actually hard core , but even the soft core is often so well done ,that it appeals to guys and girls.

Nope I think the backers of Vivid and co take their orders from the pension fund of the Christian Coalition .

 

Could you cite some of these Emanuelle films? I can't stand softcore though, so if there's no close ups or ejaculation, don't waste your breath.