HIV spread and the brutalising of women.

[duff paddy]

Pianaman - great post.

100% of the women I've filmed for their video diaries love viewing certain types of porn and if the emphasis is on "being naughty" a woman will immerse herself in it and use it to fuel her own fantasies.

One thing I've noticed though is that in discussions as to what kind of porn turns them on, it seems a woman's imagination is more interesting than 99% of existing movie scenarios. Ignoring the dull-as-dishwater US "couple porn" while they usually like things like early Ben Dover (housewife fantasies), lesbian scenes, orgy scenes and even some of the Rocco stuff - these only scratch the surface.

If, as pianaman says, we get off on seeing the woman's excitement, why isn't there more of what women want? Where's the gonzo stuff where the woman picks up the guy? Why is the group stuff gangbang biased as opposed to mutually respectful (and exciting) orgy scenes?

The UK could lead the way in this and re-invent the industry but it also needs to shake off it's "council house" image first. While women may not want the fake glamour that the US peddles, they also do not want the downmarket vibe that all too prevalent in the UK. Treat women as special and they'll give us what we want. It's a win-win

After three years filming video diaries for couples, I think I've formulated some good concepts that I'll try and put into practice in the next year or so. BGAFD will be the first to know if I do.


Duff

[Pianaman]

"Video diaries" - sounds interesting - sort of like "Sex, Lies and Videotape"?

Are these available anywhere?

I agree that often it's the fantasy element that is left out in the sort of "soulless" porn we are discussing. Fantasy, sensuality, tenderness, playfulness - it makes me think what are these producer's afraid of that they can't seem to cope with everyday human intimacy - let alone sexuality. It's not just a US thing, you see these tendencies everywhere to a lesser or greater extent, though I agree with your previous post that there are aspects of contemporary US culture (911 culture) that may create the conditions for this "distancing" we seem to be seeing. Psychologically it's rather fascinating.

But there is good US porn too - lets not forget sites like VelvetEcstacy for example - where you can see real couples engaging in imaginative, erotic sex (could be better but it's a step in the right direction at least). This isn't a national thing - there's good and bad everywhere (even Japan has some very erotic porn as well as the more deplorable stuff) - I think we are just scrathing the surface of what porn could be - its like it could be a whole art form but at the moment we're still stuck with people using crayons and 2 colours instead of the whole palette of sexual expression and feeling.

[duff paddy]

Pianaman - the video diaries are not available for sale. For the last couple of years I've been filming couples for their own personal videos and in the last year many of these people have asked me to create scenarios involving perhaps another male or female or arranging an entire environment (say, at a luxury hotel or weekend in Paris etc). I'll then shoot and edit everything according to their personal taste.

Escapism is a key part of creating the right vibe and obviously none of this comes cheap. However, as you say, psychologically it is fascinating partly because there are a whole load of people who, rather than watch someone else's idea of erotic entertainment, would rather create their own - precisely because of the reasons you state in your posts.

[joe king]

(Mike)
"As a realist I reserve the right to depict any thing. Of course the enemy always back up their augument by mentioning child porn and bestiality which are both illegal and obscene per se., so we don't need censorship to stop those."
(cillaodain)
You reserve the right to depict any thing, and then go on to tell us what you should not have the right to depict. That's not good logic.

(Joe King)
'and then go on to tell us what you should not have the right to depict'
Mike didn't say that ('you should not have the right to depict'). I have to admit I am not sure what he (Mike Freeman) means when he says ' child porn and bestiality which are both illegal and obscene per se '. The R18 theatre release recently was reported to have 'bestiality' in it. Child porn - evidence that abused children are seriously traumatised, and have their lives completely wrecked is strong.
Of course you have the right to depict what you like but the state has certain powers which might stop you further depicting what you did depict.


(cillaodain)
Again, the question: what is mainstream pornography? I suspect that most women don't like DP or DAP, being pissed on, being slapped hard, heavy bondage, lots of other things which are done in porn. I think most would not want their love partners to withdraw and cum on their faces or bodies. Let's not fool ourselves that what often happens to women in porn is what women in general want

(joe king)
I think most would not want their love partners to withdraw and cum on their faces or bodies. How do you know? Did you take a poll? What was the sample size?
' Let's not fool ourselves that what often happens to women in porn is what women in general want'
Why should you think about the women in general? What do women want (apart from 100 pairs of shoes)? A nice kiss and cuddle? Missionary position? A blowjob? So we should reduce porn to 1 kiss, 1 cuddle and a possible missionary position (with one leg still on the bedroom floor) - for that 'general' woman.


Harmful content?
Let's take as an example my spanking fetish. How harmful is it? Is someone going to be spanked to death? Have you ever heard of anyone being spanked to death? So why does the BBFC cut anything that that would mark the buttocks? Is it justified?

[cillaodain]

Joe,

I'm not in the industry. I'm just an occasional consumer with no claim to be an expert on porn, human sexuality, or the minds of women. I like some porn, and I like women. That's where I'm coming from.

I think that I can justify everything I said, but I won't bother. We could get into very tiresome arguments about how things are worded, and how much of an expert everybody is. Let's forget point-scoring, and look at the real issues.

I think there are limits to porn. Child porn and bestiality are the examples everybody agrees with (or they will say that they agree with them). I am sure that just about everybody who posts here would agree that showing real rape is unacceptable. There was a thread here not so long ago where many people objected even to the pretence of rape. I hope that people would also agree that showing the infliction of real physical injury is unacceptable.

If making child porn was legal in the UK, I think it is a fair bet that there would be people making it. That's the world we live in. They would make money from it too. That's the world we live in. So the law interferes. It's an interference that just about everybody in the industry and the huge majority of consumers support. You can call it censorship, and you would not be wrong. So this is not a debate about censorship. It's a debate about the degree of censorship which is tolerable.

So let's ask ourselves what the real issue is. The thread title is a clue. It's about the treatment of women in porn. I have already given you an idea of what I prefer. I'm not stupid enough to think that I speak for everybody, but I think that there are quite a few people who have opinions like mine. Other posts in this thread say similar things to what I said. I want to see women enjoying sex, and it looks to me as if many in the business do not enjoy what they are doing. They do it for money, not for fun. They get more money for DAP. Would they get it if it was as easy or as enjoyable as a standard b/g scene?

Women in porn are often pressured to go a bit further than they want. We have had threads here on that, with contributions from some of the women in the business. Lara Roxx was reported as saying that she was pressurised into doing the DAP with Darren James which probably resulted in her HIV infection ("no DAP, no work. No work, no pay", and she needed the money). To make things worse, it now looks as if the scenes where she and the other girl (Jessica Dee?) were infected are going to be released. Could you watch that and feel comfortable about your motives?

Porn in the 1970s was better -- a bit of story-line, a hint that the performers were people, sex as fun rather than as an athletic challenge, sometimes a bit of romance, a bit of humour. The hairstyles were terrible, though.

[stripeysydney]

A few years ago, in the comic Viz someone wrote in to the letters section asking about an old porn film that he'd seen and heartily enjoyed,after describing the film what went on ,etc;he said that he could'nt remember what the film was called and wanted to know if any of the readers could enlighten him and also where he could blag a copy of it.
The film was called "Babyface" by the godlike genius,Alex de Renzy an absolute cracker of a porn film.
The magazine commented in the letters section that this letter had generated the most replies ever! where he could get a copy,top birds,top filming;top hairdo's;etc
To me this shows that generally speaking this is the porn that people want to see and not that mysoginstic dogshit that wankers like max hardcore spew out.Also those individuals who get off on that sort of stuff,i suggest afew sessions on a pychiatrist's couch.

[Pianaman]

Very well put.

I like some 70's/80's porn too - no silicon, almost no shaved pussy's (some neatly trimmed perhaps), more emphasis on eroticism. Not so sure about plots - I've yet to see a porn movie with anything like a decent plot - though some came close ("Barbara Broadcast" for example). I'm not stuck there of course - there are a lot of things I like about modern porn. Just as there are a lot of things that were not so good about 70's porn - not just the bad hair! lol.

[DavidS]

What you say is correct. The overwhelming majority of punters do not want to see the output of Max Hardcore and the like. They certainly do not want to see women brutalised or humiliated.

[denise davies]

While I would agree whole heartedly...the fact that he is still in business obviously means that there are enough girls out there who will still shoot with him and enough arseholes out there who buy the garbage he produces!!!