egafd.com

In light of JJs comments that couples doing porn is not really porn concurred by another poster (see here: ) I thought I would take this matter further, concerned that in these times of porn aplenty, if some of us have lost our way with all of this.

I've always thought porn was the act of displaying oneself in a sexually explicit manner designed to stimulate...Ill buy the comment that couples porn does nothing in the trouser or brain deaprtment for some but heres the crux:

If a couple who did porn not as a couple for other sites appear on a couples themed reality site doing sexually the same thing but with more feeling, is it somehow not porn? Does the emotional aspect of couples porn ie kissing, "I love you" turn people off?

I would have thought something that was highly personal would have added to its appeal but thats just my bias

Having heard comments that what I do isnt really porn I take as a compliment but I wonder if I'm missing the point and that it is a veiled insult. It wouldnt be the first time given what I've heard from critics in recent years

Discuss? I look forward to reading your views on this

Personally i consider anything from solo girl penetration with fingers or toys to gangbangs porn. But maybe having seen well over 1000 films i'm easily pleased. Doesn't matter to me whether they are couples off screen or whether they met 0.1 seconds ago - if it's in any orifice it's porn, if that's the only way to see girl x get fucked, bring it on.

Your definition:

"I've always thought porn was the act of displaying oneself in a sexually explicit manner designed to stimulate..."

Is more or less the original definition of pornography. However nowadays I would think the definition would have to be modified to something like:

"More than one person engaged in a sexual activity act so shocking, violent or depraved that has been produced solely for the purpose of sexual titillation and profit, that a jury of 12 reasonable men & women find this act so shocking that they find said act worthy of being deemed, "Pornographic".

So one could assert that very few of us, these days are actually making, truly, "Pornographic" material! I reckon I make "Erotic entertainment" hopefully! Lol

judging by the lack of replies, apparently nothing.

"If a couple who did porn not as a couple for other sites appear on a couples themed reality site doing sexually the same thing but with more feeling, is it somehow not porn? Does the emotional aspect of couples porn ie kissing, "I love you" turn people off?

I would have thought something that was highly personal would have added to its appeal but thats just my bias"

Agree entirely with your views, OEJ. Porn is generally not noted for its fantastic acting and as a result a lot of porn is formulaic and robotic.

I would have thought that real couples who know each other's bodies well and in a relationship would tend to make better not worse porn!

David Johnson wrote:

I would have thought that real couples who know each other's bodies well and in a relationship would tend to make better not worse porn!


Yes, you'd think but maybe it highlights a point that people prefer the rough stuff because that is the core of most peoples interest

Maybe the lack of discussion lends some support to the point that people prefer their porn more hardcore because anything less is just not considered the same way.

Its obviously not a general view or I would have been out of business years ago

To me porn isn't a dirty word, just encompassing a variety of themes, from erotic solo pictures from mags of previous decades to the more hardcore stuff of todays movies and websites. It doesn't all work for me, but just cos I don't like it doesn't make it not porn. If it's put out there with the intention to tittilate then it's porn.

Porn has been bastardised from erotic entertainment to in many cases maltreatment of the performers by sick producers.

In some people's mind porn is simply people shagging. That misses out on the fetish market which can be erotic without any sign of penetration.

As Dave Lee Roth said in an interview years ago.....for erotica you use a feather, for porn you use the whole chicken!!

Problem now is the censors think all porn is vile and should be kept off out TV screens, and in the near future the net if they get their way, yet a recent survey in the US said 88% of college aged males and over 30% of same group females looked at web porn every day. So it isn't dirty it's the normal behaviour.

Personally the most erotic things on TV are Susanah Reid and Nigella, fully clothed but both know they are sexy as fuck and have mastered the art of teasing.

Two partners making love on film is more Mills and Boon than porn. Porn is something seedy.