Why is it de rigeur for almost all genres of porn (even older porn) for a man to pull out before ejaculation and orgasm all over the woman’s body (rear end, breasts etc.) as a finish move. You almost never see anything where a man ejaculates into a woman’s vagina.
Why is this?
That’s an interesting question. However, there is a whole genre of porn called “cream pie” which terminates in cum oozing out of the vagina.
Because otherwise hes just making a funny face. Basically so you know its not just “acting”.
In a film course I took, we had one class session on porn – the lecture was a grad student doing a thesis on some porn-related issue.
According to him it was to prove the “reality” of the sex – it was seen as proof the sex was real and not simulated, and that the male actor at least actually got off. If they could figure out some indisputable evidence of a femaile orgasm, they would have filmed that too.
I would say reality would have something to do with it as well. I mean, I take birth control, but I’m not gonna test its efficiency by letting my partner cram my cervix full of his reproductive fluid.
They do it so they have something to dip the French Frys in.
Birth control really has nothing to do with it in porn. Even when they use codoms, the guy always takes the rubber off for the splatter shot. Withdrawal is also a terribly ineffective method of birth control. Pre-ejaculate has just as many swimmers as the money shot. Professional sex workers are never going to rely on pulling out.
It really is about proving the reality. I also believe there’s a certain kind of vicarious “completeness” that guys get from seeing it.
I certainly hope they wouldn’t rely on withdrawal as a birth control method; I sure don’t. What I’m saying is that reality often consists of that same “shot,” without the camera. And you’re certainly not going to convince me that a teaspoon of pre-ejaculate has the same number of swimmers as oh, say, a quarter-cup of semen. I trust my oral contraceptive, but I’m not keen on exposing any random egg of mine to more swimmers than necessary.
On a related note, what’s up with cum-in-the-eye porn? It makes me never wanna open my eyes again, just in case there’s some random penis hiding around the corner, waiting to deliver an ocular money shot!
The “facial” is just a popular proclivity. I think the eye shot is an accident that has become a sub-branch of its own.
I do wonder how they found out what was popular with their audience, and why certain acts became so widespread. I have a feeling they really didn’t know and were basing it on stats that didn’t reflect the reality. The internet has pushed all the stuff that used to be common more into the background.
:eek: A quarter cup? :dubious:
Your boyfriend’s name isn’t “Ed” is it?
It’s fries BTW, other than that I got nothin’
That was my first thought too.
It buuuuurns!
Is this true? [Wikipedia’s (broken link, pictures of penises)](http:// Pre-ejaculate - Wikipedia) links seem (warning: pdf, see pgs 7-8)to disagree with you.
But your link also says that pre ejaculate can push out sperm that’s already there, so even if there is no sperm in it, it’s still not effective at preventng pregnancy.
ETA: If you trust your oral contraceptive, bufftabby, why wouldn’t you let your beau come in you?
Quit horsing around, you ass. I bridle at the levity. But, hey, don’t knock it till you’ve tried it, it’s actually quite erotic in context.
A seminal libation to the goddess of love. Sometimes the wine misses the chalice on purpose.
But it can make your stomachs stick together, then the morning after starts with the sound of a velcro wallet opening. Fair warning.
No, it’s actually not true at all, although it’s what They have been telling us for years.
Look at the FDA’s chart of Pregnancy Rates for Birth Control. If 100 women use no method at all for 1 year, 85 of them will get pregnant. If 100 women use withdrawal for a year, 15 of them will become pregnant - and that includes all the people who attempt withdrawal but pull out too late or miss the pull entirely. If 100 women used withdrawal perfectly for 1 year, only 4 of them would theoretically conceive.
Withdrawal is actually a better, more effective form of birth control than a diaphragm, cervical cap, spermicide, sponge or female condom, even using real-world “typical” user failure rates. On theoretical rates, it wipes the floor with any method short of sterilization, hormonal or IUDs, and is pretty gosh darn close to male condoms in both numbers.
What withdrawal doesn’t protect against at ALL is STIs or STDs, of course. I use condoms to protect against STDs, not pregnancy. Withdrawal won’t do that.
Your cite says that withdrawal has a 19% pregnancy rate. So 1 out of 5 incidents results in pregnancy. Yeah, let’s all get behind that. :rolleyes:
Thanks for proving my case. Withdrawal is not a form of birth control. If you do it every day, you’ll be pregnant in a week.