I was watching a porn movie the other day-purely an academic interest, I assure you, and I saw an unusual thing. At the moment of climax, the male actor did not pull out, but spent his seed in the orifice that God intended. Now, to me, this seemed much more erotic than the world famous “money shot” that usually takes place. So, IYHO, what’s more erotic/arousing, a cum shot across the actress’ ass or belly, or having the actor cum inside her?
First of all, can you give the name of the movie? That is a pretty rare occurrence, especially in professionally-done porn. I don’t know why it isn’t seen more often.
Second of all, I don’t really have a preference, except that I don’t really like watching women take facials who aren’t prepared for the experience, or who don’t like it but do it anyway. Put it on her chest or somewhere, if you hafta decorate something.
Do what the woman likes… that’s the answer to most questions anyway, isn’t it?
And thirdly, I do have a fetish for hair… I worship long, well-cared-for hair, any color, any texture, curled or straight… doesn’t matter, it’s all good. And when it accidently gets in her hair I get this little thrill. But when I do it on purpose it isn’t the same.
I personally was disgusted the first few times I saw this type of thing. But as I watched more and more porn (also purely for academic purposes…) I came (heh heh) to expect it. I still have no desire to do any decorating myself, and in fact the last thing I feel like doing when I’m approaching ejaculation is to interrupt whatever activity it is that got me to that point!
I suspect the “artistic” purpose of this is to provide climax in the narrative sense, as well as the sexual. It’s more dramatic than the guy just writhing and yelling stuff, as well as more visual.
I have to say, I’d rather see it go squirt squirt squirt than watch the guy make silly faces. Each one is a bit different, and some are truly art forms in and of themselves. To hide them away in a movie is a waste of material (no pun intended(OK, I meant it)).
What you gotta do now is look into (no pun intended) the “creampie” videos.
Please, avert your eyes if you don’t want to know.
What you get with the creampie flicks is apparently a gal who receives the deposit. Then, the video becomes focused on watching the deopsit be summarily rejected from the orifice in which it was placed. I guess it’s basically a felching type thing.
Pregnancy (not a problem with anus or mouth ejaculations, but you get the idea). STD’s.
[safe sex education moment]
I don’t know what the reason is, but this isn’t it. There are plenty of sperms and germs in the pre-ejaculate. Pulling out will prevent neither pregnancy nor sexually transmitted diseases.
I think the porn industry practices “High School/Back Seat” safe sex. That is, they have the actors pull out because they hope it will work. It’s not like they’re taking precautions, anyway. How many porn movies have you seen where condoms are used.
Well, I expect a large part of the original reason was to demonstrate, that yes, indeedy there was an honest to goodness orgasm on the part of the man.
I’m sure it’s not just that simple, and prophylactic considerations also were a factor. But the way they’re presented, especially in the older films with a tight closeup of the man’s face in a ecstatic grimace immediately proceeding the ejaculation, leads me to infer the above.
And I definitely agree with heembo, when I’m (ahem) concentrating on a porno, I really don’t want to be looking at the man’s ugly mug. Especially considering the number of particularly ugly mugs in porn, and the fact that all too often, I’m about ready to be (ahem) grimacing myself.
Of course, lately, given some of the practices hardcore pornvids have taken to showing, I’d rather look at the man’s face.
She may have only been a cheap hooker, but she had one of the nicest faces I ever came across.
I always thought they showed cumshots
to prove the man really ejaculated…
I’m no expert (I don’t watch porn anymore), but condom use is apparently becoming a fairly common practice. That’s one purpose of the money-shot: cut from the sex to the guy cumming on the girl’s…whatever. The taking off of the condom is cut out. That way it looks like there was no condom (the philosophy behind that being that it’s more sexy, or that the audience prefers that).
Chiming in from the other side of the fence, gay porn actors have been using condoms for anal scenes since the late 80s, at least. It’s extremely rare to find a gay porn video without condom use that isn’t of some very early vintage. And even with that, HIV still took a rather large toll of the gay porn actors’ community.
They do market “bareback” gay videos, but I don’t buy them. I don’t even watch them. It feels too much like paying to watch a bunch of kids play Russian Roulette.
Metro tried adopting an all-condom policy a few years ago, but stopped after less than a year due to some reason, poor customer feedback I guess.
It appears that now Vivid, or at least most of their directors, are going with a mandatory condom policy. Since they’re the 800-lb gorilla of porn video, they can pretty much do whatever they want.
Other companies, like VCA and New Sensations, feature condom use on occasion. Don’t know any facts, but I’m guessing it’s left up to the actual players.
Personally, I don’t find it that much of a distraction. If I need to, I can erase them in my mind’s eye. And I certainly don’t want to see my favorite stars dropping out of the biz due to HIV, even if they do have to have a clean test record less than 30 days old before every shoot.
And heck, if I were acting in a porn vid, I think I’d want a condom. Maybe even two, a la the end of American Pie.
I also always thought the point was to prove that the guy climaxed.
From the female perspective, yuck. One stand-up comedienne did a riff on the cum-in-the-face/ear/eye/whatever and speculated that the woman would later hear little voices, “I coulda been somebody!”, and would be seeing paisley.
Funny this thread should, hehe, pop up. The last porn I saw ended with the guy cumming inside the woman and I remember thinking how odd that was for a porno. I’ve seen a few with condom use, but they were usually lower budget, at least in appearance, so I figured it was for everyones safety, doubting they were big into testing and whatnot.
Gotta share this: there was a girl I used to date in college that insisted that I always pull out and cum in her mouth. Gotta do what you gotta do.
ba-dum (rimjob–err, I mean rimshot!)
HIV can take up to 6 months to show up on the tests – that’s why they always tell you to come back later, to make sure. So I’d want a longer test record…
LOL! Reminds me of the scene in Illuminatus! where the teens are fooling around on her parents’ couch and when the guy is ready to climax, he’s worried about the father finding the “evidence.” So the girl says “I know, put it in my mouth - they won’t find it there!”
I always wondered if this was a literary interpretation of an old dirty joke. Wilson did put in a stint as a Playboy editor, and they probably have collected millions of candidates for their joke page on the back of the centerfold.
I’m in the ‘To prove they really came’ camp. I’ve heard that most men can’t perform on camera, even if they can get it hard or semi-hard they can’t ejaculate, maybe this tradition was something started by pornstars to show that they are professionals…
I have seen ONE video where the guy came inside the woman - it was a tape with a lot of amateur stuff on it, and the scene was with an experienced porn star and his amateur wife (or maybe it was vice-versa, not sure). After he came in her they did a closeup of him sticking his finger in and pulling out some of the semen.
Re: condoms in a video, I’ve seen it a couple of times, most recently on a tape I bought last weekend called “Goddess”. Very interesting tape, but my wife agrees (and is disappointed by the fact!) that it is intended for women or maybe couples.