# Porn of VHS and today

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646>\
**Category:** Cafe Society\
**Created:** [June 17, 2016, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646 "2016-06-17T22:33:17Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 14\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/21 "2016-06-18T07:34:18Z")

</div>

> [@Ranchoth](#):
>
> …found it. :eek:

I’ve jokingly heard it said that Rule 35 is “_If there isn’t porn of it yet, there inevitably will be_.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 9:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/22 "2016-06-18T09:57:21Z")

</div>

> [@Alley\_Dweller](#):
>
> I really don’t understand what you mean by this. I seem to have no trouble finding porn with google.

Try finding something that isn’t porn, but has keywords that could be interpreted as porn-related. The way it works now it leaps straight from “wouldn’t offend a 1950s housewife” to “hardcore porn”, and it’s hard to find anything in between.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/23 "2016-06-18T10:36:02Z")

</div>

Beta? VHS? I’m so old I remember reels of 8 mm film!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/24 "2016-06-18T16:07:09Z")

</div>

> [@Trinopus](#):
>
> Wow! My experience is exactly the opposite of this!

Since everything is on an internet database, I checked the winners of the [Adult Video News Awards Best Film](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVN_Award#Winners_1984.E2.80.931989) and cross-checked the number of scenes in the Internet Adult Film Database. (Picked quasi-randomly because each was first in its table. I added 2016 just for fun.)

1984 \*Scoundrels \*10 scenes 81 minutes  
1990 _Night Trips_ 7 scenes 74 minutes  
1995 \*Sex \*8 scenes 102 minutes  
1999 _Seven Deadly Sins_ 8 scenes 114 minutes  
2005 _The Masseuse_ 7 scenes 115 minutes  
2016 _Peter Pan XXX_ 5 scenes 119 minutes

Definitely a trend toward longer scenes over time.

But those movies had plots, which shortened the amount of time available for sex. Companies learned that they didn’t need to bother with plots; that wasn’t what the audience wanted. So the AVN also had a category for Best All-Sex Video. Let’s track that.

1984 _C. T. (Coed Teasers)_ 17 scenes 81 minutes  
1990 _Hello Molly_ 9 scenes 75 minutes  
1995 _The Dinner Party_ 10 scenes 85 minutes  
1999 _The Voyeur 12_ 5 scenes 131 minutes  
2005 \*Stuntgirl \*4 scenes 67 minutes  
2016 [no longer awarded]

Also a huge shift from shorter to longer scenes.

I’ve never seen any of those films, so it’s possible that just dividing minutes by scenes doesn’t work. Not very likely, though, and certainly not for the all-sex videos.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/25 "2016-06-18T16:23:45Z")

</div>

> [@Martini\_Enfield](#):
>
> Look at it another way: There’s a reason Google safe search not only exists, but basically _has_ to be enabled by default.

I’ve heard quite a few people say this, and it’s really not my experience.

I spend a LOT of time online, both for work and for entertainment. I look up a LOT of things. I have also been known to look at porn online.

But in my regular, non-porn, everyday searching for information on an incredibly wide variety of subject matter, from serious historical and political subjects, to sports and movies and funny cat videos, i have only once or twice found in my search results anything that resembles pornography.

I have Safe Search turned OFF all the time.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/26 "2016-06-18T16:39:19Z")

</div>

As BigT said, a few years ago Google changed its algorithm to remove NSFW images in a general search. To get them you have to deliberately include a key word, like nude or porn. Obviously, the intent was to ensure that you couldn’t blame them if you had to justify an image appearing on your screen.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![standingwave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@standingwave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/standingwave)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/27 "2016-06-18T18:13:30Z")

</div>

> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#):
>
> As BigT said, a few years ago Google changed its algorithm to remove NSFW images in a general search. To get them you have to deliberately include a key word, like nude or porn. Obviously, the intent was to ensure that you couldn’t blame them if you had to justify an image appearing on your screen.

[Wikipedia has more info…](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SafeSearch)

On 12 December 2012 Google removed the option to turn off the filter entirely, requiring users to enter more specific search queries to access adult content But this happens only to English sites and non-English users are still required to be careful with their local language search as Google is not filtering most of the adult contents even with safe search on and with specific keywords.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![buddha\_david](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ee7513/32.png) [@buddha\_david](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buddha_david)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/28 "2016-06-18T18:48:45Z")

</div>

These image searches are (mostly) SFW with Safe Search turned off:

[Pair of Tits](http://www.google.com/search?q=pair+of+tits&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=pair+of+tits)  
[Big Cock](http://www.google.com/search?q=big+cock&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=big+cock)  
[Pet My Pussy](http://www.google.com/search?q=pet+my+pussy&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=pet+my+pussy)  
[Bald Snatch](http://www.google.com/search?q=bald+snatch&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=bald+snatch)  
[Come on Eileen](http://www.google.com/search?q=come+on+eileen&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=come+on+eileen)  
[Eating Muff](http://www.google.com/search?q=eating+muff&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=eating+muff)  
[Swollen Lips](http://www.google.com/search?q=swollen+lips&safe=off&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&oq=swollen+lips)

On the other hand, couldn’t find a phrase including “ass” which returns a bunch of donkey photos (except [stubborn ass,](http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=stubborn+ass&gbv=2&oq=stubborn+ass) which doesn’t really work.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/29 "2016-06-18T19:17:43Z")

</div>

Isn’t this just like the Dope? A porn thread quickly mutates into one comparing search engine algorithms.

A long time ago we were on the mailing list for the catalog of an extensive video store with lots of porn. Some lucky person wrote snarky capsule summaries of them all. My impression was (I am an inveterate reader) that there was plenty of black porn, and interracial porn, though I never computed the percentages. I’m sure it all depended on the market.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/30 "2016-06-18T19:18:30Z")

</div>

> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#):
>
> As BigT said, a few years ago Google changed its algorithm to remove NSFW images in a general search. To get them you have to deliberately include a key word, like nude or porn. Obviously, the intent was to ensure that you couldn’t blame them if you had to justify an image appearing on your screen.

Fair enough, although i’ve been using Google for over 15 years now, and i don’t remember seeing much in the way of unexpected porn results during regular searches even before Google changed the algorithm.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Hail\_Ants](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dc4da7/32.png) [@Hail\_Ants](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hail_Ants)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/31 "2016-06-18T20:19:39Z")

</div>

> [@Martini\_Enfield](#):
>
> I’ve jokingly heard it said that Rule 35 is “_If there isn’t porn of it yet, there inevitably will be_.”

I read that Rule 35 came about because Rule 34 used to have an exception clause stating: _ **except for Rosie O’Donnell**. Which of course someone then had to break (shudder_!\*) :eek:

Anything outside the porn mainstream, which is white hetero oral sex & fucking, is still going to be considered a sub-genre. This includes interracial, black, gay, S&M, even anal is still considered a semi-fetish genre. The only exception is girl-on-girl, which has always been part of mainstream porn because mainstream porn’s audience is primarily hetero males and we overwhelmingly dig hot lesbian scenes\*!\* 😃

Porn is probably the only business where actors (i.e. women) can specifically refuse to work with someone based solely on their race or sexual preference (no lesbian stuff, no black guys) and routinely get away with it. It’s probably not technically legal, but nobody wants to bother trying to sue about it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/32 "2016-06-18T22:41:05Z")

</div>

**Hail Ants** : It might be legal, the way theatrical casting is exempt from equal opportunity rules.

(After all, this is how porn is exempt from prostitution laws, even though people are being paid to have sex.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Laggard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9de053/32.png) [@Laggard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Laggard)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/33 "2016-06-18T22:53:52Z")

</div>

> [@Trinopus](#):
>
> Wow! My experience is exactly the opposite of this!

Mine too

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\
**Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646/34 "2016-06-18T23:20:50Z")

</div>

> [@Martini\_Enfield](#):
>
> I’ve jokingly heard it said that Rule 35 is “_If there isn’t porn of it yet, there inevitably will be_.”

Last night, I stumbled onto a Peppa Pig video on You Tube that included two of the mommy characters actually giving birth, and the characters were engaged in things like car chases, professional wrestling, and driving monster trucks through their muddy puddles. 😃 There are satirical voice-over videos with titles like “Peppa watches porn with Grandpa Pig” or “Peppa listens to gangsta rap”.

I also heard about a woman who wrote X-rated fan fiction inspired by the movie “Cars”. 😛

p.s. The births weren’t graphic, but you don’t expect something like that in a program aimed at preschoolers. p.p.s. Both babies were born in their wrestling costumes. :smack:

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/porn-of-vhs-and-today/757646.md?page=1)
