Someone asked about why Hustler & Penthouse are showing penetration these days, so i can’t imagine why Playgirl would not want to show erections…
Oh, but you could with Viagra. The little blue pill is a big (ahem) help in the porn industry.
For several summers running I had a beach share on Fire Island. Three years ago we decided to pay for some house expenses by renting the place out to porn star/director “Michael Lucas*” for two days, during which he shot an entire video. (“Fire Island Cruising,” since I’m bound to be asked. And for goodness sake, don’t search for it at work!) Viagra effectively eliminated the need for any fluffing.
*A nom-de-porn.
I’m not convinced. Nothing I’ve read about Viagra has made me believe that it’s the wonder drug people think. There are lots and lots of men it hasn’t helped.
Besides, every person truly knowledgeable on the subject says that Viagra does not help mental problems. You still need to be horny. That’s also why Viagra hasn’t led to an upswing in rapes (as I heard some predict); it just doesn’t work that way.
Furthermore, who has said that there was any significant amount of “fluffing” in the porn industry prior to Viagra? This site certainly seems to indicate otherwise. Yes, it’s a porn star’s homepage, but it’s brutally honest about the bad sides of porn, so I’m inclined to believe it.
I beg to disagree. In terms like courts martial or attorneys general or mothers-in-law, the word that is made plural is a noun. With hard-on, hard is an adjective. There is no noun to modify unless you consider the whole compound word as a noun.
Do that many women actually buy Playgirl, anyway?
Priceguy, thanks for the link, it was very informative.
Of course as soon as they start letting erect penii be displayed in magazines, we’ll start seeing them in the shake-up snowglobes as well.
Well, in an ideal world I might’ve said something like “to the extent fluffers ever existed,” :), but I didn’t - certainly that’s not exactly a secret.
Now, as for Viagra. What you’re reporting is all correct…for guys who have ED. So far as I know, neither Pfizer nor anyone else is researching Viagra’s effects on guys who don’t have ED - like, for example, porn stars, or the many young gay guys I know who’ve used Viagra recreationally. They’re using it - like the models in Lucas’s film - for the insta-rod effect, which seems pretty substantial among those who are healthy. (Of course, whether they’ll remain healthy after using Viagra repeatedly in the absence of ED is a separate question.) For a first-hand report, scrounge around Dan Savage’s archive; roughly May of 1998.
Come on. You said “eliminated the need for any fluffing”. That certainly implies that there had been a need, and now Viagra had revolutionized the business.
So what’s ED then? English is not my first language, and I have an almost pathological hatred for abbreviations. It’s kind of hard to address this until I know what you’re talking about.
I want to go to that link, but have to ask… Is it safe to look at from work?
ED would be Erectile Dysfunction. Being a porn star with this problem is like, well, as a lady I knew once put it, “Harmon glass doesn’t hire any blind glaziers.” Full-time consideration of another endeavor might be in order.
Which part of “porn star’s homepage” don’t you get?
Look at all the big names who have already signed the petition, George W. Bush, Bob Dole and let´s not forget Ben Dover.
Regarding erections in non-porn films:
The Spanish film Sex and Lucia (original-language title: Lucia y el sexo) includes at least two erect penises that I remember. It didn’t have an MPAA rating, but it didn’t play at the raincoat houses, either. In fact, it won Best Director for Julio Medem at the most recent Seattle International Film Festival.
Also, the British film Angels and Insects includes a mostly-erect penis. And as I recall, the film is rated R. (I’d tell you the context, but it would spoil a major aspect of the story.)
Both films are quite excellent, prurient value aside. I recommend them for adventurous viewers.
Does it really? That movie is shown on IFC in the US. IFC is a non-premium movie channel and I didn’t think it censored the movies. Either they did censor it, or I wasn’t watching too carefully.
It certainly beats me !
[R. Lee Ermey]Who do you think you are numbnuts? William fucking Saffire![/RLE]
FTR I agree with Walloon on said usage.
Of course as soon as they start letting erect penii be displayed in magazines, we’ll start seeing them in the shake-up snowglobes as well.
Damn you Lieu. I’ve been having Christmas shopping dreams lately. After reading this thread, I know what I’ll be dreaming about tonight.
(New meaning to the words stocking stuffer.)
Isn’t there a realism factor involved? As an owner and operator of said equipment, I can state with certainty that if I was to pose like Rodin’s Thinker on a rock at the seashore at sunrise (when it’s 62 degrees Farenheit) the “captain” would stay in bed.
The penises (penes, penii, whatever) in Playgirl and various other magazines tend to be flaccid because…
Erections aren’t that important to most women. (Emphasis on most)
As has been pointed out numerous times, men and women do have slightly different wiring. Men tend to be very heavily visually oriented when it comes to the erotica/porn spectrum. Women less so. Most porn is geared towards men (why not, they buy most of it) and therefore tends to run to their standards, needs, and wants, i.e. very graphic, emphasis on sexual organs and such.
Women, on the other hand, are less turned on by graphic visuals than by, say, a storyline. Which is a reason men by “skinmags” and women by Harlequin romances (what, you didn’t know “romance novels” were pornography written by and for women?)
Had a number of boyfriends who, in an effort to get me “hot”, attempted to use the same visual stimulation on my as worked on them - and they were completely flabbergasted when it didn’t work the same on me.
Different wiring Although visuals DO work for a sizable portion of the femal community, for me sound, words, lighting, proper touching, and a bunch of other stuff are much, much more sexually stimulating than a porn video will ever be.
So… getting back to Playgirl and cousins… Playgirl is supposedly for women and supposely caters to their tastes. Since an erect penis is not the main stimulant for most women, a lack of an erection imposes no economic penalty. If the guy gets a boner during a shoot, great, they’ll make use of it, if he doesn’t no big deal, and no need to spend the time and effort to get one. Women are frequently turned on more by, say, nice shoulders or a particular facial structure or the context in which the man is seen than a “boner in a wheatfield for no reason”.
Men often think an erect penis is sexier - and it might be, for them - but it’s much less important to women (unless we’re intending to actually use the erection in the next few minutes, but obviously don’t have real-life access to the guy in the magazine picture)
And yes, there IS a realism factor, at least for this chick.