My last post generated some very interesting discussions on twitter. It is clear that, for many women, what is currently available to them in the market is adequate. There are many heterosexual women who are very happy to consume porn made for men. There are also lots of women who find porn made for gay men very erotic. Beyond this, there are the two types of lesbian porn: girl on girl action designed for men, where the ghost of the male always haunts the sexual space as a desired but absent element (we’re getting off with each other because either a) you’re not here with your cock or b) we know this is going to turn you on), and porn shot to appeal specifically to lesbians where the male is not only absent or undesired, but clearly nonexistent within the paradigm.
I am fully capable of getting turned on by elements of any of the above, but for the most part, voyeuristically. This isn’t porn MADE for me. This is borrowed gaze.
What is currently on the market for hetero women as porn FOR them is either repurposed gay porn (spot the yellow construction helmet) or very softcore pictures of naked men lounging languidly, without erections, usually accompanied by terribly romantic text. Personally, I can’t think of anything LESS arousing than a naked man with a flaccid cock.
We started to ask the question – if there WERE real hetero woman’s porn, what the hell would it even look like? Just think of how interesting and shocking that question is. There is such an absence of it, that we have problems even conceiving of what sort of a beast it might be!
So, (this is aimed at women who like cock) what I am after are your ideas about what you would want to see in, say, in a static photograph that could be considered pornographic. I’m going to put down certain parameters to try and steer us past the ubiquitous imagery that has almost come to define what we THINK of as porn (because all we’ve seen is, for the most part, male-centered).
1. There can be women in the picture, but they should not be the focus – the object of desire SHOULD be the male.
2. As YOU – a woman – are the consumer, the picture should appeal to what YOU want. Exactly what you want.
3. A good way to start is to take a look at some male-centered porn that sort of turns you on, and find the elements that DON’T work for you. Reverse them.
4. Don’t be scared to define your ideal image by what you don’t want. That’s fine, it’s a start.
Even as a woman with a submissive streak, I can look at D/s porn and see elements that put me off because porn is not a give-and-take thing – it’s utterly selfish. Porn is about focusing on what arouses you. For instance, although I am sometimes turned on by blow-jobs, I find that male-focused porn is flooded with images of it. Although my mouth is a minor erogenous zone, I can’t orgasm that way, so the images get boring. If you’re a man, just imagine image after image of tongue on clit. If you’re honest, it would bore you pretty quickly.
I know that, for me, I’d really want to get a strong sense of male desire. The most obvious symbol of this is an erection, but I think the eyes, the pose of the hands, the attitude of the body would also play a part.
I also like proof of desire… so cum spattered abs might be nice.
Finally, if there IS a female in the image, I don’t want to have to experience that nasty crawling sense of inadequacy I get when I look at a Vogue magazine. Real women, please.
If it’s a blowjob scene, I don’t want to see HER eyes – because that excludes me. I want to see HIS abandon, his muscles tensed, so I can imagine myself as the author of it.
Okay…that’s it for me. What do you want?
An image of a guy eating out a pussy from the vantage point of what the woman would see might be nice. Although hunky guys with erections are great to look at, I’m realizing I’m more into seeing what he can do for me. So any shots taken from the vantage point of the female while the man pleasures/fucks her would suit me just fine.
Yes, I agree completely. In male centered porn, the POV is very often from the guy’s vantage point. The ‘what he can do for me’ element is definitely of supreme importance is female-centered porn.
I’m thinking that a shot of a man sinking his cock into pussy, but where the POV is upward, from the female’s perspective, would be damn nice!
Yes, there should be more of those. This is the only image I can think of that does that.
*Fans myself*
Um, yup. There should definitely be more of those.
I also really want to see more signs of male desire. In straight porn videos, it’s like a man authentically moaning is a horrible taboo. In still images, I find certain facial expressions very arousing, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one I liked outside of gay-focused sites.
The vast majority of straight porn either cuts the guy out entirely, never shows his face during key moments (instead focusing on a pussy), or say everything about the image is what I’m asking for: A guy, being hot, focus on the guy, obviously aroused. Often the expression on his face isn’t saying “I’m enjoying this.” or “I like when you look at me.” or being flirtatious about anything. It’s much more an ego thing/challenge: “I’m hot as hell, check out this body, oh yeah.”
Apparently my issue with straight industry images of guys masturbating is that they’re too masturbatory. Amusing realization.
I agree completely. It’s one reason why I turn down the sound in film porn – there are never any sounds from the man. I HATE IT. Of course you can’t get sound in static images, but you’re right – facial expression counts for a LOT. There’s a lot of male-focused porn with the woman’s face either in ecstasy or looking up at the camera with a mouthful of cock – I want that too – but from a man, not a woman. You’ve made such a good point about expression!
And re: The “I’m hot as hell, check out this body, oh yeah!” look – GAG. It doesn’t turn me on, it makes me laugh. I don’t want to be invited to adore someone. Fuck that! I want to be invited to share their pleasure.
I want to see the man’s whole body in the picture as much as the woman’s.
First I want to thank you Remmittance Girl for opening this extremely important discussion “Conceiving of the unconceived – Hetero Women’s Porn”!
I want to see the man’s whole body in the picture as much as the woman’s. It feels like a form of abuse through deprivation and lack of validation to the hetero woman viewer that most porn focuses so heavily on showing the woman’s whole body including face while rarely ever showing the man’s entire body and face! I once tried an experiment by finding all the porn magazine picture I could find that included the man’s entire figure, which was not so easy, as most porn cuts off parts of the man’s figure while making sure to include the woman’s entire body in the picture. Then I used scissors to cut off any part of the woman’s body that wasn’t touching the man’s body, just as an experiment to reverse the dynamic, and wow, I couldn’t imagine men being so accepting of having to look at that porn where the whole man’s body is in focus but the woman’s is constantly cut, but that one-sidedness is what hetero women put up with.
“The idea that women ARE visual when it comes to sex makes people uncomfortable. The idea that we want to be visually turned on, that we expect potential partners to be visually appealing (and not just good providers or charming jokesters) is, to many people, pretty threatening. The pervasive idea that female arousal is a circuitous, delicate, and finicky thing is a sneaky way of spaying us. It’s certainly more socially acceptable for men to value physical appearance. Case in point—male nudity at the movies. When we see male nudity on film it’s often played for laughs. While men (and women) are treated to Halle Berry’s breasts, the best we girls can get is “joke dick”—think Jason Segel in Forgetting Sarah Marshall or Mark Wahlberg at the end of Boogie Nights. If we acknowledge that women are visual creatures then it puts more pressure on men to look good. While a shlubby sitcom writer might try to convince us that hot girls do, in fact, want to marry fat, funny bald guys, most women want to be visually attracted to their partner.” — What Being Editor in Chief of Playgirl Taught Me About Female Desire, The case for abandoning the myth that ‘women aren’t visual’ by RONNIE KOENIGJUN, 7 2013
”In relationships between dominant and subordinate groups, the subordinate group members always possess a far greater understanding of dominant group members and their culture than vice versa. Contemporary women’s success still depends on our attunement to ‘male culture’, our ability to please men, and our readiness to conform to masculine values.
Surely, women’s commitment to relationships is part of our proud legacy and strength. The problem arises, however, when we confuse intimacy with winning approval, when we look to intimate relationships as our sole source of self-esteem, and when we enter relationships at the expense of the self.
Historically speaking, women have learned to sacrifice the ‘I’ for the ‘we’, just as men have been encouraged to do the opposite and bolster the ‘I’ at the expense of responsible connectedness to others.
In our production-oriented society, no accolades are given to men who value personal ties at the expense of making one more sale. Fame and glory do not come to men who strive to keep their lives in balance and who refuse to neglect their important relationships. The rewards in doing so can only be private ones.
For both women and men the most significant area of learning is that of understanding and enhancing our intimate relationships. All of us develop through our emotional connectedness to others, and we continue to need close relationships throughout our lives. Only through our connectedness to others can we really know and enhance the self. And only through working on the self can we begin to enhance our connectedness to others.
Changing any relationship problem rests directly on our ability to work on bringing more of a self to that relationship. Without a clear “I” we become overly reactive to what the other person is doing to us, or not doing for us – and we end up feeling helpless and powerless to define a new position in the relationship.
Messages everywhere exhort us to achieve selfhood – to find and express our true selves. “Be yourself. But if this is yourself, be someone else.” Perhaps existence would be simpler if all the important figures in our lives could be open and upfront about the contradictory messages they communicate.
Most mixed messages are so subtle and covert that we are not aware of sending or receiving them. “Be independent.” is the spoken message – but then “Be like me.” or “Be for me.” may be the disqualifying communication. “Don’t be so clingy.” may be spoken as we are unconsciously encouraged to express neediness and dependency.
Of course, learning what others expect from us is a necessary part of becoming a civilized human being. There is no true self that unfolds in a vacuum. However, it is the unconscious or covert communications – those outside the awareness of sender and receiver – that often carry the most negative power.
Being a self means we can be who we are in relationships rather than what others wish, need, and expect us to be. It also means that we can allow others to do the same. It means we do not participate in relationships at the expense of the “I” and we do not bolster the “I” at the expense of the other.” — ‘The Dance of Intimacy’ by Harriet Lerner
I like pictures of men sodomising each other from behind. Fit men. There is plenty of this available for me.
I also like hitting. I do not see enough images of men hitting each other. Again, fit men.
If this discussion doesn’t interest you, then you need not participate it. But you are off topic, and you know it. So, I assume this was sort of passive-aggressive vandalism?
I like pictures of men alone, mostly masturbating… so caught up in their own desire that it’s almost innocent… They can be naked or half-dressed, it doesn’t really matter.
I wonder if you’ve seen Jennifer Lyon Bell’s film Headshot? It’s a blowjob scene where you only see the man’s face. I haven’t seen it either but apparently it’s exceptionally mad hot.
I remembered one possible avenue, partway there. BeautifulAgony.com. It’s composed only of faces in the act of masturbation and orgasm. It loks like it has a female:male ratio of 3 or 4 to 1, but the expressions are honest and open. It’s a different kind of porn, though definitely not all of what you’re looking for.
you asked what kind of porn we wanted to see?
Gender and the gaze really interests me. But I have reached different conclusions to the ‘women’s porn’ people.
I think it is important to discuss gender with people you disagree with.
Your previous comment about wanting to see more gay porn or male on male violence were a little off topic, since there is lots of both already available. I asked readers to try to conceive of something different – a type of porn that doesn’t yet exist to any great degree. I understand that you aren’t interested in what I’m interested in, and that’s fine. There are excellent discussions to be had on gender and gaze, but this post was dealing with a very specific gaze that, for the most part, isn’t catered to.
I’m not sure who the ‘women’s porn’ people you are referring to are. Certainly I don’t feel I belong to any particular group of ‘people’ with a specific agenda. I’m an individual commenting on the lack of porn made specifically for heterosexual women. Though it seems you have decided I belong to some ‘camp’ you find offensive.
And you are welcome to discuss gender with me, but that’s a post on a far broader scope than this one covers. But I get the sense that either you have decided to comment on this blog post without reading it, or completely ignoring it’s content in order to initiate the discussion YOU want to have. You have your own very popular blog which is highly respected, and I would be happy to have a discussion on gender with you on a post on that subject, either when I blog about gender and gender perceptions, or when you do.
no RG I dont think you belong to a ‘camp’ but they do exist. Ms Naughty and Filament Mag i put in that camp…
I think you will find that there is not hardly any decent porn of fit men hitting each other. I can’t find any and I have looked hard.
In an age when ‘extreme pornography’ is illegal, my desire for S and M porn is not met adequately. Just as you find most ‘hetero’ porn doesnt cater for your tastes, so I find most S and M porn doesn’t cater for mine.
You’re not as odd as you think you are. DM me your email address and I’ll send you something, if you want. I really can’t publish it on here. You might want to consider some Muay Thai footage. That does it for me.
Great discussions RG, as usual…
I do actually like the type of content that you seem not to like, well, it’s one of the types of content that turns me on – that of the resulting pleasure authored by the man in the image or film, I _like_ to imagine that her noises are mine, that her cunt or ass is mine, plus there’s the voyeuristic aspect of it for me. Now, obviously I’m a bit more discerning than the above generalisations, but, you get my drift – I do enjoy what you say you do not. I don’t know who most porn is made for, I don’t know the demographics of who buys it, looks at it, watches it etc. I know I watch porn maybe 3 times a week on average, but I haven’t paid for it in a very, very long time! and I’d be surprised if I ever did again given what’s available online, but, I digress….. when I watch it it’s heterosexual and it contains what I know will get me off as that’s what I watch it for, if I want an extended period of self pleasuring then it’s not porn I want, it’s erotica to read or my own imagination or a ritualised practice of some sort.
Anyway, it’s late, I’m rambling & not making much sense, so I’ll leave it there for now!
Do people not read my posts? Please read my first paragraph over again. I said there is LOTS of porn I like. I simply want to know why there is almost none authored for a woman’s POV.
Geeze. I’m getting tired of being mis-read.
I did read the post, I also read the comments.
You wrote something, I read it, I took my own meaning from it (as everyone who reads anything does) & chose to comment on it, you were not happy with what you perceived to be my understanding of what you communicated. I love much of your work RG, as you know, but, I will not comment here again as it’s just not a enjoyable process for me; I’ll happily debate the opinions, but not your perception of my understanding of it.
Lilith, come on, you start off your comments by telling me about porn I don’t like, when I’ve opened the blog post by listing a lot of different porn genres saying I FIND A LOT OF THEM AROUSING, but that there is another type of porn I wish I could see but isn’t available.
Hence my comment on your comment.
Do you get to comment, misinterpret me and I don’t get to say anything about it? How fair is that?
I’m sorry to have lost your very intelligent and stimulating input, Lilith. I respect your point of view and you are masterful at putting forth your side of a discussion. But if I don’t get to say that I think you’ve misrepresented me in your comments when I feel you have, then I guess we’re at an impasse.
For some reason I can’t reply to your most recent comment…
RG, it’s your site, you can say whatever you like about whatever you like, however you like to say it etc, I didn’t say you couldn’t or shouldn’t. I’m not interested in censoring you, far from it.
I’m sorry about that. For some reason there is a limit to the level of threaded replies that this WP template will take.
And I’m not interested in censoring you, Lilith. And I’m happy to hear your point of view no matter how much it differs from mine.
Something I’d like to see more of is attractive men who fall outside the (gay) male physical ideal but aren’t like the guys you tend to see in het porn, with their big ol’ dicks, unimpressive bodies, and (more often than not) absent faces.
Personally, I want to see men who look like the attractive men I know and see every day. The model-hotness that happens in a lot of gay porn (and in Hollywood in general, to be honest) turns me right off.
some ‘gay’ amateur porn is more diverse in body types I find…
But yes I know what you mean.
I loved reading the comments – I’ve never really given it much thought, mostly assuming that straight porn doesn’t do it for me. It seems to me that there is so much more emotion in lesbian port – like both parties are enjoying being there.
I love watching porn with my boyfriend, but can really relate to wanting to see another POV reflected.
I don’t think I am ‘odd’ it’s only porn!
But I have found the porn I am interested in tends to lie behind various barricades of market forces/censorship/laws/people being ‘careful’.
The type of porn I would love to see but cannot find, is where the focus is on what is happening inside the heads of the people in the photo or movie.
For a photo, I want to see the facial expressions (as RJones says) and preferably those expressions would reveal very strong emotions.
In a movie, I would love to watch the man play with the woman’s mind as much as he plays with her body. I prefer the rough stuff so my ideal scene would probably start with a kidnapping and be followed by hours, or preferably days, of different activities designed to consecutively hurt or pleasure the victim’s body while confusing, delighting or terrifying her mind. I have found a few novels like this, but in movies the action always moves too quickly and no sooner is the girl kidnapped than she is tied up, fucked and loving it. I want to see the inner-struggle. I want to feel her emotions, not just her physical pain and pleasure.
Hehe…so basically you want porn with explicit sex, but also great dialogue writing, good actors and a compelling plot.
Good luck on that. 😛
Yup!!! Not much to ask is it? *grins*
That sounds like the types of films that Jennifer Lyon Bell makes, or is working towards making, particularly her latest film Sun. Like. Skin.
Thank you for the info Suraya! I visited the website and read the synopsis for the film you mention and it sounds interesting – but not at all my thing. Too consensual!
Yes. It’s a little bit tame for me too. Also, no direct downloads, damn it. I can’t get porn shipped to the country I live in.
Hmm, yes I should’ve made clear I was just referring to the emotional bit rather than the kink bit! Erika Lust has some really well done kink stuff and so does Maria Beatty, but most (if not all) of Maria Beatty’s kink stuff is lesbian. Maria Beatty is good for the emotional context too. I hope you do find what you’re looking for!
One thing that struck me as interesting is, if there are a majority of women who don’t feel comfortable admitting to consuming porn, then Blue Artichoke’s business model may not work so well just because women might not be comfortable having it shipped to their house, or going to a store where those kinds of films are available for purchase.
Pay per view, online streaming would provide a much more private way to view.
I suspect they’re in process of developing something where people can watch online. Making those things work and making them secure and doing it all affordably can be a real struggle.
That’s for sure!
Everytime I see a woman having an orgasm in porn, it’s almost always by oral sex, masturbation or sex toys. I want to see more female orgasms in a heterosexual intercourse. There’s an identification factor to it; I want that. I want to see the actress as a mirror. It kinda hurts/offends me that the guy has to pull out before she comes. I want to see more women orgasming WHILE THE GUY IS STILL INSIDE HER. Even better: simultaneous orgasms. Is that too much to ask?