Post: #1

Looks like their tradition of introducing salacious articles to generate hits is going strong, they've put out a slew of feminist deconstructions of porn.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/d...omen_.html

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/201...able_.html

Apparently it's homophobic to not want to whack off to a video where the camera is centered on some dude's taint...who knew? But seriously, does anyone else find it funny that women seem to lack a basic understanding of why men look at porn?

Post: #2

(11-17-2011 08:09 PM)BortimusPrime Wrote:  Looks like their tradition of introducing salacious articles to generate hits is going strong, they've put out a slew of feminist deconstructions of porn.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/d...omen_.html

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/201...able_.html

Apparently it's homophobic to not want to whack off to a video where the camera is centered on some dude's taint...who knew? But seriously, does anyone else find it funny that women seem to lack a basic understanding of why men look at porn?

First link doesn't work. Second one is written by a gay man (http://www.linkedin.com/in/jblowder) projecting his sexuality on hetero men.

Quote:"The straight male performer must be attractive enough to serve as a prop, but not so attractive that he becomes the object of desire."

Hess is spot on. Men need to see a penis in straight porn (presumably to stand in for their own), but not one that is attached to a guy who might be threateningly attractive, not to mention plausibly appealing to the woman involved.

This is so incorrect its worth taking the article or writer seriously at all.

Post: #3

The statement that men control porn isn't totally accurate. If you mean that most distributors/producers/directors of porn are men, you're probably right. However, women are the stars, and make FAR more than male performers. Women make the money on merchandising products based on themselves (pussy molds, fuck dolls, etc. as well as other merchandise), and many women have their own production companies. Women decide which guys they want to work with, and can make several films in a day, which a man can't do. The photographer Timothy Greenfield-Sanders did a documentary film about the making of his photography book, "Thinking XXX." It featured photos of porn stars, clothed, then un-clothed in the same pose. Each performer did a little interview to talk about the business. One of the males (Sean Michaels) was actually BITTER that he was only considered a prop, and didn't earn what women earned. Another performer whose name escapes me, claimed to be straight, but did gay porn because that was the only way a guy could make top dollar.

I can't say I care about what men in porn films look like, be they muscle-bound freaks are somewhat normal looking guys. I want to see chicks taking dick, and I'm not the least bit threatened by the guy who's laying the pipe. There was a lot of psychobabble in that article. That's why most chicks lose money when they only do girl/girl porn (Jenna Jameson is probably the exception, though she did some girl/guy), because dudes buy the shit to see bitches take dick, not licking clits, doing each other with dildos or rubbing their kitty-cats together. Some women directors are trying to do more female-centric porn, showing "lovemaking" instead of bitches getting nutted on. PLEASE.

Post: #4

(11-17-2011 09:21 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  The statement that men control porn isn't totally accurate. If you mean that most distributors/producers/directors of porn are men, you're probably right. However, women are the stars, and make FAR more than male performers. Women make the money on merchandising products based on themselves (pussy molds, fuck dolls, etc. as well as other merchandise), and many women have their own production companies. Women decide which guys they want to work with, and can make several films in a day, which a man can't do. The photographer Timothy Greenfield-Sanders did a documentary film about the making of his photography book, "Thinking XXX." It featured photos of porn stars, clothed, then un-clothed in the same pose. Each performer did a little interview to talk about the business. One of the males (Sean Michaels) was actually BITTER that he was only considered a prop, and didn't earn what women earned. Another performer whose name escapes me, claimed to be straight, but did gay porn because that was the only way a guy could make top dollar.

Most pornstars are dumb as shit and get taken. The guys making 99 percent of the money used to be producers and distributors. Now its the owners of those streaming porn sites along w/ producers and distributers.

Even FlowerTucci.com isn't owned by Flower Tucci.

Of course there are outliers like Tera Patrick and Jenna Jameson, but think of how many guttersluts get pissed on for 400 bucks a pop for every porn actress that ends up successful in the industry.

Post: #5

(11-18-2011 02:30 AM)UgSlayer Wrote:  Of course there are outliers like Tera Patrick and Jenna Jameson, but think of how many guttersluts get pissed on for 400 bucks a pop for every porn actress that ends up successful in the industry.

If you do that every working day of the year (~250) you're pulling in $100K. That's pretty good for a girl with psychological issues, no talent and moderate attractiveness.

And also, I don't know the numbers, but many female pornstars parlay that into a career as a high-class escort/prostitute, which can be incredibly lucrative compared to porn. Indeed, some (many?) get into porn just so 6 months later they can quit and join a "bang a pornstar" agency. The less dim ones, anyway.