That aproned-men thing is so fucking patronizing. Give me Violet Blue's The Smart Girl's Guide to Porn any day.

Oh, hey, and she linked to Violet Blue's page! That's what I get for commenting before reading the article.

I've read Violet Blue's Girls Guide to Porn and found some of it helpful.

What I don't like about the "porn for women" is that it does indeed think we're all one Borg like entity and what I've seen of it presents itself as a lot of talking and "feelings" which is not something I'm looking for in my porn. I also tried watching the "natural" porn where they tout the "natural" bodies (and/or orgasms)and while I don't like the opposite end of the spectrum with the super fake everything some of the male performers in natural bodied porn just turned me off to the whole subgenre. *sigh* maybe I'm just too picky.

I tend to have a pretty grim take on what's out there, though I am not on board with the notion that sexually explicit visuals can't be both made and distributed in a way that respects all of the participants, the audience, and women as a whole. How that can happen is a much more complex issue.

One thing RKB takes on at the end is the notion of the term "porn" as a euphemism. Increasingly, I see it used to mean, roughly, "a detailed visual depiction that would only be of interest to someone with a nearly fetishistic interest in the thing depicted." For rock climbers, there's "bouldering porn." For woodworkers, there's "furniture porn" (guilty as charged; every time I go to Home Depot a copy of Fine Woodworking jumps right off the rack and into my cart before I can stop it). Speed Channel shows "Victory By Design," where Alain de Cadanet drives museum-quality vintage race cars at high speed, with obsessively true reproductions of their exhaust notes and lingering shots of the cars, still and moving and from every angle. Vintage race car porn.

Here's the question, and I am of two minds on it. Does this usage merely ratify the elevation of the crappy mainstream porn into the culture? If furniture and car pictures are "porn", does it make porn okay? Or does this usage somehow drive a wedge between a pejorative connotation to the word "porn" and the opposition to the actual material presented? Does it move us in the direction where "porn" has nothing negative associated with it linguistically, but opposition to misogynist imagery can be voiced without sounding like opposition to sex?

(Why do I suspect that answers to this will break down along the usual line?)

I wrote a paper in college about feminist porn. Basically I was wondering if it existed. Now, of course, everyone has their own definitions of what is or is not feminist, so I didn't get any solid definitions, but I found a lot of interesting stuff.

I find the concept for this book pretty patronizing. Maybe if I was married to a guy who never helped around the house I would find it funny, but I doubt I'd find it erotic. I think the idea that men doing housework is hot for women is equally unfair to women and men. Ergo, I won't be buying the book.

I also get annoyed with the "women like porn with a plot line" or "women like soft core porn" lines. While I'm sure some women prefer those things, that's hardly the kind of porn that I like. And a lot of my female friends feel the same way.

Personally, I like porn where the women actually look like they're enjoying themselves. I feel like that's one of the most bothersome things about mainstream porn. Obviously there are other issues...not the least of which is the unrealistic standard of beauty...but I think I could put up with that if the female orgasms weren't so obviously fake and if so many of the women didn't have that empty detached look on their faces. That part creeps me out.

I once read an article describing the programming on Food Network as "pornography appealing to a different instinct."

Personally, I like porn where the women actually look like they're enjoying themselves. I feel like that's one of the most bothersome things about mainstream porn. Obviously there are other issues...not the least of which is the unrealistic standard of beauty...but I think I could put up with that if the female orgasms weren't so obviously fake and if so many of the women didn't have that empty detached look on their faces. That part creeps me out.

Me too - if the people involved don't look happy, I find myself getting bored. Nobody ever smiles in pornographic videos, which I find rather upsetting.

The best porn movie I saw for women (in general terms all women), was the British movie "9 Songs." Some may say that it is not a porn, because it had a plot and a story, but it is graphically explicit, so it is considered hardcore.

I like to think of myself as an amateur pornographer, though I only write stories and screen plays, not take pictures or shoot films. Figuring out what turns women on is no easy task, but as I observe my wife and every other woman I know, I notice that they get more turned on by the actors in "chick flick" drama movies than they do over the prop like characters in main stream porn industry movies. I don't think that that means that women want a plot with their porn, but I think it shows that women want their men to have a personality in addition to their good looks. Where as men usually care less about porn actresses personalities, and focus exclusively on their bodies and the activities they engages in. Porn is basically determined a success by the quality of the performers (both male, and female) involved. No one really cares who writes or directs a porn movie.

If you ask men to list off their favorite porn actresses, they will usually give a long list of names pretty quick. However, I have found that few woman can give even one name when they are asked the same question about porn actors (males only).

I predict that someone is going to make a lot of money when they figure out what kind of men makes women swoon when they display their oral sex techniques.

One of my coworkers recommended Cinemax at night, and my wife's favorite is "Queer as Folk. (to get hot to)"

Sterotypically speaking women adore aproned men. But, the reality is that they really don't. I read other blogs by women that are turned on by that overbarring protection and there are others that are completely turned off by it. The sexist-free porn is on Cinemax after midnight.

Argh, Rachel mentions Elosia James (a wonderful romance writer) mentioning how all romance novels are "women porn" which is unbelievably stupid. I see it all the time, though, so I am not suprised. The thing is, genres which tend to appeal more to men- and I am not saying, of course, that no women read them- such as war novels and sci fi have just as many sex scenes (and keep in mind, not all romances have sex) as female-genred books. The difference is, no matter how well written and how fantastic the match and the characters and the humor and the awesomeness, women's books with the slightest hint of sex are dismissed as "women's porn." Meanwhile, men's books can have sex, and no one accusses them of beng "porn." I think the problem is two-fold. People want to have an excuse to dismiss books for women, and men have better porn options.

Anyone looking for good porn for women- Early to Bed in Chicago produced porn starring actual lesbian pairs, directed by a woman. They are fantastic- two and more in the future.

Yeah, I'm not sure you've noticed that the word "porn" doesn't mean what it meant 20 years ago. You know, language changes and evolves and we make bad words mean good things, we explode them and give them multiple meanings. "Porn" these days means "something you want" "a Utopian view"
"eye/brain candy"... you get the idea.

I'm not saying the book is good. I haven't looked at it. It sounds pretty stupid, like greeting card stupid, but harmless.

But I don't think anyone thinks the Porn For Women book is *actual* porn.

For those of you on livejournal, I've made a community called takebackthesexy for discussion of this sort of thing.

I'm still working on a community description, but have thrown a few posts up already, and would welcome others' input.

After some recent forays into the porn world - both the main stream and feminist variety - I have a couple of thoughts about it -

Guys in mainstream porn are gross. I think I can count on one hand the number of male performers I've ever seen who I've actually found attractive. More often than not, they look like the kind of men who would expose themselves to you on the subway, or who you would at least definitely NOT want to run into in a dark abandoned alley. I suppose that's a result of the fact that mainstream porn is definitely geared towards men (who could care less what the guy looks like, as long as the girls have giant breasts.)

On the other hand, I've seen the For The Girls website before, and haven't been too impressed by it either. It seems, well, a little soft to me, as if the ideology of being made for women only includes scenes of "after glow" and discounts anything more hard core. Granted, I haven't actually paid money to see the site in full, but based on the free tour, I'm just not really that interested.

I would agree with the previous comment that it's exciting to see women in porn who are enjoying themselves (not just staring off vacantly), and perhaps even further, to see women performers as the ones initiating and controlling the encounters - not necessarily in an S & M sense, but as being engaged participants in the activity and in being comfortable and confident enough in their bodies to be expressive of personality.

After some recent forays into the porn world - both the main stream and feminist variety - I have a couple of thoughts about it -

Guys in mainstream porn are gross. I think I can count on one hand the number of male performers I've ever seen who I've actually found attractive. More often than not, they look like the kind of men who would expose themselves to you on the subway, or who you would at least definitely NOT want to run into in a dark abandoned alley. I suppose that's a result of the fact that mainstream porn is definitely geared towards men (who could care less what the guy looks like, as long as the girls have giant breasts.)

On the other hand, I've seen the For The Girls website before, and haven't been too impressed by it either. It seems, well, a little soft to me, as if the ideology of being made for women only includes scenes of "after glow" and discounts anything more hard core. Granted, I haven't actually paid money to see the site in full, but based on the free tour, I'm just not really that interested.

I would agree with the previous comment that it's exciting to see women in porn who are enjoying themselves (not just staring off vacantly), and perhaps even further, to see women performers as the ones initiating and controlling the encounters - not necessarily in an S & M sense, but as being engaged participants in the activity and in being comfortable and confident enough in their bodies to be expressive of personality.

woops! sorry for the double post!

Yeah, it's weird. It's not just actresses that are bored - no one looks like they're having fun! It looks like WORK

The worst I saw was a series of scenarios that ALL went meet-->contrived attraction-->she goes down on her-->he goes down on her (briefly)-->they fuck unconvincingly for far too long with far too much zoom-->they orgasm unconvincingly. Oh, and one of the guys clearly couldn't keep it up. How turned on was I? *rolls eyes*

I don't think I need MORE storyline, just one that's not completely ridiculous. And sex that's realistic, that's more like the sex I have (and would like to have) than some mechanical routine.

Plenty of men I know really enjoy mainstream porn but equally acknowledge that it's crap and they'd enjoy something better. I think everybody is patronised by the dumbed-down sexuality of mainstream hardcore

"What I don't like about the "porn for women" is that it does indeed think we're all one Borg like entity and what I've seen of it presents itself as a lot of talking and "feelings"'
Actually, if you can find a sweet action magazine (mentioned in huffo post), you might get what want. Its actually made by women, for women. Its an independent zine so its not published very often. Some of the men are decidedly cuter than others but its definitely the best thing out there. Its like looking at a favorite lover just after sex. Check it out. www.sweetactionmag.com

Let's not forget erotic fanfic. I have friends who are devoted slash consumers.

I think I forgot to mention that the "porn" I like best consists entirely of text.

Ja! Who doesn't love Bust magazine's "One Handed Read"s?

Let's not forget erotic fanfic. I have friends who are devoted slash consumers.

Don't forget the writers :) There's something to be said for writing your own porn, and having friends write porn just for you.

Then there's hootisland.com , which isn't exactly "for women" but has a bunch of smiles. It also links to this: http://nakedmen-nudemen.com/silly/

Bah. Bust's One Handed Reads bore me. Last time, it was so preposterous that it made me laugh.