Ms Naughty Porn for Women Blog

Archive for October, 2010

I’ve recently put together a small site that features erotic movies that feature real sex.

Obviously all of the sex in porn movies is real, not simulated, but that’s not the focus of Real Sex Films. Rather, I wanted to compile a list of movies that either depict sex in a realistic manner or else make use of real couples. “Real” sex in this sense is sex that is not done solely for the cameras via the typical porn cliches. Rather, it’s a depiction of fucking that is more intimate, passionate, realistic, “average” (in the sense that it’s how a lot of people really do have sex) and yes, even loving.

Obviously the films of Tony Comstock fit the bill here but I’ve found a number of others that were worth including. Here’s a few:

Lovers: An Intimate Portrait: Jennifer and Steve (1993)
The blurb: Jennifer, a Manhattan stripper with a perfect body and an Ivy League master’s degree, and Steve, a talented filmmaker, bring objectivity and illumination to a much misunderstood, maligned and taboo aspect of human sexuality: the exchange and interplay of power and surrender in a dominant/submissive relationship. This film was directed by artist R.C. Horsch and produced by Candida Royalle.
Available From
Hot Movies: Download

Barcelona Sex Project (2007)
The blurb: Barcelona Sex Project is a feminist adult movie, created for women by women by Spanish auteur Erika Lust. The film discloses the private lives and sexuality of six individuals. Each are interviewed before settling down to masturbate on camera. The project is based on the conviction that women desire to know a person’s inner character (their beliefs, their character, their feelings, fears and passions) before becoming drawn to them on a sexually intimate level.
Available From
Gamelink: DVD or Download
Hot Movies: Download
Good Vibrations: DVD

Real Couples (2005)
The blurb: Four real-life gay couples show us how they do it! This is their first video celebrating sex between real-life couples. They interviewed each of these couples and asked them to speak about how they met, their sex-life together, their attraction to each other… and then they filmed them going at it uncensored. Come on this journey in the bedrooms of eight handsome men. REAL COUPLES. REAL SEX.
Available From
Gamelink: DVD or Download
Ms Naughty: DVD

Real Lesbian Sex: Jay and Pike (2010)
The blurb: Jay & Pike make a sexy couple, one with flaming red hair and the other bald and tattooed. Their sex involves a lot of passionate kissing, fondling and licking and scissoring. When the flavored lube comes out and the fingering begins, you know it’s going to get good and someone is going to take an entire hand!
Available From
Hot Movies: Download

I also compiled a list of “mainstream” films that feature real sex (unsimulated sex scenes).

Related Posts:

• I’m In Best Women’s Erotica 2012
• The Thought Of Her – Trailer
• Women And Male-Male Erotic Fiction
• The Guardian Does Porn For Women

Gawker pointed out this delightfully red, hot and steamy weather penis the other day. And here’s a few more.

Warm front:

Tornado warning

Tennessee Tornado Penis

Yes, it’s very juvenile, isn’t it? South Park has already been here:

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

OK, so I’ve been busy this week, haven’t had time to blog much. Here’s some pics to tide you over.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

You may have already seen this video by sex advice columnist Dan Savage. In it he and his husband urge gay teens to ignore the bullies at high school because life does get better.

Today I also watched this very moving speech by Texas city councillor Joel Burns, discussing his own experiences of bullying and the happy life he’s led since high school:

The “It’s Get Better” Project has now picked up speed and over 100 people have made videos talking about their own experiences of growing up gay. It seems that abuse and victimisation are par for the course for gay and lesbian teens (and also for many straight teens – being called a “fag” or a “dyke” is a common form of abuse, whether one is homosexual or not).

I applaud Dan for starting this campaign which aims to offer advice and support to teens and I think it’s created a much needed dialogue about the horror of bullying at high school.

I’m now pondering the underlying idea that teens have to just grit their teeth and bear it, at least until they leave high school (or even college). There’s almost a grim fatalism to the message, as though nothing else can be done. There are bullies, there always will be bullies. Just wait it out because you’re better than them.

This is essentially the same thing my mother said to me when I was 12, crying at the kitchen table because I was on the receiving end of the usual bitchy nastiness that so many girls endure at school. And it’s pretty much the same thing I said to my nieces a couple of years ago when they were being picked on by their school Queen Bee.

I understand the truth of it, of course. It does get better. And the people who are cruel and bigoted in high school don’t go anywhere. That’s the best they ever do in life.

But I wonder: why do we as a society just accept that bitchiness and bullying and hatred are par for the course at school? Does it always have to be that way? Is it something that inevitably happens because teenagers are just teenagers?

Last year I saw a fascinating documentary on the ABC’s Catalyst show called Whatever, The Science of Teens. It was looking at the different ways teenagers think due to the way their brains are still forming (see also this transcript). It showed that during adolescence, the parts of the brain that deal with social interaction and peer acceptance suddenly take on huge importance. Meanwhile, decision making ability goes out the window and risk taking becomes par for the course. There’s also a decrease in a teen’s ability to empathise with other people; being self-obsessed is common. This study found that girls become very concerned with how individual peers viewed them while boys focused on their status within the male pecking order.

So the science says that teens are especially vunerable to what other people think about them and that they can also lack empathy for others. In theory, the teen years are fertile ground for bullying and being bullied.

Is this why we just shrug and say “grin and bear it?” And is it even possible to imagine a way for teenagers to make it through adolescence without that pain?

I sometimes wonder why we as a society like to confine teenagers into high schools during those difficult years. In theory it’s because kids should be learning while their brains are still fresh. It’s a nice theory… but I’m not sure it’s accurate. Do you remember what you learned at school when you were 14 or 15? Or are your memories more involved with romance and looking cool in front of your friends? I know I’m pretty vague about my school work from that time but I can clearly recall episodes of bullying, along with embarrassing moments, earnest crushes and – thankfully – good times with my small group of nerdy friends.

Given the new information about what’s going on inside teenager’s heads, it’s a wonder we don’t do something else with them during that time, like mentoring them individually or just getting them to do menial work while they concentrate on their social lives. Surely throwing them all together into one place and letting them fight it out amongst themselves is a less-than-satisfactory solution? Of course, there’s all kinds of programs in schools now to prevent bullying but it’s the kind of problem that is very difficult to bring out into the open. And there’s all the added stress of social networks, meaning that harrassment can happen outside of school hours.

Maybe we just throw them all into high school to get them out of the way. Because, after all, teenagers are pretty annoying sometimes.

I was recently talking to a good friend who was part of the “popular” clique at school (we used to be deadly enemies). She and her group were all horrible to me and my friends… but they were also mean to each other, taking it in turns to ostracise a different girl every day. We talked about the whole dynamic of what went on and she said that all of the nastiness came from a single girl… but the others joined in to be part of the group, in the hope of not being the target the next day. It became a matter of self preservation. The “queen bee” enjoyed her power over the other girls and used bullying to maintain it.

Perhaps bullying is only ever the result of a few “bad eggs” who seek to be an “alpha” within their own social group. And the others follow so as not to become targets themselves. I guess the question is whether the restricted environment of high school helps these kinds of negative social interactions to flourish.

I do agree with Dan’s point here, though: the teen “bad eggs” usually get their negative attitudes from their parents. When those attitudes are homophobic, the inevitable result is that gay teens will be harrassed and bullied. And homosexual teens seem to be the easy target, the inevitable target, the ones who are more often on the receiving end of serious abuse and violence.

Does it always have to be this way? I don’t know the answer. I just wish there was a better response to the horror of high school than “grin and bear it.”

More about the It Gets Better Project here. And here’s the Youtube Channel.

Related Posts:

• Women And Male-Male Erotic Fiction

What a wonderful photo. This is NBA star Amare Stoudemire posing in the ESPN Body Issue. More pics here.

Related Posts:

• Librarian Porn. Feminist Porn.

This guy is just amazing. I’ve seen a few men attempt to bellydance before with mixed results. This guy just owns it. Incredible muscle control and strength, graceful yet still quite masculine. Turn that into a strip show and you will have women screaming even harder than they do during his performance.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Abortion is back in the headlines here in Australia because in Queensland a woman has today gone on trial for procuring an abortion. This is the first such prosecution in the state’s history, even though the law banning abortion was first introduced in 1899.

There were several pro choice rallies held around the country in support of Teagan and her boyfriend, although I’m disappointed to say they weren’t well attended. This might just be because people feel protests don’t achieve much. Despite this, the majority of Australians do support a woman’s right to choose – see here and here and here.

Technically a court ruling overturned the law in 1986, although this case appears to completely ignore that legal precedent. The Queensland government, with its first female premier, has been remarkably cowardly on the issue, refusing to repeal the 1899 law and instead wallpapering over the cracks with a few changes to legislation that seemingly make it OK to take RU486. But the case has had a huge chilling effect on the ability of women to obtain an abortion in Queensland and, if they are found guilty, will no doubt cause further erosion of a woman’s right to seek a termination.

I don’t want to go into too many details about this case as it’s already been covered elsewhere. The two SMH opinion pieces Abortion law stuck in the 19th Century and Abortion trial not just about women do an excellent job of summing up the case.

What’s inspired me to blog about this case, apart from the obvious feminist interest in the whole disaster, are the comments on those opinion pieces. Specifically, the way the pro-life/pro-choice arguments keep boiling down to the idea of “Is it life?”

I am pro choice, of course. I completely support the right of women to make choices about their reproductive health and about whether they want to have children. My body, my choice. Raising a child is a huge responsibility and if someone isn’t ready to be a parent, they shouldn’t have to be.

I honestly think that “Every child a wanted child” is the fundamental reason why we should support legal abortion. Kids deserve to be loved and raised properly. Given the plight of so many unloved and unwanted kids in this world, I think it’s better that women be able to choose whether they want to be a mother or not. If you are not up to doing the job, you shouldn’t be forced to do it.

The anti-abortionists (”pro-life”) are all about the rights of the child, and only the child. They don’t seem to take into account what happens after the birth of that baby; all they see is a life, a potential person who has a right to live.

Here’s the thing: I do see their point. But it doesn’t mean that I agree with them.

All the arguing about “when life begins” is essentially ridiculous. An egg is alive. A sperm is alive. When they join, they create a new cell. And that cell has the potential to go on and become a new conscious human being. But there is never a moment when that entity isn’t alive so it’s a moot point. And I am not going to deny that a zygote or embryo or fetus is a human.

Nonetheless, it is a bundle of cells that requires the womb of the mother in order to grow.

The question then becomes: when is a child viable? Or, perhaps more importantly, when do we say that a baby is a baby and not just a bundle of cells?

And this is where the various arguments get a little bogged down because you can probably argue all day about spinal cord growth and brain development and nerve endings and so on. The anti-abortionists say that the moment of conception is most important because that’s when the new individual begins. The pro choice argument is a little more vague on this topic. It seems the closer you get to birth, the more viable the child becomes and the less acceptable an abortion is.

I’m just going to come out and say where I stand: I understand that abortion involves killing a bundle of cells/embryo/fetus/baby/potential person. And I don’t have a problem with that – even when it involves late term abortions of disabled fetuses.

My reasons are this. It comes down to conflicting rights; the rights of the mother versus the rights of the potential child. And for me a grown, conscious woman’s life takes precedence.

An embryo/fetus/baby is not conscious. Even a newborn child is not fully conscious. For me, consciousness is the most important thing. Obviously I’m not advocating infanticide but it really does come down to that fact. Consciousness makes us who we are. We don’t have a soul, all we have is a brain and when the brain is not fully developed, there is no consciousness.

Anti-abortionists are arguing that an unconscious fetus is exactly the same as a grown adult and that it has a right to life. But that life is solely dependent on the mother, on her body, her time, energy, attention and care. They demand that the mother make physical, emotional, mental and financial sacrifices -for years – against her will for the benefit of the unborn child. Put simply, it’s not a fair transaction.

And not only is it unfair for the mother, it’s also unfair to the child. Better that the kid be wanted and properly looked after than a source of ongoing regret, spite and anger

I think I could take the “right to life” arguments more seriously if babies were instantly independent the moment they’re born. But they’re not and that’s exactly the point. A child is 20 years of your life. That’s a massive undertaking and it should always be done willingly and happily.

And it seems that most right wing “pro-lifers” are also against welfare for single mothers, sex education and contraception. They want the babies to be born and then don’t give a damn what happens afterwards. They also seem to hold the view that women who have abortions are all callous sluts (see The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion for examples of this attitude – where pro-lifers have abortions and are back picketing the clinic the next day).

But having an abortion is never an easy or simple choice. I’m sure that most women give it serious thought before they undergo a termination. And while the pro-life movement likes to make up statistics about “abortion grief”, the fact is that most women who have abortions feel relieved afterwards. They usually go on to have a family a little later, when they’re ready (although some don’t, and that’s fine too.) There are, of course, women who have finished having children and who choose to terminate a late-in-life accident. It’s not only young women who have abortions.

The reason it’s called “pro choice” is because it’s about trusting women to make the right choice. About understanding that unwanted pregnancy is a very stressful and difficult situation to be in, a situation that no woman takes lightly. It has to be about individuals making decisions according to their own needs and circumstances, independent of any religious authority that wants to dictate “morality” to them.

Nobody wants to have an abortion. It is ultimately a very sad thing. But it’s better to terminate an unwanted pregnancy and start again than to continue on and have an unwanted child.

On a personal note, I have never had an abortion. I think it’s mostly a matter of luck, although I have been fairly meticulous in my pill taking, simply due to my strong desire not to have children. My husband and I said from the beginning that we would terminate any accidents; thankfully I’ve never been confronted with the actual decision. I do know that it would have been hard, in spite of the beliefs I’ve just outlined. But I think that if I discovered I was pregnant tomorrow, I would be OK with having a termination.

I do have plenty of female friends who have had abortions. All of them say they don’t regret it. Some went on, built up their lives, relationships and careers and then had much-loved children. Others remain happily child free. None of them wanted to be in that situation but accidents happen, as they always will. They made a choice that was right for them at the time and I would never say that it was a wrong choice. And it makes me angry that others would judge them for it.

I suspect that this long blog post hasn’t covered any new ground. Still, it’s been useful for me to write it and to articulate exactly where I stand on this issue.

In looking for an image to accompany this post, I typed “abortion” into Google images. I then scrolled through the many gory and confroting images that anti-abortionists use to argue against abortion. And while I found the pictures horrific, I don’t resile from my position. Yes, termination is an awful thing. But the rights of the mother are greater than the rights of the unwanted, unborn, unconscious zygote/embryo/fetus/baby.

Every child a wanted child.

It’s the 21st century and it’s time the law reflected the modern-day ethical choices of women – and acknowledged reality.

Abortion should be legal.

Pic came from here.

Note:
I also recommend Leslie Cannold’s excellent book The Abortion Myth for a more thorough exploration of the issue.

“The women I interviewed, no matter what side of the abortion fence they were on,” writes Leslie Cannold in The Abortion Myth, “were clear that the fetus is alive, and abortion kills it. None of them, however, believed these facts proved that abortion was wrong.” Cannold criticizes pro-choice feminists for denying the fetus in an effort to bring the woman back into focus as the locus of pregnancy and the agent of decision-making. In her view, women are moral persons for whom the decision to abort derives less from a sense of rights or privacy and more from a broader evaluation of what the “right” thing to do is. This evaluation speaks to their attitudes towards pregnancy and motherhood, and the real difference between pro- and anti-choice women is their level of trust that other women will “act morally.”"

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Steve Martin, replete with spectacular prosthesis in 1987’s Roxanne makes a point about “that old saying about a man’s nose.”

Urban myth site Snopes says that the old saying is wrong.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts