Ms Naughty Porn for Women Blog
Ms Naughty looks at porn for women, the adult industry and sex in general.
I’m In Best Women’s Erotica 2012
Monday, December 5th, 2011
The Best Women’s Erotica books from Cleis Press are one of the longest-running erotica series. Violet Blue has been the editor since 2006 and she’s shown herself to be quite the talented curator of dirty stories.
The 2012 edition is out tomorrow (6th Dec) and I’m pleased to say that a story of mine made the grade this year. My story Tweetup is listed second and appears under my Louise Lush pseudonym.
Here’s a small excerpt:
“I should have recognised you,” Scott said as he handed me my glass.
“How?”
“Your hoop earrings. You wrote you always wore them. A few weeks ago?
I thought for a moment. “That’s right, I did. Gee, you pay attention.”
He smiled. “I like your tweets.”
I laughed. “Now there’s a 21st century compliment.”
We fell into a very easy conversation, comparing thoughts on politics, computers and whether Stephen Fry was worth following anymore. Scott seemed to hang on every word I said, eager to hear my opinion, his eyes always on me, seemingly oblivious to the rest of the room. I felt flattered by his attention and found myself responding in kind, drawn to his presence, keen to hear what he had to say. The wine had started to kick in and I felt warm and happy in his company. I also felt more than a little flirtatious.
“Are you married, Geekguy?” I asked.
“Uh, no, not yet,” he said. “IT guy, remember? That means lots of lonely nights at home eating two minute noodles and playing World of Warcraft.”
I nodded, laughing at the stereotype. “Yeah, me too. Just me and the frogs.”
“And the porn.”
I shrugged, blushing. “Uh, yeah, the porn.”
“I like how you tweet about porn.”
Best Women’s Erotica 2012 is available from Amazon.
Related Posts:
A Billion Badly Researched Assertions
Friday, June 24th, 2011
There’s a logical fallacy called “cherry picking” which is essentially this: you come up with a hypothesis. You then seek out data to back your assertions. You ignore any contradictory evidence and only use the stuff that supports your theory.
Then you write a book about it. Cue the articles in major newspapers and interviews on TV. Suddenly, your delightful theory is accepted uncritically as fact.
Thus, we come to A Billion Wicked Thoughts, the book by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam. It’s subtitle is “What the World’s Largest Experiment Reveals about Human Desire” and it’s main idea is that the authors have revealed fundamental differences between men and women by looking at internet porn (or, specifically searches for internet porn). You’ll never guess what that fundamental difference is. Yep, men like sex, women don’t.
I’m a bit late with this blog post. Plenty of other bloggers have already pointed out the various problems with this book and the methodology used and I figured I didn’t need to add my voice to the protest. Indeed, I didn’t pay a lot of attention when it first came out.
But today I discovered that the researchers had asserted that the (alleged) lack of popularity of For The Girls was proof that women are only interested in romance fiction. And well, fuck that, I’m kind of angry.
Before I go there, let me direct you to the article (and assertion) in question. It’s this: Censored by the Wall Street Journal: The Female Sexual Brain in Psychology Today. Yes, the same Psychology Today that recently published an article saying black women are objectively less attractive.
Here is the main thing they have to say about the differences between men and women when it comes to sex:
“Men seek out visuals and go straight for orgasm. Women prefer stories and often favor conversation over culmination.”
Sound familiar? It’s the same thing Kinsey was asserting 60 years ago, back when there was no porn for women. It’s the same idea that is repeated ad nauseum in any discussion about women and porn. And it’s the same idea I’ve been battling for the last 11 years.
Note the blanket statement about what men like and what women like? No detail, no nuanced acknowledgement of the wildly varying sexuality and tastes of men and women. And no concept of bisexuality or homosexuality or queerness or transgenderism at all.
(Let me say this – I’ve been called out on this in the past, saying “women like this sort of thing”. And they were right. I’ve done my best to change my views. It’s wrong to say “all women like this” because it’s just too broad a statement to be accurate).
This use of search statistics to support the “men are from Mars, women are from Venus” idea was apparent from the very beginning of their research. This was posted on Slash fan fiction sites in 2009:
We’re deeply interested in broad-based behavioral data that involves romantic or erotic cognition and evinces a clear distinction between men and women. (my bold) Fan fiction matches this criteria perfectly. Let us make clear, however: fan fiction is not the subject of our research. Our subject is the human brain. For us, fan fiction is a wonderfully rich source of data–like single-neuron recordings in rhesus monkeys–albeit a unique and invaluable one.
Suffice to say, the researchers fell foul of the fanfic community on whom they based many of their conclusions about women and romance – the response can be seen here.
So, on to the bee in my bonnet. It’s this:
The five most popular adult sites for men are all within the top 100 most popular sites on the entire Internet. All are webcam or video sites featuring anonymous graphic sex, such as PornHub, the most popular adult YouTube clone, which draws about 13.9 million visitors a month. In contrast, the most popular adult video site for women, For The Girls, draws a meager 100,000 a month (and up to half of those visitors are gay men). All across the planet, with women free to access any erotic content they wish, they mostly seek out character-driven stories of sexual relationships: romance novels, erotic romance (sometimes called EroRom or Romantica®), fan fiction, slash fiction, gay romance novels, and erotic stories.
The most popular “erotic” site for women is fanfiction.net, featuring more than 1.5 million visitors a month and more than two million stories, about half of which are tagged as “romance.”
The bit in bold is their assertion about For The Girls. According to them, FTG is a minnow in terms of traffic and half of our members are gay men. That’s quite the statement to make when you have never contacted the owners and don’t have access to a site’s statistics or membership details. Let me say this now: it’s totally inaccurate.
Today I sent them an email asking where they got the data to make such statements.
I can only assume they’ve come to this conclusion by looking at the figures on Alexa, an Amazon-owned company that keeps track of people’s surfing habits via a toolbar. As alluring as that data can be, it’s not very accurate. It relies on people willingly installing their software, allowing themselves to be tracked. And the info is often 3 months out of date. Interestingly, Alexa says our main audience is 65 year old women without children – exactly the kind of person who would unknowingly install spyware or a toolbar.
But wait! Here I read that the authors contacted fellow women’s erotica site Sssh.com. Interesting. Did Sssh give them the figures on FTG? If so, why would the authors listen to a competitor site who also does not have access to our stats? And if they contacted Sssh, why isn’t THAT site the one they quote in their Psychology Today article?
I’m not about to publicly bandy about the traffic figures for FTG. That’s given out on a need-to-know basis. But rest assured, we get a shitload more traffic that 100,000 visitors a month. A metric shitload.
To be honest, though, I’m more offended about the assertion about the gayness or otherwise of our membership. Assuming they relied on the dodgy data from Alexa… there’s absolutely NOTHING on there that discusses the sexual orientation or otherwise of site visitors (and if there was, well, damn, there’s bound to be a human rights violation in it). I can only assume this assertion is based on Playgirl’s readership figures – which have absolutely nothing to do with us.
The fact is, I have no idea how many of our members identify as gay. We don’t collect that kind of data. Asking would be rude. And, what’s more, it doesn’t fucking matter. What I do know is that the majority of names on members’ credit cards are female.
Yes, we do get men joining For The Girls but I don’t know whether they’re straight or gay. Given that our content is half straight hardcore and half nude men, I don’t think it’s remotely accurate to say we resemble a gay site or that we are trying deliberately to cater to gay men. Our target audience has always been straight women. I do get emails from straight men thanking us for offering a more positive version of porn or saying they joined to share the experience with their wife or girlfriend.
Beyond this, let me say that comparing FTG to a fan fiction site (or free mainstream tube sites) is not even remotely comparing like to like. Notice how the authors called us an “adult video site” as if we’re the same as Pornhub? We’re a membership site that requires people to be aged over 18. A great deal of our visitors arrive there having clicked on an ad, knowing we’re a commercial product. We self identify as a porn site and offer hardcore content but we’re also a magazine with articles and fiction. Compare that with your average free fan fiction site. It’s apples and oranges. What’s more… FTG doesn’t offer slash or gay fiction (although we’re changing that soon). So right there you’ve got a vast difference in individual tastes.
And that’s the problem with this research. It doesn’t seem to understand the idea that women’s tastes ARE different and different women will seek out different things on the net depending on who they are, how old they are and what turns them on at that very moment.
So to use For The Girls as “proof” of the assertion that “women aren’t visual” and are more turned on by romance novels or “conversation” is just a nonsense.
By the way, let me say I’m so disappointed in this research. The idea of looking at internet porn searches IS interesting. For one thing, it seems to suggest that Gail Dines’s assertion that men are seeking out violent porn is way off the mark. But I couldn’t in good conscience use this data in a debate.
If they can’t get the facts right about For The Girls, what other information did they fudge or fuck up?
If or when I get a reply from the authors as to the source of their assertion, I’ll add it to this post.
* Note: I thought I’d include the above image from the Billion Wicked Thoughts website. Nice indication of the gender stereotypes they’re selling.
——————-
Update 25th June
I’ve had a reply from Sai Gaddam. He says they emailed us in July 2009 and got no reply. I searched back, couldn’t find any emails from them. Perhaps they went into spam.
Sai says:
We used the web analytics services Quantcast and Alexa to obtain traffic and demographic estimates. Both report a monthly traffic of less than 100k.
Quantcast also reports that 54% of the visitors are male and the most correlated site are freebuddymovies.com and outpersonals.com, which are both categorized as Gay.
We understand that these numbers rely on random sampling and are estimates — but reasonably useful ones.
We will be happy to update these articles with more accurate information about your site if you can share any relevant data with us.
Quantcast is an analytics service that relies on websites to volunteer their own data by inserting code onto their pages. When a website does not use Quantcast (and For The Girls doesn’t), they estimate. I have no idea how they estimate, but the figures they apparently pull out of thin air look impressive. Thus, according to Quantcast, 54% of our traffic is male and the majority of our surfers are black. Uh, OK.
There’s also an “Audience Also Likes” feature which says “The people who visit forthegirls.com are also likely to visit these categories and sites.” Apparently our surfers are “likely” to visit Outpersonals, Ebaums World and Urban Dictionary.
The truthiness presented by this information was “reasonably useful” enough for our intrepid authors to present it as fact and then use us to prop up their assertion that women aren’t visual.
Not good enough. As I said, if they fudged the stats here, what else did they fuck up?
Related Posts:
Cock Colouring Books
Tuesday, March 8th, 2011
Who said that colouring-in was only for kids? It seems that the folks from Big Book Alt Press wanted in on the action and thus they created the Big Coloring Book Of Cocks, the Big Coloring Book of Vaginas and the Big Coloring Book of Sex Positions.
The Cock book offers “30 pages of illustrated cocks with games such as word search, connect the dots, and an ‘all about my cock’ section.
A friend posted on Facebook about the Vagina (it should be vulva!) one. One of the comments was: “Stay in the lines, now out of the lines, now in the lines…” I guess the cock book would require long, sweeping and firm colouring strokes getting progressively harder and harder.
Related Posts:
Librarian Porn. Feminist Porn.
Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011
During our December photoshoot I was trying to think about funny and artistic ways we could shoot our male models beyond the usual “I’m naked with my hard cock out” pic. I did a few artistic rip offs, as you can see in the post The Artistic Male Centerfold.
These photos were inspired by my bookshelf. More specifically, I thought my collection of feministy, porny titles would probably look much better if I got a naked man to hold them.
As you can see, Dan here does an excellent job of holding my books for me. I used to be a librarian before I started to make porn. Apparently the “sexy librarian” has become a porn cliche (she rips off her glasses and shakes out her hair!) but only when depicting women. I thought I’d turn the tables.
I also deliberately chose those books because I wanted to make a statement about feminism and porn. The books in the pile include The Porn Report, The Hite Report, both of Nancy Friday’s books on female fantasies, Susie Bright’s Sexual State of the Union and The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf. I also included the weighty Attorney General’s Committee on Pornography report which was the result of Andrea Dworkin’s famous campaign against porn.
When we take a photo of a naked man, it’s still a revolutionary act. We have a lot of history behind us, including a history of repression and censorship. But we stand on the shoulders of women like Shere Hite and Nancy Friday and Candida Royalle and all the rest.
I admit, I had to photoshop the second pic. I don’t own a copy of Gail Dines’ anti-porn book Pornland. I intended to buy it for the photo session but was shocked to discover it was over $40 to buy. I found myself reluctant to contribute money to that particular author, given that she is so unrelentingly negative in her portrayal of porn and in favour of censorship. So we got Dan to hold another book and I’ve pasted in the cover.
Still, makes a nice image, don’t you think?
Gail Dines insists porn is exploitative. Are we exploiting the young and delightful Dan by taking a photo of him like this? I’d say no; we paid him well and we didn’t make him do anything he didn’t want to do. He had originally planned to be full frontal naked but he changed his mind. That was OK, we still paid him what we promised and everyone was happy.
Are women being harmed by this photo? Uh, I’m not sure. Anyone? How are you coping with this image? Is it causing you to turn to drugs, or to rush out and have abortions, or whatever harm it is that’s supposed to come from viewing porn? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Has this photo made you addicted to porn? Not sure. Maybe I should check back in an hour or so.
Anyway I hope you like this pic. It’s my final contribution to Lady Porn Day. At least, until tomorrow.
Related Posts:
Where The Hell Is My Prince Charming?
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
Gorgeous cartoon from Stuff No One Told Me, via Erika Lust.
I think we need to make this point a little more often. Romance novels are often derisively called “porn for women” and, while this is inaccurate in a lot of ways, it does make a point about unrealistic fantasies. Both porn and romance/fairytales offer a fantasy version of the opposite sex and depict sex and relationships in a very unrealistic way.
Interestingly, there isn’t the same moral panic about girls reading teenage romance novels as there is about boys looking at porn. But maybe it’s something we need to talk about more.
Just speaking from personal experience, I used to love Sweet Dreams and similar girly romance books when I was 14 and it led to plenty of confusing experiences when I finally got boys to pay attention to me. I expected them to act a certain way and floundered when they didn’t. I wouldn’t say it was a major problem, really, but it meant I was somewhat deluded about how this whole “love” thing was supposed to work.
Thankfully, it all worked out OK for me in the end and I did marry my Prince Charming. I just had to get used to the fact that he farts.*
Still, it’s a question worth asking: do romance novels encourage girls to have a warped view of men? Of relationships? Of sex? And does it feed into the general world view that sells Men Are From Mars-type books? Does it encourage the Cosmo-style idea that men are mysterious creatures who are afraid of committment and must be seduced with feminine wiles?
Or is this another case of not giving young women enough credit? Are romance novels, like porn, just a bit of easy entertainment?
And since I’m asking questions, here’s one: why don’t boys (in general) read romance? Is it because, like porn for women, there are no books that actually dare to offer male-friendly stories that focus mainly on love and relationships?
It’s an intriguing idea, romance for men. I’m now wondering what it would look like. Excuse me while I go away and see if I can find anything like it on the net.
* As do I!
Related Posts:
Books About Cunnilingus
Thursday, May 20th, 2010I’m revamping one of my favourite sites Pure Cunnilingus* and it’s partly why my blog has been so quiet this week. I’ve done a bit of research into books on cunnilingus so thought I’d repost the info here.
She Comes First: The Thinking Man’s Guide To Pleasuring A Woman
by Ian Kerner
Dispelling the widely held myth of genital penetration as the apogee of sexual pleasure, Kerner, who holds a doctorate in clinical sexology, offers this witty, well-researched manual for “consistently leading women to orgasm” through cunnilingus. Loaded with practical anatomical information (the clitoris has 18 distinct parts, and more nerve fibers than any other part of the human body) and graphic line drawings, the book also touches on the less mechanical, more psychological aspects of oral sex, including the three assurances every woman needs from her lover to feel comfortable: (1) “you enjoy it as much as she does”; (2) “there’s no rush”; and (3) “Her scent is provocative, her taste powerful: it all emanates from the same beautiful essence.”
Since studies show the average woman takes about 20 minutes to reach her first orgasm during a typical sex session, while men take a mere four minutes, Kerner advises men to delay their own climax and make oral sex “coreplay” (”the substantive phase in which sexual tension builds, culminates and then releases itself through the female orgasm”), instead of foreplay. Breaking down six stages of coreplay, from the “first kiss” to orgasm, Kerner speaks to both beginners and more seasoned lovers. His candor concerning his own bout with sexual dysfunction adds a compassionate tone and credibility to this decidedly pro-female methodology.
Oral Sex She’ll Never Forget: 50 Positions and Techniques That Will Make Her Orgasm Like She Never Has Before
by Sonia Borg
For many women intercourse isn’t enough to get them from “oh” to “oh-YES!”. Getting a woman to orgasm has more to do with movement of your lips than what you do with your hips. This ultimate oral sex guide teaches you all of the mouth moves you need to go down on a woman skillfully.
Oral Sex She’ll Never Forget gives 50 unique cunnilingus experiences from start to finish. You’ll learn how to combine positions, mouth moves, hand strokes, sex toys, seduction and setting to create the most exciting oral sex experience for her. Surprise your lover with something new and exciting.
Cunnilingus: Better Oral Sex
by Ian Bendtsen
Ian Bendtsen has for many years practiced cunnilingus – the art of giving oral pleasure to women – with a rather large number of women in a sexually emancipated milieu. In this book he tells his story openly, wanting to share his knowledge and experience. In praise and for pleasure for both men and women. Cunnilingus – better oral sex is a book about pleasure, pleasuring each other. It is the result of gentle pressure from many of the writer’s friends, both male and female, over the past years, urging him to write a book about cunnilingus. Ian Bendtsen is 38 years old and holds a degree from the Business School in Aarhus. He works as a senior consultant of business development and innovation. The writer has for many years been part of a sexually emancipated milieu – and he is the unofficial European champion of cunnilingus.
The Ultimate Guide to Cunnilingus: How to Go Down on a Woman and Give Her Exquisite Pleasure
by Violet Blue
Blogger, author and sex expert Violet Blue provides everything you ever wanted to know about cunnilingus. Full of facts, advice and even erotic fiction, this book is a must-have for anyone contemplating the fine art of pussy licking.
Blurb: The Ultimate Guide to Cunnilingus is a complete step-by-step guide to oral sex for everyone – men and women! Inside has all you need to know to give and receive exquisite oral pleasure. Not only does this book include techniques for mind-blowing orgasms, advanced positions, tips and tricks, toys, games, fantasy and power play, and helpful tips on preparation and hygiene, but it also has a clear, illustrated guide to the female anatomy and what to do with it! In between each chapter, is a steamy short story by Alison Tyler to keep you motivated. Also, this book is friendly to all sexual preferences.
The Guide To Eating Out
by Palmer Strong
Everything You Know About Oral Sex is Wrong and I Can Help You Fix That! What you’ll learn in this book: – The critical things you must do within five minutes of getting her panties off – How to read her body language, so you’ll know exactly what she wants.even if she doesn’t say anything – How to make a woman feel totally comfortable with your tongue between her legs. even if it’s the very first time you’re together – The one, simple thing you can do during oral sex with a woman that will build sexual tension and leave her eagerly waiting for more – How to work a woman up to the “I must have him!” feeling of ecstasy, which will leave her begging you for something more than just your tongue – What you must do in the bedroom to keep a woman interested in you forever or at least as long as you’re interested – The one mistake almost all men do, which actually repels women. and often shuts the door on any chances you have of her wanting to have intercourse – How to make a great and lasting impression on every woman you meet and eat.
Cunnilingus:: 50 Ways To Lick Your Lover
by Brian Hodges
50 ACTUAL ways to lick your lover! Want to master the beautiful art of cunnilingus? You can now learn everything you ever wanted to know about pleasuring the vagina with your mouth… but were too afraid to ask about. This is the most comprehensive book ever made on woman focused oral sex, including 50 mild to wild techniques to try on your lover. This book is the master collection of years of research into various techniques, movements, patterns, speeds, directions, pressure points, and general combinations as it relates to her most feminine of openings. Forget an orgy or a three-way; you can have more fun 1 on 1 just following this book. Open a bottle of wine. Take off her shirt. Take off her bra. Light a candle as she gets topless. Admire her nipples getting hard in anticipation. Take off her pants, so she is almost naked. Take off her panties, so she is fully nude. Lay her down on her back. Open her legs. Then, try any quantity or combination of the 50 steps to really light her fire.
This book Includes 100+ illustrations with explanatory text. Straight men, as well as new lesbians can benefit from the techniques in this book. You will travel from her breasts to her ass exploring all of her erogenous zones, but will focus on the most important target; her clitoris, or “clit”. Some people will view this as XXX, porn, or NC-17, and it is likely to be banned by some countries… but what it truly is… is a beautiful oral version of the Kama Sutra. Oral meets tantric, with 50 easy to follow steps and ideas to try. Find her own favorite combination of techniques, and keep improving on it….
Tasting Her: Oral Sex Stories
The primal sense of taking in the essence, taste, smell, and sexy up-closeness of a lover is a powerful aphrodisiac that affects one physically, mentally, and emotionally. Once this special connection is made, the heat of desire, passion, and lust focus before one’s eyes and tie arousal directly to them. Tasting Her explores the ultimate joys of oral sex from a distinctly male point of view.
“The book is a triumph of erotic fiction, offering a myriad of wonderful explorations of female oral sex, all of them different and all of them compelling.”
* If you followed the link to Pure Cunnilingus, you’ll see it’s a bit dated. In only a few days I’m relaunching it with a new tour, thousands more photos and a stash of sexy videos, plus more articles and fiction. I love this site and it’s going to be soooo much better, very soon.
Related Posts:
Great Reading: Bonk
Tuesday, April 13th, 2010
I’m helping a friend out with his online bookshop today which means I’ve spent several hours cataloguing books and wishing I had time to read them all.
I’m pleased to say I’ve encountered a number of great books about sex but the one I’m dying to get my hands on is Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Sex & Science by Mary Roach.
This is a book that offers you a huge number of weird and wonderful scientific facts about sex and at the same time aims to make your sex life better. What more could you want from a book?
Here’s the official blurb:
If you can transplant a face, then why not a penis? Why doesn’t Viagra help women or, for that matter, pandas? Does an orgasm boost fertility? Cure hiccups? Do the earlobes swell during sex? Can a person think herself to orgasm? Can a dead man get an erection? Can Kegeling cure erectile dysfunction? Can Broadway musicals cause it? Is vaginal orgasm a myth?
The study of sexual physiology – what happens, and why, and how to make it happen better – has been a paying career or a diverting sideline for scientists as far-ranging as Leonardo da Vinci, James Watson and Napoleon Bonaparte’s great grand-niece Marie. The research has taken place behind the closed doors of laboratories, brothels, MRI centres, pig farms, sex-toy R & D labs, and Alfred Kinsey’s attic. Mary Roach has devoted the past two years to stepping behind those doors. The result is Bonk – everything you wanted to know about sex but couldn’t imagine that someone in a white lab coat had studied. Few things are as fundamental to human happiness as satisfying sex. Bonk is both an ode to a fascinating and vital pursuit and a reminder that there is still much to learn. Sexual arousal and orgasm are two of the most complex, delightful, utterly amazing scientific phenomena on earth. Sexology, as Roach approaches it, is right up there too.
So the amazing bookshop I’m helping out is Embiggen Books which is a science, art and reason-celebrating bookshop. If you’re Australian you’ll find it cheaper to order from this shop than Amazon thanks to the reduced postage.
They’ve also got a surprising amount of books about sex – but they’re all guaranteed to be smart, sexy and engrossing.
Related Posts:
Great Moments In Australian Censorship
Friday, January 29th, 2010
So, while I’m waiting for the Classification Board to officially say that they don’t think female ejaculation is urine, I thought I’d compile a quick list of other things that have been banned by our great and heroic censors in the last decade.
* In 2009 Jennifer Lyon Bell’s gorgeous erotic film Matinee was due to screen at the Melbourne Underground Film Festival. The ACB refused the festival permission to screen the film due to explicit sexual content. At around the same time, the ACB gave Lars Von Trier’s sexually violent film Antichrist an R rating. It features footage of a woman cutting off her own clitoris.
* In 2009 the game Aliens vs Predator was classified RC (banned) but the decision was reversed on appeal and the game given an M15+ rating. There is currently no rating available for adult games in Australia.
* In October 2009 Even More Intimate Moments, a DVD from adult site Abby Winters, was classified RC following the raid on the site’s offices in June. Police seized over 30 DVDs and submitted them for classification. All but that one were rated X. No reason has been given for the RC rating of this particular film.
* In 2008 police raided the gallery showing an exhibition of photographer Bill Henson’s photographs, alleging that the photos were child porn. Controversy ensued, charges were suggested but in the end the photos were rated G by the Board.
* In 2007 the OFLC (now ACB) refused to grant a festival exemption to Tony Comstock’s erotic documentary Ashley and Kisha: The Right Fit because his past three films had been classifed X. The film was thus banned from screening at MUFF even as an equally explicit film called Destricted played the same night at a festival across town. Another six films were also banned from the festival.
* In 2007 The Peaceful Pill Handbook, a euthanasia guide by Dr Philip Nitschke, was rated RC. The website was included on the ACMA’s leaked blacklist and will presumably be blocked by the proposed internet filter.
* In 2006 the Queerdoc festival was due to screen Tony Comstock’s erotic documentary Damon and Hunter: Doing It Together however the OFLC refused to grant the film a festival exemption, effectively banning it.
* In 2005 the uncut version of 70s epic Caligula was re-classifed as RC. The same year saw 9 Songs rating changed to X18+ in South Australia, heavily restricting its availability.
* In 2005 an Australian film made by teenagers called Welcome to Greensborough was rated RC because it contained explicit sex scenes performed by the filmmakers themselves. They subsequently reshot with adult performers. Another Australian film called 70K was banned because it depicted the activities of a graffiti crew..
* In 2003 Ken Park was classified RC. Margaret Pomeranz led a protest against the banning, risking arrest, but nothing changed.
* Pasolini’s 1975 film Salo was briefly available from 1993 to 1998 but has since been re-classified RC numerous times at the request of politicians such as Liberal MP Trish Draper.
* In 2002 Baise-Moi was originally rated R18+ but the rating was changed to RC on appeal by the Attorney General Daryl Williams. Cinemas kept showing the film after the ban date, saying they would only stop when police intervened. Christian politician Fred Nile then mounted a campaign to ensure DVDs of the film could not be imported into Australia.
* In 2001 an article about genital cosmetic surgery in Australian Women’s Forum was forced to black out the “before and after” photos illustrating the story due to a ruling form the OFLC that the magazine was “including too much genital detail”. Ironically, the story was about how young women were becoming paranoid about their genitals and turning to surgery because the censored images in porn were giving them a false idea about how labia should look.
* In 2000 the adult film Dreamquest was rated RC due to a non-sexual act of violence (the protagonist hits a guard on the head) which was a necessary part of the plot.
For more info on films and books that have been banned, visit the Refused Classification site and Libertus’ excellent Banned and Challenged Information list. You should also read this excellent article by Helen Vnuk about the insanity of Australia’s censorship laws.
Related Posts:
Beyond Heaving Bosoms
Thursday, May 21st, 2009Romance novels have long been considered to be trashy, something that plenty of women read but should not brag about. Now there are feminists standing up for their right to read good romantic fiction. Beyond Heaving Bosoms: The Smart Bitches Guide to Romance Novels recommends the good stuff. There’s a great interview with the author here.
I liked this quote.
MV: Why should feminists read romance novels?
SW: It’s a 50-plus-year-old industry comprised mostly of women writers operating their own businesses and producing a genre about women’s self-actualization, pursuit of autonomy, and acquisition of sexual agency for an audience made mostly of women, who buy over $1.4 billion dollars worth of books a year. No, no, nothing feminist or even subversive about that.
Related Posts:
Are Erotic Book Covers Sexist?
Friday, November 7th, 2008
Thanks to The Girl for pointing me in the direction of Erotica Cover Watch. This is a new blog that asks the question: why are only women featured on the covers of erotic books?
It’s a very good point and the topic naturally delves into the whole feminist issue of the male gaze and the continued way that straight women are still considered to be non-visual.
It all comes down to official marketing wisdom which says that women on covers sell and men don’t. That’s why women’s magazines like Cosmopolitan don’t feature guys. Indeed, I suspect Playgirl was one of the few magazines to flaunt this official rule and that was probably only because they were marketing themselves to gay men.
The funny thing about this is I remember having this conversation over ten years ago with Helen Vnuk, then editor of Australian Women’s Forum, the Aussie adult mag for women. The editorial staff were busting to put some of the hunky guys on the cover, especially considering they were delightfully naked in the middle. Nope, said marketing, not doable. And I think the bean counters then proceeded to bring out sales figures that showed the covers featuring couples didn’t sell as well as solo women.
It was the last act of defiance for AWF that their final issue did feature a guy – and he was pretty hot too as you can see.
I suspect that women are just trained to see other women on a cover as normal… and of course the continuing justification of the need to make sales turns it into a self-fulfilling prophesy. On top of that there’s homophobia, which dictates that a guy won’t want to be seen reading a book that features a hunky, half naked man, in case people assume he’s gay and – possibly – beat him up. Much safer to go with the girly pinup pic, right?
The compromise is, of course, to feature a couple, but that rarely happens either. Is it considered too raunchy? Or is it cheaper to only shoot one model?
In any case, I’m glad someone is making a fuss about this. Maybe next year’s Best Women’s Erotica, which is absolutely and utterly aimed at women, should have a guy or a couple on it. Maybe we should ask Violet and Cleis Press what they think.
Related Posts:
Mills And Boon Gets Spicy In The UK
Tuesday, September 9th, 2008Romance publishers Mills and Boon are 100 years old this year and they’re about to launch the Spice erotica imprint in the UK, according to The Independent. In the past, M&B books only allowed sex within the confines of a long term relationship. Spice, however, features stories where people “have sex for enjoyment.”
Phew, imagine that?
The article has an interesting timeline of erotic milestones in the Mills and Boon books. Like the first masturbation scene was in 1973 and the first oral sex scene was in 1982.
“There are other places to kiss,” the hero darkly informs the heroine of Antigua Kiss, who promptly surrenders to “waves of ecstasy”.
Wa-hey!
Related Posts:
Erica Lust To Release “X For Women”
Friday, September 5th, 2008
The always-busy Erika Lust is due to release a new book this month called “X For Women” (more info here). The book is intended to be a guide for women who want to know more about porn and features various discussions about the porn industry, how to choose the right adult movie and lists of recommendations.
Erika says: “We can and must be able to enjoy ourselves without feeling offended. I will take you through the history of the genre, how men’s sexuality and values have been imposed, new feminine and feminist adult movies, recommended films and where to find them, special online shops for women, how to watch explicit films at home, which sub-genres could be more appealing and more.”
She has created the book with the help of two graphic artists and, judging by the preview pages, it certainly makes an impact.
The book contains a chapter called “When, Where and How Much?” While the book focuses on films rather than websites, I hope I get something of a look in. Websites do tend to get ignored in these discussions which can be disappointing.
The book is due to launch sometime this month and will appear in English and Spanish editions.
Related Posts:
Books + Dicks = YAY
Friday, August 8th, 2008I’m up to my neck in reading entries from the short story competition at the moment, not much time for the blog. So here’s a great pic for Friday: A man whose cock can double as a bookshelf.
Via AAG.
Related Posts:
Dirty, Dirty Girls
Friday, July 4th, 2008
Last week I reviewed the new erotica for women book Dirty Girls for For The Girls. In a previous post I expressed concern at the cliquey comments on the back, but I’m pleased to say that the inside is fabulous. Don’t judge a book by its cover!
The collection is chock full of naughty sexual adventures starring women who aren’t afraid to enjoy themselves. These are dirty girls indeed, greedy as they are for pleasureable, unusual or challenging experiences. You’ll find lesbianism, threesomes, bondage, power play, voyeurism and public sex within these pages, and a whole lot more.
Some of the stories are confronting and evoke strong emotion. Others make you want to curl up with a throbbing vibrator and just get down to business.
Dirty Girls sets out to create a hip and edgy vibe, one that is divorced from idea that women’s erotica is all about “soft-focus” romantic sex. I’m not going to go into the legitimacy of whether women’s porn really fits that mould or not. What is important here is that this book offers female readers a nice swathe of erotic variety and adds to the growing collection of quality women’s erotic fiction on the market today.
I liked it a lot. Get it from Amazon.
Related Posts:
Dirty Girls
Tuesday, April 29th, 2008It seems that the canon of women’s literary erotica is growing, and that’s a good thing.
The latest book release is Dirty Girls, edited by Rachel Kramer Bussell. I received my review copy the other day but I haven’t had much of a chance to read it. The few stories I have read have been amazing, so I think it’s worth checking out. Here’s the official blurb off the back:
What do women really want? To be sensually seduced or pressed up against the wall for a quickie? To be tantalized by a peep show or the chance to join the mile high club?
Acclaimed erotica writer and editor Rachel Kramer Bussel knows: They want it all. They want to be worshiped, ordered around, sent blindly into ecstasy, and made hot in front of a mirror. They want strangers bearing ice cubes on a hot day and to be the party favor passed around among guests. They want sex at the office and in the great outdoors and on trains and airplanes. They want sex with the whole United States of America (or, at least, part of it). They want to be wooed, seduced, flirted with, taken. They want to handpick their lovers and make them do their bidding. They want men, women, and sometimes both at the same time.
I have to say, there are two recommendation quotes on the back that I found offputting. One is from Joanna Angel, who says: “Finally, a book about what girls REALLY think about. Well, maybe not every girl, but the dirty ones… and those are the ones who really count.”
Another quote is by Susannah Breslin who says: “…a collection of erotically charged short stories that affirms that dirty girls are the new black.”
These quotes irked me. I realise they’re all about appealing to those who think that erotica for women somehow always means flowers and romance, but is there any need to start imposing an “us and them” rhetoric onto it? It’s like there’s this dichotomy of sluts versus housewives, or something like that. Rachel Kramer Bussell herself says that women can be both “dirty and sweet wrapped up in one” and I really like the inclusive “we want it ALL” idea of the book, so why use those two divisive, dirtier-than-thou quotes?
Yes, it’s a niggling complaint but it has created a slight bias for me before I’ve read the book. I’ll see how it plays out in the next week or so.
Related Posts:
For The Girls Sample Galleries
Ms Naughty On Twitter- msnaughty: RT @Mistress_Fiona: #feministhopes2012 Politicians & media stop assuming all women are interested in childcare - plenty of us do not hav ...
- msnaughty: When I saw Google's privacy change emails last week it felt like they'd finally jumped the shark... I don't trust them anymore.
- msnaughty: Turning off personal results in Google. http://t.co/aOEjqDxc Now if I could just turn of geo targeting...
- msnaughty: Yay. Google did something not evil, first time in a while. You can now turn off personalised search via a radio button in search settings
- msnaughty: RT @Colvinius: I genuinely believe those two, "Don't be a dickhead", and "everything you post is public" are all you need from a social ...
