Ms Naughty Porn for Women Blog

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!

This, my friends, is the full cover of Petra Joy’s new DVD Her Porn 2 which has been unleashed onto the world.

Aside from the general fabulousness of this movie, which includes short films from famous directors such as Candida Royalle, Annie Sprinkle, Shine Louise Houston and Maria Beatty, it also includes my film That’s What I Like!

Yes folks, it’s finally on DVD, along with the other finalists from the Petra Joy Awards. So this must mean I’m a REAL pornographer now. 10 years online and a hugely successful paysite doesn’t count. I’m now on a hard copy digital format so I must be real.

Here’s the official blurb:

This compilation celebrates the best porn made by women for women: from sensational porn classics by pioneering directors to the latest erotic flicks by new female directors from around the world.

HER PORN seduces with nearly three hours of sensual viewing pleasure.

What do women want in sex and porn? HER PORN has the answer. We hope you will enjoy the many different flavours of female-made porn – from vanilla to kinky, straight to queer and soft to hard.

The film is in the process of being distributed and I can’t really name any online places to buy it beyond the European store Openerotik.com. And of course, you can order through Petra’s site.

I’ll do another post soon with the trailer for the film, plus a bit more information. But for now, just enjoy the cover. Yes. That’s Mia and Andy right underneath the big red letters. Ooh, I feel all funny.

This is a short film shown before Yves Saint Laurent’s 2009 fall fashion show for men.

It consists of only a full-frame shot of Michael Pitt’s face as he listens to an unseen woman talk to him erotically about clothes. “I lift up the T-shirt that peeks out from the sleeves and see underneath, you’re stark naked,” she rasps in French. “You dream of me rubbing your feet… I raise the veil from your leather belt and discover where your firm, flat stomach begins. Trousers which, though baggy, fall perfectly straight.”

Is it sexy? Well he’s certainly good looking and it feels like Jennifer Lyon Bell’s film Headshot or a Beautiful Agony video. The French voiceover sounds great although it may be seen as pretentious. I’m not sure I can read that much eroticism into clothing, I must admit, but if you like fashion, it may be a winner.

It took five weeks but here, finally, is my little doco about the 2009 Berlin Porn Film Festival. It’s a little over 4 minutes and you’ll hear some great comments about feminist porn by some of the fab female directors I met including Shine Louise Houston, Anna Brownfield, Candida Royalle, Anna Span, Petra Joy, Jennifer Lyon Bell and Renee Pornero. Plus a quick cameo from Joe Gallant and footage from the Petra Joy Awards presentation.

A much longer version went live at For The Girls yesterday and I’ll also be uploading more footage there soon. Candida Royalle’s lecture about her films is particularly interesting – that’s waiting for a future update. I also wrote an expansive article about my experiences in Berlin for FTG.

The short blog version is that I had a ball, won an award, met lots of wonderful people and wished it could have gone for another 3 days. I didn’t get to enjoy nearly enough films because I was so busy with the Petra Joy Award but the ones I did see were amazing.

It was the people I met that really made it worthwhile. I interviewed Shine Louise Houston from the Crash Pad Series and was so impressed with her drive and knowledge. She’s a woman with a plan and she’s going to become even more of a force to be reckoned with in the future.

Well-known director Joe Gallant could well be the nicest man in the world. We talked the future of porn and hopefully we can work together at sometime next year. He said he thought I’d like Bong Water Butt Babes but I wasn’t so sure. He made me aware of how disconnected I am from the mainstream porn industry… something for which I’m kind of grateful.

Anna Brownfield is a card. We were so pleased to meet each other and had the comraderie of two Aussies lost in Europe, trying not to slip into slang when giving interviews. Her film The Band was such a standout and it shows you can easily marry explicit sex, comedy and great storytelling.

I also got to meet Lisa Vandever from Cinekink who is so much fun and easy to talk to, as is Vena Virago, a wild, pink haired artist who just happens to make porn for Vivid Alt. And I found myself getting stupidly protective towards the gorgeous Julie Simone, who is very quiet and shy, despite being a fearsome BDSM Mistress who can rock a rubber dress.

And then there’s Jennifer Lyon Bell of Blue Artichoke Films who I met last year. Jen is kind of like the social glue of the event, introducing people and arranging dinners and you couldn’t encounter a warmer, more positive person.

I even got to say hello to Candida Royalle, albeit briefly. Indeed, I cringe a little when I think about it. I was feeling a little starstruck and eagerly handed her my card which read Louise Lush. “That’s my new pretendy name,” I said.

Pretendy name??? Sheesh! I like to flatter myself that I have a decent vocabulary but do you think I could remember the word pseudonym for love or money at that moment? My husband has been teasing me about my pretendy name ever since.

OK, enough name dropping. Suffice to say I made lots of contacts and, as you see in the film, we all feel like we’ve found a family in Berlin.

I’ve since discovered quite a few of the short films on Youtube or other free sites around the web. I’m hoping to feature these on the blog in the future.

And as expensive as it is to travel all that way I think I’ll have to go back in 2010. The festival is too much fun and far too useful to miss out on.

Someone has helpfully posted the segment on the Oprah show featuring Violet Blue so I’ve finally been able to watch what was said.

Violet has posted her feelings about the show on her blog and they’re overwhelmingly positive. I like this bit:

Look closely at this show and you’ll notice that Oprah has reframed the entire conversation: we women are not ‘tolerated’ or marginalized for exploring our inhibitions, voicing our desires, or owning our sexual agency — we are embraced. The 1 in 3 consumers of adult material online — women — were finally acknowledged, and with respect for a change…

Myths and stereotypes: smashed! We live in a world where women are more sexually powerful and articulate than any other time in history because of the internet and emergent communicative technologies. Oprah’s hip to it. You’re soaking in it. And that’s really, outrageously exciting for all of us.

She’s right, of course. It’s wonderful that women’s erotica got such a good airing on a mainstream TV show without the usual negativity.

I do, however, have a gripe. I feel that the show only seemed to skim the surface of the topic and it did so in a way that seemed to focus much more on the mainstream porn industry rather than the burgeoning indie/women’s porn movement that I feel is doing a better job at catering to women. I think having the interview with Jenna Jameson as the main focus meant things were skewed that way.

That moment when Oprah first asked about Violet’s recommended movies had me holding my breath, waiting to hear Tony Comstock’s name, or Nica Noelle’s, or Shine Louise Houston’s or even Candida Royalle’s. Alas, it turned into a plug for Jenna’s relatively mainstream film The Masseuse, fab though that may be.

And it’s wonderful for Playgirl and director Skye Blue to get a mention but for me that company is a prime example of mainstream porn aiming at a female market but not necessarily getting it right. The Playgirl movies I’ve seen look great and can inspire a mood but they still feature the same old porn stars having the same old porny sex. They’re nice enough but they could be so much more.

Of course, maybe I’m just jealous. Actually, I AM jealous, dammit. Once again, online porn receives much less media attention than “real” porn offered via movies (although now that DVD sales have tanked, this may change).

The main thing is, it’s a start and it was good that Oprah even dared to tackle the topic (especially given some of the negative and vitriolic reactions from viewers in the forum).

Now that Oprah has announced a new cable lifestyle channel we can look forward to a sexuality-themed TV series, one that has more time to devote to women’s erotica.

I can dream, can’t I?

In the last week Adam and Eve and Candida Royalle have released Petra Joy’s Feeling It to the US market. The film has a new cover, one that’s quite radically different to the old one. As you can see it features a big pic of the female stars all laughing together with champagne. They’re not nude. There are three other pics along the bottom but none are explicit. It’s an interesting idea; the cover art seems to suggest this is a fun, “girl’s night out” kind of film, rather than a porn movie. I’m wondering if it will make a difference to sales.

I think I prefer the original cover which features the gorgeous Belle blissfully caressed by a hunky black guy, their skin contrasting in an alluring way. Perhaps the mainstream people didn’t like the “interracial” overtones… because you can’t just have a black guy and white girl together. You have to label them.

Anyway, this looks like Petra’s big break into the US market which is great; she’s been stymied by difficult distributors in the past. And having Candida’s name on anything will ensure it gets out there and sells.

Meanwhile, I’ve been slaving away updating Porn Movies for Women. I’ve added new directors/companies Anna Brownfield, Courtney Trouble and Joybear plus updated the Playgirl and Sweet Sinner pages with their new titles. And I added a bunch of new names to the Female Directors of Porn page, including myself (hell, why own a huge encyclopedic website if you can’t be a bit biased towards yourself?). It’s becoming apparent that the “hall of fame” of feminist porn directors is getting decidedly large. And that’s fabulous.

And I really need to write up some new reviews but I think I’m knackered.

Edit: I did a quick review of Nica Noelle’s The Stepmother.

So it’s been almost a week since Oprah did her porn show. I haven’t had a chance to watch it so I can’t comment but it seems the response is not as positive as we’d like it to have been.

This seems due to the fact that the show relied heavily on an interview with Jenna Jameson. Reading comments in the Oprah forums after the show had aired, I was depressed to see so much negativity towards the topic and also toward Jenna herself. Perhaps not surprising – blonde, silicone-boobed Jenna is not exactly the sort of celebrity who appeals to your average soccor mom/Oprah viewer. She’s an example of the mainstream porn industry rather than the new alternative porn that is seeking to cater to women.

By all accounts Violet did a great job but it was Jenna who got the attention – along with Vivid founder Steve Hirsch. The show also featured the owner of an adult store. What is interesting is the number of people who weren’t interviewed.

Which brings us to Candida Royalle. She’s made a comment on Facebook saying she’s “miffed” at the Oprah show for the way it was conducted:

Anyone catch Jenna Jameson on the Oprah show? Jenna trying to take credit for ‘feminist porn’ was a joke. Only thing worse was watching Vivid founder Steve Hirsch try to take credit for the ‘couples market’. Oh really? Was he even in business when I created my Femme line for women and couples in 1984?…

So here’s the deal: I was called by the producers in June and worked with them for 5 months on that show…only to be canned at the last minute along with a bevy of other far more qualified and significant women who made a difference for women in porn…

In the end they went for the most famous, wealthiest and recognizable person who they hoped would bring in the ratings…it is after all sweeps month.

(Quote is from LukeisBack)

I do think it’s a pity that Candida and other female-friendly porn producers (and stars) couldn’t have been on the show. Hell, I’d have paid my own way over there to be on it and give my 9 years’ worth of 2 cents. But I guess it’s a mainstream show and, like Candida said, they wanted something to give them ratings and headlines.

There have been a few articles about the show:

E!Online offered this snarky short piece: Jameson to Oprah: I’m One Classy Lassie

The Examiner had several opinion pieces on the episode. Suzanne White offered this analysis of the show, concluding that it was focused on Jenna rather than on women consuming porn.

Interestingly, Google News lists Oprah/Jenna stories from such worthy tomes as The Plastic Surgery Channel and Celebrity Baby Scoop. I decided not to link to those.

Here’s the page on Oprah.com describing the show along with several other links (including, unfortunately, an article that states that “men are visual, women are textual”).

So… all in all, it hasn’t exactly been the big win I was hoping for.

Incidentally, if I had the luxury of compiling a show about women, porn and the new wave of feminist porn, I’d want to invite a massive guest list. My stars would include:

Candida Royalle, Annie Sprinkle, Nina Hartley, Veronica Hart, Shine Louise Houston, Anna Brownfield, Jennifer Lyon Bell, Tony Comstock, Petra Joy, Erika Lust, Marianna Beck, Maria Beatty, Nina Lennox, Anna Span, Nica Noelle, Jamye Waxman, Audacia Ray, Tina Tyler, Estelle Joseph, Tristan Taormino, Madison Young, Mia Engberg…

And me of course.

Now that I’ve compiled that list, it’s pretty damned impressive, actually, and nowhere near comprehensive.

Here’s hoping the Oprah show decides they haven’t given the topic enough attention and has another go.

Anna Brownfield’s amazing indie erotic film The Band has only just been released in the US and is available on Amazon.*

The Band opened the Berlin Porn Film Festival and played to 3 sold-out cinemas on the first night. The response from the audience and other filmmakers was overwhelmingly positive. I certainly enjoyed it. This film successfully combines a fully developed narrative arc with plenty of hardcore sex. The explicit scenes are just the right length and they’re often combined with humour. Indeed, this film gave me the giggles; not the standard thing you’d expect from a porn movie.

I had the pleasure of meeting and chatting with Anna torwards the end of the festival – she was so busy being interviewed it was hard to pin her down beforehand. It was great to talk porn with a fellow Australian (not to mention revert back into non-enunciated Aussie slang). She’s a no-nonsense, smart and talented woman who really knows her stuff and I’m so glad to now count her as my friend.

Here’s the blurb for the film:

When lead singer Jimmy Taranto dumps his girlfriend Candy then his rock band Gutter Filth, Candy decides to take his place in the band. Together with anal bass player GB, cross-dressing drummer Dee and Jennifer their loyal manager, they begin a journey to stardom. While their success eclipses Jimmy’s, Candy still can’t find the true love she is looking for. But sometimes the things you want are right in front of you. Includes special Making of The Band featurette plus director’s commentary.

The Band is grungy, funny and very sexy and you should buy it!

Here’s the trailer:

* Can I just say how pleased I am that Amazon quietly made the decision to sell erotic films? It used to be that they’d can you as an affiliate if you were also promoting porn.

The mainstream media has featured a number of articles about women and porn recently, most still breathlessly amazed that women enjoy porn.

The Telegraph (UK) featured a short piece on the large number of women present at the Berlin Porn Film festival. It also discusses the “PorYes” awards created by Laura Merritt.

The SMH has reprinted the article today with comments. I’m still waiting for mine to be moderated.

Meanwhile the Fox “Sexpert” Yvonne Fulbright has offered her take one women and porn, disputing the figures about how many women actually watch porn. She then goes on to make lots of generalised statements about “what women want.” Unfortunately the column ends by assuming that only men are reading it – the second last sentence says “At the end of the day, the success of your quest may not be your movie of choice, but getting her to explore different forms of pleasuring in general.”

In other bad press, Kate Harding’s Salon argument that porn doesn’t empower women has irked me in a number of ways, the main one being her use of the term “actual feminist” to describe those who think porn oppresses (as opposed to all of us confused pretendy-feminists who might hold a differing opinion). She is happy to assume all porn is a monolithic bastion of male pleasure to further her point. The article doesn’t do much for creating a respectful or useful atmosphere for discussing various problems posed by pornography.

I wasn’t going to mention it but there’s quite the frenzy about Sarah Palin’s almost-son-in-law Levi Johnston appearing in Playgirl, not quite nude. Good PR for Playgirl but I’m not sure I really want to see that guy in the buff. Because crazed fundamentalist Republican teenage fathers really aren’t my bag, baby.

Lastly, there’s a great interview with Tristan Taormino at Alibi.com along with the schedule of the (just finished) Pornutopia film festival in Alburquerque. It icnludes this interesting quote:

There’s no pat way to make porn appeal to women, Taormino adds. “The first thing you have to do is abandon all hope that you’ll be able to speak to all women,” she says. “I’ve spoken to thousands of women about what they want to see, what kinds of porn they like, what kinds of porn they don’t like, and there is no single female viewer.

Pic is from Gawker.

This is a hot pic. There’s something very appealing about sex swings and that weird combination of freedom and captivity they offer. I love how she’s smiling while he licks her clit. Sexy.

Full set of photos is at For The Girls.

This hunky guy looks just a tiny little bit like Twilight star Robert Pattinson. So if you’ve got a bit of a thing for him, he might make a reasonable substitute. Personally, I just think he’s a cute guy. Look at those “fuck me” eyes!

Full set of photos available at For The Girls

I’ve just received a PR email from British adult film director Anna Span. She’s won an important legal victory over the British Board of Film Classification (UK censors) over whether female ejaculation exists.

Her film Women Love Porn, which contains shorts from five separate female directors, has been held up for several years thanks to the original ruling of the BBFC with regards to the ejaculation scene. The censors maintained that female ejaculation is not possible and that the scene actually contained urination. They demanded that cuts be made to the film in order to pass.

Anna Span decided to fight the ruling. She presented the BBFC with substantial scientific evidence that female ejaculation is a natural and normal phenomenon, helped by expert Deborah Sundahl.

Anna says; “I am really proud to have changed this outdated ruling and to have made a difference to women who experience this in their own lives throughout the UK. It was never fair that the BBFC dismissed their amazing orgasms as urinary incontinence”

The BBFC is still being a stick in the mud, saying that their “position remains fundamentally unchanged for future releases” but it’s fairly certain that any future bans will be contested based on this precedent.

Interestingly, the BBFC is currently hamstrung thanks to the fact that Britain joined the European Union but they carry on regardless.

I’ll say it again: I’m OK with labelling videos (classifying – on a voluntary basis) so that adults can make informed choices but banning films is just draconian and stupid and it should never happen in a civilised society to values freedom of speech.

Check out Anna Span’s videos at Porn Movies For Women

Update 9th October
This story has now had some decent coverage in the media and large blogs.
Kristina Lloyd from Erotica Cover Watch has this opinion piece in the Guardian.
That article prompted this post at Jezebel.
Violet Blue’s latest column at SFGate is about the issue and she also wrote a blog post about it here.
Eye for Film featured this article on the issue.

I found my heart beating a little faster this week when the organisers of the Berlin Porn Film Festival sent me their catalogue for the upcoming festival. There it was, my film, scheduled to screen at 6pm on Sunday 25th October, 2009. How completely exciting!

I remember the first time I had anything published: it was an erotic story in Australian Women’s Forum in 1997. This film premiere is kind of the same thing. I’m going to be horribly nervous, worried about whether this movie is good enough, whether the audience likes it. I’ll be watching it, picking it apart, thinking of all the bits I’d like to change.

And yet I’ll be immensely thrilled and proud that I’ve made something that’s being screened at a film festival, in a real movie theatre.

The stupid thing is that That’s What I Like has been available on For The Girls for months now and I’m sure it has now been seen by thousands of our members. Haven’t had any complaints. Still, there’s that deep-seated idea that I haven’t really made it unless I a) get a book published or b) make a movie. This first screening is a big step towards the latter option.

In the last couple of days I’ve updated Indigo Lush, the official site of my film production company. If you want to see stills from the short film or learn more, go there.

This is the cover of Temptations 2, an erotic fiction compilation from Xcite Books. Nice, isn’t it?

It’s one of 3 recently released by that company. They have responded to calls from Erotica Cover Watch to have more men on the covers of erotic fiction books. I think it’s very appealing.

In the last week or so I’ve been musing about the length of sex scenes in videos, specifically, what’s too short and what’s too long.

I was recently editing a non-exclusive male masturbation vid and, in a frenzy of cuts, got a painfully long 18 minute video down to under 5 minutes. In that space of time I captured the guy fondling himself through his pants, taking them off, becoming erect and then stroking himself to orgasm. I watched it with fresh eyes the next day and was very pleased with the result.

This got me thinking that I should go back and re-edit some of the other videos at For The Girls. A lot of them go for at least 10 minutes, some up to 20. When I originally edited them I often left scenes longer than I would like because I figured our members would prefer a nice big batch of ongoing sex with plenty of time for masturbation. That is, after all, the main point of a porn video, yes?

And I suspect this theory of “wank time” is a driving factor behind the length of most sex scenes in porn films. The actors go at it, the camera captures it and the editor gives everybody a whole lot of masturbatory room before anything new or different happens. Plenty of people watch porn with one hand on the remote (or >> button on Windows Media Player) so they can find the bits they want and fast forward what they don’t. Why deprive someone of the possibility of finding a bit they like?

Unfortunately there’s a major downside to the theory of “wank time”: far too many porn scenes are downright boring.

When you think about it, sex is a very repetitive business and there’s only so many ways you can do it. Slot A goes into Slot B, move back and forth, rinse, repeat (or something like that). So capturing every second of it is not necessarily going to reveal anything new or exciting. There might be 3 or 4 minutes of piston-like pumping in any given scene but you might only see one interesting facial expression or line of dialogue in that time. So why persist in giving viewers the whole thing?

Beyond “wank time”, scene length in mainstream porn films may be dictated by the desire to make feature-length DVDs. When you’ve got 90 minutes or more to fill, more footage is better than less, no matter what the quality. It could be argued that the increasing move to web-based product would change this idea but it continues apace. There’s a worry that giving people less product – even if it’s of better quality – isn’t good value for money.

Perhaps another reason for the under-editing is the idea that the footage is there so the director might as well use it. You’ve just spent a bunch of money hiring porn actors and crew to get the scene in the can so you may as well wring it for all it’s worth.

I know. That’s how I originally felt after directing my first erotic short film in February this year. I had a whole bunch of wonderful footage and it was really – I mean really – hard to pick out the bits that would best suit the film because I liked so much of it. And I’ve actually gone through a learning curve with the editing process on that film. My initial cut was nearly 20 minutes. There’s a long version of 15 minutes at For The Girls and the version showing in Berlin is 10 minutes. My R-rated version is 7 minutes. And then I re-cut it again to enter it in the Joy Awards and that version is under 5 minutes.

And having gone through that process, I think the shorter versions are better.

There is of course the balancing act that occurs between authentically capturing the moment and boring your audience. You do want to do your actors and their scene justice by documenting the essence of what went on but you have to also be a little bit ruthless on behalf of your viewers, whose time is precious.

So what’s wrong with editing things down to show four or five strokes (for example), cut to the interesting expression, cue another camera angle, back to the original camera angle… and then move on. Film school students will tell you that 3 seconds is ample time to give your audience an idea of what’s happening. Modern music videos often only give you half a second worth of shot. So why does porn persist in holding the audience captive for so long? Why must we see every different position for at least 3 or 4 minutes? Do people really masturbate along in time, like some kind of perverted Read-A-Long story?

My problem is, I’m not sure that my opinion is reliable on this topic. I’ve been working with porn for nearly ten years now. I’m afraid to say that I find a lot of porn dreadfully boring, perhaps because I’ve seen it all before. Maybe the opinion of a porn newbie or a seasoned fan will be very different.

And I’ve actually been given pause to wonder about scene length even further after watching Nica Noelle’s The Stepmother. The first scene in that film goes for 35 minutes and I think it went for too long. At the same time, I very happily watched it to the 15 minute mark without feeling bored because those first 15 minutes are very watchable indeed. That’s because the sex is so very real, intimate and passionate and I was enthralled to see something like that in a porn movie (still a rare thing!). There were very few edits on show; the footage seemed to flow in real time. Unfortunately, just when it felt like the sex should naturally come to a conclusion, the couple switched positions and kept at it. And at it. And at it. And so I got bored.

And in reality, I could have happily watched a few minutes less of each position, so long as my interest was maintained. As I said in my review: actually having sex for 35 minutes is fun. Watching it for that long, not so much.

That’s the big question: when do things get boring? And are the punters getting bored in the first place or are they just getting busy with their hands (or lovers)?

Meanwhile, Erika Lust has released a short film called Handcuffs that features lots of emotive, film noir build up but very little actual sex. Will it be good wank material? And should it be considered in that sense (because obviously Erika’s film offers more than your average gonzo scene designed purely to get you off)? For some, the erotic atmosphere and shock of the very brief hardcore scene will be enough to inspire fantasies and trigger orgasms. It may leave others cold. Certainly it’s a very left-fieldexample of how a sex scene can be cut together but I do think it shows that the “same ol’ same ol’” theory of porn editing is a bit tiresome.

I asked this question on Twitter a few days ago. I only got one personal reply. She said: “I tend to get what I need by the 15 minute mark.” Meanwhile filmmaker Tony Comstock said that “Boring your audience is a cardinal sin, regardless of subject matter.” And “surveillance camera footage is not a film.” Which is a good point.

But is there a consensus out there about the ideal length of a sex scene? Does it differ according to the type of “action” involved (e.g. can a hetero boy-girl scene go longer than a male masturbation one?) Does “wank time” matter? Let me know!

* Still above is from my film “That’s What I Like”