Ms Naughty Porn for Women Blog

The Star, a Canadian media site, features an article called What Women Are Starting To Want. Starting? Ahem.

Anyway, it features an interview with Mimi Balfour who last year made the softcore film Man of My Dreams. The film won a Feminist Porn Award and Mimi says she now has distribution for it through the Sinclair Institute. I’m still having trouble finding it on my usual sites, will keep looking.

“What’s been interesting for me is that it’s not for everybody,” says Linton, who attached her real name to Man Of My Dreams. “There are a lot of women out there who like the harder-core stuff, who like the gritty imagery. But I just really believe that women deserve to have choice. We can’t just present one type of sexy to the world’s women.”
….
“I’m aiming my product at moms in their 30s and 40s who are maybe curious about dipping their toes into the adult entertainment waters but who have been put off previously by some of the choices out there,” she says. “I’m providing them with a safe way in.”

The article also has some quotes from Candida Royalle and a brief overview of the research into what women find arousing.

Last year my friend Jamye Waxman disappeared to Jamaica (of her own accord) in order to film a new instructional adult movie. She then amused us on Twitter with her ongoing search to delineate all 101 sex positions featured in this film.

I was amazed that she managed to even find 50 positions, let alone 101. There’s only so many places your arms and legs and cock and cunt can really go.

Thus I’m really curious to see the final result. It looks like a lot of fun and all filmed with lush tropical backgrounds. It also features Jamye being her usual irrepressible self.

It’s available on DVD here or you can download it here.

And don’t forget to check out Jamye’s blog!

Alison and the good people at Good For Her have sent out a press release concerning next year’s Feminist Porn Awards. They’re planning to create a jury of members of the public to help judge the films, which is an excellent initiative. You can find out how to become a jury member here.

They’ve also initiated a scholarship for new and upcoming feminist porn filmmakers (hmm… sounds familiar), the Emerging Filmmaker Award (EFA).

The EFA will honor emerging talent in the field of feminist porn production by offering monetary scholarship to an individual who is breaking boundaries, creating sexy feminist porn and who is committed to the representation of women and alternative sexualities in erotic media. Each year, Good For Her will strive to select new, up and coming talent with the hopes of creating more accessible opportunities for those whom are traditionally challeng ed by the process of securing finances for their creative projects.

The EFA is intended for the completion of a film project to be released for film screening and/or DVD distribution in 2010-2011. The EFA is intended for individuals working on their first erotic film project(s) only.

Full terms and conditions are on their site.

Despite all my best laid plans early in the year, I have nothing to submit for nomination. I could, however enter the EFA as I have plenty of exciting ideas in the pipeline.

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.

Petra has uploaded these videos shot on the 24th October at the Joy Awards.

And here’s snippets from the winning films including mine:

Part of me is mortified at how I look on that video. There’s a reason I’ve been anonymous all these years and it’s not just privacy or safety. I’m also kicking myself because I had a fabulous necklace and earrings ready to wear on the night and forgot to put them on. I was so distracted by trying to strap on my mile-high lesbian wedding heels (and then I spent half the night trying not to fall off them). So I look kind of bare. At least the professional makeup job looked nice.

Anyway, I’m out of the porn closet now for better or worse.

I should say that the other winners I met on the night – Lindsay, Cora and Lola – were all lovely and very talented. We had a great time drinking champagne in the limo – even if we did get stuck in traffic and had to do a 16 point turn to make it back to the cinema in time.

I will say thank you again to Petra for organising the whole thing and also thank you to Pjur for putting up the prizemoney. It helped to pay for my trip to Berlin and accommodation which was great.

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.

Well folks, this is my last proper blog post for about four weeks. I’m off on my big trip to the Berlin Porn Film Festival where my short film That’s What I Like is having its premiere on Sunday the 25th Oct at 8pm.

I’m very excited about attending the festival and meeting so many wonderful female porn directors. Candida Royalle, Petra Joy, Shine Louise Houston, Jennifer Lyon Bell, Maria Beatty, Anna Span, Emile Jouvet and many others will be attending. I’m taking my camera and hope to interview them all plus capture some of the fun and craziness that is part of the festival. I’ll post a short video when I get back but I’ll also be adding a longer, more comprehensive version to For The Girls.

In the meantime That’s What I Like and Paddling The Pink Canoe will also be showing at the Sexy International Film Festival in Melbourne. I had a clash of dates and chose the ridiculously expensive overseas trip. Ah well. I wish I could be there. If you’re down south I do recommend you attend as the festival looks fab.

For more on my films visit Indigo Lush.

So I probably won’t get a chance to get properly online and post anything until I come back. I’ve scheduled some simple dirty picture posts to appear in the meantime so the place doesn’t look too sad. I’m hoping to Twitter a bit so check the sidebar for any updates.

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.

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”

I hate being late to the party with these things but I’ve only just heard about the European Feminist Porn Award which is being held on Saturday 17th October in Berlin. Yes… I’m going to miss them, dammit, but despite my general divineness and best efforts at omnipresence I’ve discovered that I just can’t be everywhere at once.

So this is essentially a party and film night to honour the feminist pioneers of porn: Candida Royalle, Annie Sprinkle, Maria Beatty, Shine Louise Houston and Petra Joy. The lovely Jennifer Lyon Bell from Blue Artichoke Films will be there as well.

In October 2009 the first Feminist Porn Film Award will be presented in Berlin. The initiators set themselves off against sexist, mainstream pornography. “We want to revolutionize the erotic film market”, says Laura Meritt – sexpert with a doctorate in communication sciences. Awards will be given for high quality erotic movies “with a wide range of portraying female sexual lust and in which women play an important role as producers.”

The feminist film prize is initiated and organized by Sexclusivitaeten, the first women-oriented sex enterprise and sexual communication centre in Europe, together with the Freudenfluss network.

I have to say, I really like their criteria for feminist film. I think these are rules that all adult films should uphold!

• A sex-positive attitude, no de-humanising or misogynistic portrayals

• Roles in collusion with those involved / no crossing of personal borders

• Ethical work conditions / safe sex is encouraged

• Those involved will be shown in relation to one another – eye, skin, hand, and body contact, energy exchange.

• Emotions and declarations of love are encouraged, doable, and showable.

• Diverse camera settings, light and shadow games

• Variations of sexual practices in joyful transitions, not an achievement test, broadening of the stereotypically portrayed spectrum.

• A variety of body types, ages, genders, sexual orientations and ethnic backgrounds.

• Authentic sound recordings or music. No gender-stereotypical amplified dubbing of moaning.

• Portrayal of lust and pleasure, focus on female lust and its diversity.

• No schematic portrayals of the “sexual curve” – that is to say no straight zoom in on the male ejaculation, no emphasis of the male cum shot. Orgasms are not the only goal.

• Women are significantly involved in the production of the film as producers, directors, or camerawomen.

In Berlin last year I had the honour of meeting Jennifer Lyon Bell, an American filmmaker with a compelling vision for erotic film. Her film Matinee is a gorgeous work of art, well written, masterfully acted and beautifully filmed. It is a wonderful addition to the growing canon of well-made, female-focused erotic films and I consider it to be part of the new wave of sex-positive movies that are forging a new path in porn.

Naturally this means the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification has banned it.

Matinee was due to screen as part of the Melbourne Underground Film Festival over the weekend but the OFLC told MUFF it would be illegal to show the film in public, effectively banning it. The film has not been officially classifed by the panel; they merely made a brief decision based on… well, I’m not sure what. They haven’t actually seen the film. They found out it had real sex in it and that was enough, I suspect.

MUFF and Jennifer have issued statements regarding the decision and they’re currently on the front page of the MUFF site.

The organisers rightly point out that the OFLC didn’t have a problem with Lars Van Trier’s Antichrist, which disturbingly depicts a scene of female genital mutilation and seems to be misogynist in intent. Jen’s film, which only shows two people having nuanced, meaningful, tender sex, is apparently more offensive than that.

MUFF says:

MUFF opposes the OFLC’s decision on the grounds that it represents a hypocritical and troubling suppression of transgressive female-centric sexuality on film. The modus operandi of Blue Artichoke Films, Bell’s production company, is to create films which portray realistic sexual intimacy, depict empowered female characters, possess artistic merit and strong narratives, and do not fall back upon the damaging and often dangerous stereotypes of female sexuality that the Western media is accustomed to. In other words, Bell is looking to produce films about sexuality which women can enjoy, free of masculine control.

MUFF are considering a “civil disobedience” screening as a way of protesting this ridiculous decision.

Jen writes:

Seriously?

It’s just two characters enjoying sex in a realistic way that fits with their characters’ personalities. Consensual sex, nothing weird. Why on earth would that be dangerous to watch?

What’s weird is that mainstream movies spend hours building up the characters in a story, then mangle the lovescene with brusque camera cutaways and awkward sheet-covering bedroom choreography as soon as the moment arrives. You never see James Bond have sex; after a few witty double entendres it’s fade-out then fade-up with a lit cigarette…and this is considered a perfectly acceptable depiction of sex on film.

Frankly, I’d like to know more about how James Bond does it. Is he a true sexual connoisseur, able to quickly divine each woman’s preferences and feel from her subtle reactions whether she wants her G-spot stroked or her hands deliciously pinned to the bed? Or is he an arrogant Casanova who uses some weird abrasive “patented technique” on every woman he sleeps with, smugly congratulating himself “They all love it when I do that”? I’d like the movie better as a whole because it’d tell me a lot about who he is. Plus, if he was good, it’d be really fun to watch, wouldn’t it?

The films that inspired me to mix explicit sex with story and character – Ken Park, 9 Songs, Shortbus – have all had rough roads. But I hoped that outside of America, my loving but prudish home country, everything would be easier. As it turns out, New York was no problem at all, and neither was Amsterdam (my current home). Strasbourg and Berlin festivals are happily screening it this fall. But Australia has a problem.

It’s depressing but not surprising that Matinee has been banned. It’s becoming increasingly apparent that our country’s ridiculous censorship laws are applied in an ad hoc manner and that they are out of touch with what most Australians think.

How is it that grown adults are prevented from seeing a film because it contains sex? And why aren’t we up in arms about this?

There are no reports in the major newspapers about this issue. I’m hoping to contact Margaret Pomeranz for a statement on where she stands with this. She was willing to be arrested for Ken Park in 2003… will she also speak out for Matinee?

Find out more about Matinee and Jennifer at the Blue Artichoke Films site.

Edit: Tony Comstock gives his view on the issue here.

The other day I visited one of the local video rental shops, a store I haven’t been to in a while. Imagine my surprise when I discovered Michael Winterbottom’s 9 Songs sitting unabashedly on the drama shelves. This is a small town, after all, and sexually explicit “art films” are a bit thin on the ground. I haven’t had a chance to see Shortbus, Destricted or any of those other “mainstream” explicit films due to this general scarcity so naturally I jumped at the chance to see 9 Songs.

The film happily bills itself as “the most explicit mainstream movie ever!” The plot, such as it is, focuses on a young couple in the flush of first lust and love. We see their relationship over the course of a year as they fuck frequently and go to concerts. That’s pretty much it – nothing else happens except concert footage and sex. Winterbottom apparently wanted the audience to “fill in the blanks” of the couple’s relationship, opting to show only snippets of conversation amid a lot of fucking, letting the viewers decide what kind of characters they have and what problems they my encounter.

It’s an interesting idea and I’ve yet to decide whether it’s clever or makes for a very boring movie. Certainly I wasn’t enthralled by it (and fast forwarded most of the songs). Of course, if this was a porn film (i.e. a film made explicitly to arouse) I’d think it was fab because it shows perspectives and characters often missing from the genre.

But this is NOT, Winterbottom insists, a porn movie. This is an art film, thank you very much. And thus that makes the explicit sex far different from all the explicit sex you see in a porn movie. This is a film with morals, people, and it’s made for a more discerning class of viewer than your average wanker who likes porn.

At least, that’s the spin on it.

I personally sat there watching it and couldn’t help but fume at the hypocrisy apparent in the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) Board’s decision to give it an R rating (after an initial X rating). And I wasn’t fuming because I thought it should have been lumped in with the porn films and effectively banned from cinemas. Nope. I was angry because this film’s R rating entrenches an arbitary line that says “this is an art film, it’s OK” and “this is a yucky porn film, ban it”.

I found myself reading the OFLC appeal decision on the film, which lists in extensive detail all of the sex acts in the film like some kind of really bad sex story:

At 47 minutes 58 seconds Lisa ties Matt to the bed, she slaps his face with her open hand and puts her stiletto heel into his chest and puts her weight on her foot. She then puts her booted foot onto Matt’s legs. She undresses. At 49 minutes 45 seconds Lisa asks Matt “do my nipples feel sore to you? They are.” At 50 minutes a two-minute scene of actual sex commences. Lisa kisses Matt’s penis and pulls at his testicles. She holds his penis in her mouth (actual sex), she manipulates his penis with her hand (actual sex), her hand is shown repeatedly manipulating Matt’s penis (actual sex).

The “interested parties” who made submissions regarding the film’s classification included TV critic Margaret Pomeranz and the conservative Christian lobby the Australian Family Association (and can I just say how much it pisses me off that the religious nutjobs have commandereed the word “family”?).

The paper discusses why the board decided to go against the “general rule” of “‘simulation, yes – the real thing, no.” I’ve added my own emphasis:

The Review Board in the majority found that there were special aspects of 9 Songs which differentiated it from other films which feature “the real thing” and have been Refused Classification by the Classification Review Board:

• 9 Songs is a film in which Matt and Lisa’s relationship is explored, from Matt’s perspective, through music and sexual activity. In this context, the scenes of actual sex are integral to the plot and theme of the movie.

• 9 Songs, made by the highly-regarded British director Michael Winterbottom, is a film of serious intent and considered by many to have artistic merit. The underlying themes of the movie, the honest, realistic and, at times, emotional and poignant depiction of the couple’s relationship, which were integrated with the scenes at rock concerts, were likely to resonate with a number of the film’s likely audience and had artistic value.

• The scenes of actual sex are not considered by the majority to be exploitative, immoral, indecent, demeaning, improper or gratuitous. In particular, regarding the scene in which Lisa slaps Matt and steps on him with a stiletto boot, the majority was of the view that the impact of this scene was mild and was not demeaning to Matt or Lisa.

• The tone of the scenes of actual sex, in terms of theme and style, were contextually relevant, filmed in a restrained manner and different from standard pornographic films that are routinely classified ‘X’.

The board also took into account “the persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published.”

So the decision to let 9 Songs be R rated was based on the idea that the film was artistic, serious, moral and not demeaning to the participants, as well as the fact that, being an “art film” it was designed for a higher class of people – you know, those smart trendy ones with university degrees who can obviously watch explicit sex without being corrupted or aroused – unlike all those scum who watch porn and for whom the X rating was created, to stop society from descending into a Mad-Max type scenario.

At least, I think that’s what the Classification system is supposed to do.

The OFLC document holds its moral head high in declaring the various teddibly important and artistic reasons why they made this exception to the rules. And yet to me it reveals that the Australian censorship emperors are clothing themselves in particularly airy garments.

I can name numerous adult films with explicit sex that are artistic, serious, moral and not degrading. Of particular note is, of course, the films of Tony Comstock which were banned from a film festival several years ago, but I could also talk about the explicit films of Petra Joy, Jennifer Lyon Bell, Shine Louise Houston or Tristan Taormino. Most of the movies I saw at last year’s Berlin Porn Film Festival could fit into that mould… but they would be illegal to screen here. I could easily argue that the new brand of porn seeks to explore relationships and sexuality in exactly the same way that Winterbottom has done with 9 Songs.

The only difference is that adult filmmakers acknowledge the arousal of their audience rather than placing themselves on an “art” pedestal, one that denies the fact that people WILL get turned on and masturbate if you show them sex.

And that’s what it really comes down to in the end. The OFLC can use all kinds of excuses about art and class and audience and intent but ultimately our laws are about the fear of people getting aroused and masturbating.

(It’s interesting to see the way film reviewers are so quick to say that 9 Songs isn’t really arousing… at least, for the right sort of person.)

If 9 Songs can explicitly show penetration, fellatio, cunnilingus and ejaculation and receive an R rating, why can’t others? I might think that 9 Songs is an art film but no doubt the Australian “Family” Association thought it was filth on the same level as your average gonzo. But if real sex gets the OK in some films and not others, what is the basis for distinction?

The OFLC document talks about the porn genre with disdain, indicating there are personal judgements of taste at work. I find a lot of porn to be distasteful as well (not to mention artless and downright stupid) but that should not be a defining factor in what adults can and cannot see in this country. I find the whole idea of Australian Idol and Transformers 2 to be fairly tasteless… so why are they on our TV and cinema screens?

Why are the personal tastes and “morals” of those who sit on the Classification Board considered to have more authority than mine? What special thing makes them able to sit and watch films that may corrupt the rest of us?

One of the things I find frustrating is that this nonsense is still on our lawbooks in 2009. 9 Songs was released in 2004 and the R decision prompted some debate… but nothing has changed. The legislation still talks about “the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults” but those in power won’t accept that standards have changed. The ready availability of porn on the internet means that people are a lot more comfortable with sexually explicit material now. What’s more, the fact that society hasn’t disintegrated as a result of this ready availability should be a strong indicator that all the moral panic surrounding sexually explicit material was wrong.

Until someone can show empirical proof that porn causes harm, there should not be laws restricting the consumption of it.

And if Australians can be grown up enough to rent 9 Songs from Video Ezy and not go mad, why not Xana and Dax, or Chemistry or, hell, even your average Buttman nonsense gonzo.

I’m looking on the bright side. 9 Songs has given me a happy hitlist of the top 10 important things I need to include in order to get an R rating for any explicit film I make:

1. Concert footage from whiny-yet-hip bands plus a brief snippet from a classical music concert
2. Footage of a couple eating breakfast and being playful together. It helps if the guy says “I love you” while wading in freezing water.
3. “Restrained” penetration, oral and cumshots. Whatever that means.
4. Arty lighting.
5. Wandering piano music during the sex scenes.
6. Comments about Antarctica and global warming.
7. A trailer that doesn’t show very much sex.
8. A marketing campaign that focuses on the right “class” of people.
9. A constant avowal to the press and critics that “it’s not porn, it’s art.”
10. A good relationship with Margaret Pomeranz.

I must admit, I’m not saying anything new with this post. If you want to read a more researched and academic critique of the whole “porn vs art” censorship issue, visit Tony Comstock’s The Intent To Arouse. For the Australian perspective I’d recommend my friend Helen Vnuk’s book Snatched: Sex and Censorship in Australia or read her excellent article on the whole topic here. Also another one here.

Here’s the trailer for 9 Songs. As you can see, it’s pretty light on for sex.

I’ve just spent a couple of days adding over 30 new film listings to Porn Movies For Women.

I’ve created several pages for individual filmmakers and studios including Madison Young, Sweet Sinner and Libido Films.

I’m actually a little embarrassed that I hadn’t added Libido Films earlier. The movies made by Marianna Beck over the last decade truly are good quality porn for women starring real-looking people having real orgasms.

I want to point you towards a great interview done with Marianna and Jack Hafferkamp called Libido Films Laid Bare.

An excerpt:

Are your movies designed to help guys get feminist nookie?
MARIANNA: We think they’re designed to help guys realize what women’s sexual pleasure is really about. And here’s what it really is about . . . clitoral stimulation! So we almost always try to integrate a vibrator in scenes involving partner sex. Vibrators make some guys nervous. But as our friend Betty Dodson puts it, “a smart guy soon figures out that the vibrator is really his best friend.”

What’s the way to a feminist’s heart?
MARIANNA: Showing signs of intelligent life . . . and remembering that clitoral stimulation. If you mean by feminist a woman who is interested in sex and wants to see an erotic story with a storyline, dialogue, and real sex, that’s a good start.

Great philosophy.

This week’s update at For The Girls features my new short video “That’s What I Like.” If you’ve been following me on Twitter you’ll know I had a big weekend shooting this movie and an eventful couple of weeks editing it. Now it’s live at FTG and I’m so pleased with it.

The official blurb for the movie is:

“That’s What I Like” portrays one woman’s individual sexual preferences, in words and in the flesh. This short 10 minute film aims to offer an intimate portrait of sensual heterosexual sex. Realistic and arousing, it also affirms the right of women to express their sexuality through the medium of film.

The movie is 10 minutes long and I love the way it looks. Filming was quite a learning experience, challenging but ultimately rewarding. Our two actors were gorgeous, very easy to work with and did a great job.

I’m looking forward to making more great porn for women videos in the future.

In the meantime, you can find this video at For The Girls. Next month we’re uploading a much longer version of their sex scene.

Phew! Today I spent waaay too much time updating Porn Movies For Women. I’ve actually added a total of 21 new titles to the listing, which is pretty impressive considering it’s only been two months since I last updated it.

I created a new page for Kelly Holland’s Chick Media, which last year released four titles including the MySexTherapist series. The first one earned her the Sexiest Straight Film at the Feminist Porn Awards.

Tristan Taormino’s Expert Guide series has been updated again, with Penny Flame’s Expert Guide to Handjobs and the very fresh Expert Guide to Threesomes.

Tina Tyler, who has only just announced a return to performing, has added two more titles to her Handyman male masturbation series.

I had a field day on my porn movies for lesbians page, adding a veritable swag of new movies. It really seems like authentic lesbian erotica is charging ahead while the rest of the porn industry languishes. Shine Louise Houston’s new film Champion leads the pack, of course. She’s recently launched a site for the movie complete with trailers, pics and cast lists. I also added the Good Dyke Porn compilation, Trans Entities and One Night Stand by the talented French filmmaker Emile Jouvet. All of them are at Babeland, which seems to stock the most comprehensive queer catalogue online.

Tony Comstock’s newest film Bill and Desiree has also been added.

Then there’s the usual Playgirl titles, one appearing every month like clockwork. And I even added Pirates 2 to the Couples page. Might as well, I thought. Someone’s bound to like it.

In the course of ferreting out all these new titles I also discovered that Babeland have started their own porn “label” and are scheduling the release of two movies over the next couple of months. Sounds interesting and I look forward to seeing what they come up with. 2009 looks to be a very promising year for women’s porn, I suspect.