The customary context for depicting ejaculation–i.e. the pornographic money shot–thoroughly pisses me off.
What upsets me is not so much behavior–any goings on between consenting parties are awesome my book–it’s the ubiquity of the presentation.
(Cindy Gallop’s TEDTak outlines the trouble with such ubiquity better than I can.)
Beyond that, the fact that the woman is expected to wait passively, looking up, making eye contact with her lover–getting semen in your eyes is worse than nosing tequila, FYI. If she really wants cum all over her face, why can’t she exercise some agency and lend a hand.
Bringing me to the other thing–and I can only speak from my own experience here–but the best self-induced orgasm ever is only marginally better than the shabbiest orgasm contributed by a lover. Why drive cross country in a Maserati only to stop and walk the last furlong to the driveway of the destination?
Lastly, the act of ejaculation–when there’s some force behind it, is both really fucking visceral and with the projectile trajectory taking on endlessly fascinating, liquified globular forms, goddamn visually dynamic.
My own failed efforts not withstanding, I am obsessively convinced of the possibility of depicting ejaculation in ‘fine art’ context.
This .gif is equally a failure In terms of artfulness. But from the standpoint of pornography, it’s an interesting a departure.
Not to mention as far as cum shots go, the distance and arc are not only impressive but also quite lovely.