MormongirlzAn Orgasm for Each Sister Wife (2016)

Karley Sciortino (the editor of Slutever) did a report for Vice back in early 2017 juxtaposing Utah’s efforts to ban pornography as a public health menace with the lapsed LDS woman who started Mormongirlz.

At it’s best, Vice is indispensable. However, it’s only at it’s best maybe 15% of the time. The only thing that really stood out about it to me was the attention to authentic detail during Mormongirlz production. There appeared to be a real effort exerted to make something that was both recognizably fluent in Mormon culture and code but that uses this knowledge to subvert sex-negative stigmas.

That should’ve motivated me to check them out sooner but I haven’t. Then I saw this slide by on my feed.

Full disclosure: I‘m not completely on board with everything presented here. As someone who is a survivor of both sexual assault and intimate partner violence, the absence of continual, verbally affirmative consent is a baseline requirement for me.

That being said: as a switch who is a little bit more bottom leaning, I’ve had fantastic sex as a result of having a partner take what they want from me without asking first. (I really, really have been feeling a strong need of late to have a lesbian push me up against a wall, grab my tits hard enough to leave bruises, shove her tongue down my throat and then hold me against the wall by my neck while she uses her free hand to get me off multiple times.)

Yet, with porn, I do think there is a responsibility to convey the importance of asking for a receiving consent at all times. The way this starts makes me very uncomfortable. I’m sure it’s fine that it starts off seeming non-consensual and then the coercion transforms into a willingness to participate. But in the absence of any signifiers of respecting consent, it just follows that a little coercion is fine as long as it becomes consenting at some point.

I’m not cool with that.

Still, this gets the fashions of not just Mormonism but also fits with my understanding of Xtian fundamentalists. The confluence of repressive religious symbology with experimental sexual exploration is something that I can’t tell you whether it’s hot because it’s transgressive or if it’s transgressive because it’s something I find so damn hot.

The other thing I like about it is that although it’s definitely produced to cater to the male gaze, there are wonderful moments that aren’t male gaze-y (the glee with which the woman with the red hair is told to turn over and the way she gleefully complies, the scene later in the scene where the woman with the black hair is kneeling on the floor and we see her making eye contact with the redhead whom she’s going down on and the way there’s a focus on stopping to kiss before switching who gives and who receives–personally, one of my favorite things about sex is kissing after all the parties have come and the way you can taste a mix of your own fluids and your partners fluids on lips and tongues is one of my favorite human experiences; and I don’t really like the way I taste that much but I’ll not waste a single drop when I’m with someone else.)

I don’t think it’s artful or even especially high quality as far as production facets go but I’ve gotten myself off to this video 7 times in the last 36 hours and that is likely going to become 8 as soon as I save this draft to my queue.

[↖] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [↗] Lucas Entertainment – Wall Street feat. Ben Andrews & Rafael Alencar (2009); [↑] Cocky BoysDillon & Max Go Fishin’ {desaturated} (2012); [←] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [→] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [↓] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [<] Vixen.comBad Girl feat. Cadey Mercury & Xander Corvus {desaturated} (2017); [>] PornProsWet Toy Slut feat. Kelly Diamond (2014); [↙] Hustler – Casey Young and Tiffany Taylor (2008); [↘] Source unknown – Title unknown {desaturated} (201X)

Juxtaposition as commentary

RuddTitle unknown (2017)

I love this even if the composition is somewhat funky. (Yes: the ottomon and her arm draw the eye at a diagonal up and right toward her sternum, the equal yet opposite angle of the couch pushes the eye past her face to the hand thrown behind her head; the mass of negative space is like the tension of a bowstring when the arrow is loosed and the gaze spans back to where he’s feasting upon her desire–this subsequently then causes the eye to shuttle back and forth between him and her.)

It works but the layout is just strange and if I had to guess I’d say that this is a drawing made from some sort of image reference. (This would explain the strange layout because when you’re drawing you can put a camera anywhere but in the real world their are limitations on where a camera will fit.)

Still: I really do like the fact that the way the illustration scan preferences her pleasure above its catalyst. And when you subsequently realize the cause of the pleasure, the connection sharpens her experience somehow.

There’s also the little things–like I don’t exactly understand if it’s a stylistic contrivance but both of them appear to have their nails painted black. It’s small but it’s not a bad tact to remind you that her extended right arm is still part of the composition despite the way the viewer’s gaze is encouraged to loop between her face and his.

Lastly, it’s great that below his left armpit and her right inner thigh you can see a puddle of vaginal mucous and presumably saliva spreading on the couch. Good times.

image

[↑] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [↖] ZishyArya and Bailey Room Mates (2016); [↗] X-ArtRaw Passion (2016); [+] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [←] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [→] Source unknown –  Title unknown (201X); [-] Source unknown – Title unknown (2015); [↙] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [↘] Source unknown – Title unknown (201X); [↓] Nubile FilmsTitle unknown (201X)

Follow the thread: GIF Exception Edition

Source unknown – Title unknown (201X)

Although this doesn’t quite work there’s some great elements.

First off, I have a strong affinity for work which is ostensibly heteronormative but sublimates expectations. For example: most porn seems to operate from the principle that you shouldn’t see dick unless there’s a naked lady in the frame at the same time or a woman who although partial clothed is in some way interacting with the penis.

The positioning of the hands and the way they inform the rest of his pose reminds me of a Renaissance contrapposto sculpture. Also: the texture of the upholstery makes me think of those benches in national galleries.

The pattern of the tile and it’s alignment with the upholstery of the table is one of the reasons the composition more or less works–the eye scans left to right and the snaking chain attached to the shackle around his scrotum pulls the eye back across the image emphasizing the off kilter angle.

Overall all, as an image: it’s mostly strong enough to transcend the sloppy way his right ankle is chopped off at the ankle.

Anonymous – Two women engaged in oral sex (c. 1895)

With the invention of the daguerrotype in 1839, photography was
enlisted in the production of pornography. By the 1880s, when
developments in photographic technology brought cameras into the
middle-class home, amateurs could produce not only their own portraits
and snapshots but also the means of their own arousal. This pocket-sized
photograph is one of some 50,000 erotic images – professional and
amateur – that pioneer sexologist Dr Alfred Kinsey began to collect in
the late 1930s, working with difficulty around obscenity laws and codes
of ‘public’ morality. Taken not in a conventional studio but in a homey
Victorian bedroom, this representation of cunnilingus was probably
intended for illicit heterosexual male consumption, though one hopes
that at least a few women managed to put it to good use. The woman
sitting demurely on the bed wears an apron, indicating that male
fantasies about the sexual availability of domestic servants was
operative in the production of the image. Unlike in most erotic
photographs of the period, the face of the sitting women has been
crudely blacked out.

Catherine Lord, Art & Queer Culture (New York: Phaidon, 2013), 59.

(via @lesbianartandartists​)

Author unknown – Title Unknown (192X?)

Things I like about this:

  1. The corner of the room behind the divan at the left edge of the frame;
  2. The wallpaper,
  3. The way genitals in encircled by open mouth a smidgen north of the exact center of the frame;
  4. The garter with white bow relieving the black stocking of weight that would’ve otherwise unbalanced the composition;
  5. The way she’s looking at the camera;
  6. The eye moves over this in a very interesting fashion–left to right (taking in the tableau), upon reaching the right edge, there is a much more forcible momentum right to left–the backward trajectory reinforces the joining of bodies and then the angle of her hear and the downward jutting of her right arm creates this whipping loop where the viewer’s gaze cycles counter clockwise from arm, through rump, through the nexus of connection again and again.
  7. Zoom in close and you’ll see that the sort of silver highlights throughout the image are actually a result of where fingers pressed into the emulsion leaving the oily residue of fingerprint.

Lastly, a counterpoint on the why the eye parses this frame: there is no sense that there is a continuity beyond the edge of the frame, thus the exclusion of the woman on the left’s right forearm and hand represents an amputation, a symbolical removal of autonomous agency. (Her foot is similarly maimed.) No matter the cleverness of the way the work cycles the gaze–these women are definitely meant to perform for the male gaze.)