Daily Archives: January 11th, 2015

The UK’s new porn regulations aren’t particularly feminist, but neither do they prove the existence of ‘feminist porn’. Also, ‘squirting’ isn’t feminist

fucknopornblogs 01

fucknopornblogs 02

The above images are from the fucknobornblogs tumblr, and are captioned “articles from dailydot posted literally within a day of each other; cognitive dissonance is wonderful this time of year”

A lot of fuss was made last month over regulatory changes in the UK regarding on-line pornography. While there has been a lot of histrionics over censorship – with pornography described by one sex industry lawyer as “the canary in the coalmine of free speech”, these regulations only bring the internet in line with DVD regulations in the UK:

Introduced on Monday, the changes to existing regulations will ban a list of 10 sexual acts, reported to range from aggressive whipping to strangulation. It means that paid-for online pornographic films must now adhere to the same rules as content produced for hard-copy DVD films sold in sex shops.

While the changes took some by surprise because of the absence of any major campaign, the government said the Audiovisual Media Services Regulation 2014 removed uncertainty from the regulatory framework covering video-on-demand services and provided the same level of protection online that existed on the high street.

Acts that would fail to meet an R18 rating under guidelines laid out by the British Board of Film Censors are now prohibited, while material for which the BBFC has issued an R18 classification must not be included in an online film unless it is behind effective access controls which verify that the user is aged 18 or over.

A spokesperson for the DCMS said: “The legislation provides the same level of protection to the online world that exists on the high street in relation to the sale of physical DVDs.

“In a converging media world these provisions must be coherent and the BBFC classification regime is a tried and tested system of what content is regarded as harmful for minors.”

The other big claim, being repeated unquestioningly by the liberal/lefty mainstream press, is that these regulations “appear to take aim at female pleasure,” as equivalent acts, like ‘deep throating’ aren’t banned.

The quote above comes from an article in the Independent, which also lists all the acts the new regulation covers:

Aggressive whipping
Penetration by any object “associated with violence”
Physical or verbal abuse (regardless of if consensual)
Urolagnia (known as “water sports”)
Role-playing as non-adults
Physical restraint
Female ejaculation

The final three listed fall under acts the BBFC views as potentially “life-endangering”.

Even assuming that all these acts are being carried out by a dominatrix in a ‘femdom’ scenario (and we really can’t make that assumption, especially when it comes to “role-playing as non-adults”, a euphemism for the fetishisation of child sex abuse), this doesn’t mean they have anything to do with “female pleasure”; ‘femdom’ porn is by and for men, and it depicts male fantasies (if that were not the case, men wouldn’t have to pay women to do these things in real life).

There was even a protest outside the Houses of Parliament:

idiot sex-pozzer

You have to feel sorry for the woman in this photo, if she thinks the ’69’ position is synonymous with ‘face-sitting’ or necessarily involves suffocating a man with a woman’s genitals.

Next Years Girl sums the protests up nicely:

R-E-A-L-L-Y interesting that the protesters/commenters are all focused on the banned acts done by female performers (face-sitting, squirting) (while of course ignoring why those acts/the way they’re accomplished on a porn shoot are harmful to the performers themselves) and not the other acts banned by the law. Do you think it’s because it’s harder to sympathetically/hilariously act out caning/whipping women, penetrating a woman with billy clubs, pissing on/choking women, or adults “roleplaying” as children? Not so much quirky, alt-fun to be had there, harder to make the animus behind the law look like simple prudish cringing?

The only thing of any real interest here is the ban on the depiction of ‘squirting’, or female ejaculation. Since female ejaculate comes out of the urethra, it is impossible to distinguish from urination in pornography, and the two seem to be used interchangeably, which is the justification being given for the ban.

But putting the urination issue aside, is ‘squirting’ feminist? I am saying no for several reasons: ‘squirting’, like the vaginal orgasm, is not something all women can achieve, so it simply becomes another way for women to feel sexually inadequate. Also, it is only popular in porn because it is visual, so it reduces ‘female pleasure’ to something surface and performative, with no relation to the subjective experience of the woman making the performance. In fact, not only is most ‘squirting’ in porn faked, the occurrences that aren’t faked require a lot of effort on the performer’s part, detracting from any putative pleasure involved.

Female ejaculation is not uncommon in the average woman, says Kerner. A small amount of whitish and milky fluid that’s produced during or just before orgasm, its contents are different than the natural lubrication produced when sexually stimulated. It has a tiny bit of momentum, but it doesn’t shoot out.

On the other hand, “squirting” or “gushing” – copious amounts of fluid that shoot out of the woman at the same time as her supposed orgasm – is actually caused by a deliberate manipulation by the woman of her own body, specifically an intense bearing down on the pelvis, according to Kerner. Basically, a forceful clench and release of the bladder. When the contents of this fluid have been analyzed, it’s actually – yes – closer to pee than it is to female ejaculate. While porn frames squirting as a “reward” for the male partner’s pleasuring ability – supposedly depicting a woman who has been pleasured to the point of losing control of herself – the reality it’s actually the opposite, pointed out Kerner.

Squirting has nothing to do with the intensity of the orgasm. In fact, the women who do it are likely more focused on fulfilling the sexual fantasies of their male sex partners than actually enjoying an orgasm. Many sex therapists actually think that straining to squirt can ultimately damage the pelvic muscles, said Kerner. “When you think about it, an orgasm is an involuntary process. Regardless of what happens during sex, orgasms are unconscious and involve relaxing and letting go.”

Kerner warned me that if I asked people in the adult industry, they’d likely claim otherwise, given that squirting is a moneymaker for them. But porn director Billy Watson, who also writes a blog called I Shoot Porn (NSFW), is willing to admit (in colorful language) that he’s come to no conclusions about squirting.

“I have no fucking clue,” Watson told me. “I wish I did. Female ejaculate is a fucking mystery to me. I’ve see it happen all sorts of times – usually when [the male actor] has a really big wiener. Once, [an actress] squirted a ton on my set (she was one of the best at that trick) and I immediately stuck my nose in it – not literally – and sniffed. Not a hint of urine smell at all! But then I’ll have Porno Princesses tell me that they’re pissing, and squirt doesn’t exist, and it’s all BS.”

Tara Lynn Fox, one of the porn actresses he’s worked with, confirmed that gushing, in porn – the extreme version of squirting – is often smoke and mirrors. And douches.

While shooting a scene for a squirting fetish site, Fox couldn’t seem to do it naturally, so (in her words, via email), “the director filled up a bunch of douches with water and had me lay on my back and started filling me up! Then as soon as he thought there was enough he threw the bottle out of sight and hit record – and ferociously started rubbing my clit to make it look believable.”

Nevertheless, Fox says that squirting is real – rare and difficult to accomplish, but real. She said that she has squirted on set before, but off-camera. During a brief break, in order to stay hard, the male performer went down on Fox, and she had an orgasm: “He told me it was just a little squirt, but I did it. It wasn’t a big mess or anything.” Granted, I’m not a professional at this, but Fox’s experience sounds like a female ejaculation, which means that the issue of “female ejaculation v. squirting v. gushing” is also a semantic one. Because this needed to be more complicated.

If a pile of garbage like Cosmopolitan can understand this, why can’t the idiot sex-pozzers outside the Houses of Parliament?

Another reason to reject ‘squirting’ as feminist is because of the way it is portrayed in porn; it is portrayed the same as every other bodily secretion (and sex itself), as something disgusting and degrading:

Elegant Angel has produced several multi-award winning film series including Buttwoman, Big Wet Asses, Cumback Pussy, and the Sodomania series. Several EA films were included in AVN’s book on the Top 500 Greatest Films.

In 1993 Collins bribed a Hungarian transport official to allow him to film Buttwoman Does Budapest on the city’s busiest Number 18 tram, as it travelled through the Taban Park neighborhood. The bribe was US$100 and a box of chocolates, and Collins became the first American pornography director to film in Budapest. The film starred Collins’ wife Tianna, and features public sex scenes in front of the city’s main tourist attractions.

Niche-themed series that followed the 2004 hiatus included Cum Drenched Tits, teen-themed films like It’s a Daddy Thing, and ethnic-themed releases like Up That Black Ass, Big Black Wet Asses and Latin Booty Worship.

Some of Elegant Angels’ most successful series have focussed on the niche of female ejaculation. Squirtwoman was the first, followed by Swallow My Squirt, Flower’s Squirt Shower starring Flower Tucci, Cum Rain Cum Shine and Squirt in My Gape.

More recent series include Blow it Out Your Ass, which focusses on milk enemas and anal creampies, and the snowballing line, Sperm Swappers.

MRA Facility: Refuse Only

MRA Facility

(found at The Bewilderness)

QotD: “It’s still a big dick-measuring contest – we’re just using different rulers”

I think my biggest “huh” moment with respect to gender roles is when it was pointed out to me that your typical “geek” is just as hypermasculine as your typical “jock” when you look at it from the right angle.


Basically, the whole “geeks versus jocks” thing that gets drilled into us by media and the educational system isn’t about degrees of masculinity at all. It’s just two different flavours of the same toxic bullshit: the ideal geek is the alpha-male-as-philosopher-king, as opposed to the ideal jock’s alpha-male-as-warrior-king. It’s still a big dick-measuring contest – we’re just using different rulers.

David J Prokopetz, full post here, (found via Appropriately Inappropriate).