Myne Tease 3 - Scene 1

Well people, I brought home the movie Myne Tease 3 to analyze while on my break from school. And I will start off by saying that I am not at all impressed by this film. As someone who both supports and enjoys pornography, I will say that I would NEVER watch anything else by director Pat Myne by choice. Simply by watching the first scene of this film, I can tell that this film was definitely not directed with women in mind at all, whether as an audience, as sexual beings, or even as humans. This first scene was pretty appalling, to say the least.

Myne Tease 3 was released in 2005 by director Pat Myne, a man who is apparently famous in the industry for his scenes of anal sex. In fact, it seems from a brief review of the "literature" that the entire series focuses almost exclusively on anal sex. This alone is somewhat troubling. While we cannot deny that many people enjoy anal sex and do get pleasure out of it, the anus is not one of the female erogenous zones (at least not the last time I checked). I do also realize that it is possible to get off simply thinking about a certain situation or image that turns us on. However, we must face the fact that the director almost cuts out entirely other types of sex that are more likely to lead to female orgasm. The anal sex in the first scene of this video contained no more than 5 total seconds of what we would technically have to consider foreplay - there is a brief moment when the male actor runs his hand over the woman's genitals. For this reason, it seems that the director is choosing to ignore female pleasure entirely and direct this film explicitly toward men whose only goal is their own orgasm. We see and hear many indicators that the male/male actor in this film have "come," but the female's performance is hardly convincing. Linda Williams, a feminist theorist who writes on porn, discusses that this focus may be due to the difficulty in "proving" female orgasm since it is less visually obvious than that of the male's. However, what many women would consider "typical" things that must happen in order for them to come are simply not present in the first scene of this film. Completely phallocentric, it is!

This is not even to mention the language. The video opens with the woman saying, "I want you to come and fuck my motherfuckin' throat now." The woman is then degraded multiple times while orally stimulating the man on screen; he says, "That's a good little girl" and "No hands, just your mouth," just as a couple of examples. If she's such a "little girl," you probably shouldn't be fucking her! The woman is actually no better in the movie, calling him "whore" and "motherfucker" and then drawing attention to her body as if she is a display. She says, "Look at my titties bounce" and ends up displaying her stretched out (and possibly bleeding?) anus directly at the camera a minimum of five times. The exhibitionist aspect of this video is really disturbing; many feminists complain that all pornography objectifies women, and I would disagree, but it is hard to argue against language and actions that are self-objectifying on the woman's part. So, the language and the whole displaying-of-her-asshole thing were really too much.

You would think that a self-respecting feminist would turn off the film by this point, but I decided to finish it. The movie concludes with the woman faced away from the camera, squatting over a wine glass while she farts the male's ejaculate out of her anus. And as if that wasn't enough, she then proceeds to drink the ejaculate after toasting the camera (and the male audience). I think the worst part of this scene was the farting noises - it is a scene of total embarrassment and degradation. It reminded me of the first couple of minutes when the gagging and choking noises of the woman from this man's dick were enough to make me want to vomit. Overall, this movie was quite disgusting and, like I mentioned before, written and directed as if in a men's-only world.

Conclusion

I had a couple of concluding remarks. First, I thought it was interesting that the director had the woman in this first scene be so commanding, ordering the man to fuck her or to "let her" taste his dick, among other things. This intrigued me because, at one point, we hear the director's voice ordering the woman to do something with her breasts or the position she was in. This false sense of command simply reinforces how lacking in pleasure the occurrences in the movie truly are, and how male-focused the entire scene is. The authoritative nature of the woman is a total ploy and parody of female sexual power and autonomy. Another thing that caught my attention was that the male asks her to look up at him while she has her mouth around his genitals. I was wondering why, on a more complex level, he asked her to do that. Obviously, it is what men want to see. But why? Why do some people enjoy eye contact during oral sex? My suspicion is that there is a psychoanalyst out there with an answer, if I can only do enough research to find them...

My rating? 1 out of 10 stars for overall viewability of this film.

The Importance of Pornography

Today was a very sad day for me.

Last month, I applied for a grant given out by my college that encourages research and learning through sponsored faculty-student projects. Pornography has been an academic subject of interest for me since last year, and I decided to do my bachelor-level thesis project on it. But, since my proposed research would require money and materials, I decided to try and get funded. One of my FAVORITE professors ever agreed to work with me for the whole kit and kaboodle, and we spent the better part of two months putting together a project that explores pornography today.

The result? Epic fail. Both my professor and I received the official rejection letter, eloquently written in order to better kill my spirits. A project that is supposed to foster my academic growth was turned down because my work was seen as irrelevant and undeveloped. Well, of course it's undeveloped - I haven't done the project yet! Or at least that was my initial reaction. Along with a long string of swear words.

So, what does this mean? It means this blog is even more important to me now than it ever was. What was already a difficult feat of my work being accepted by the HSRC is made slightly more unlikely by the fact that I didn't receive grant approval.

What does this really mean? It means I'm going to take all my super pissed off energy and turn it into productive, kick-ass, feminist, fuck you energy!! I WILL research myself so thoroughly no committee member will ever be able to outsmart me. I WILL use every resource I can get ahold of to improve my knowledge of field research. I WILL show pornographic films all over my school and get amazing, free-spirited women like myself to talk about it. I WILL continue applying to the HSRC until my work is accepted. And I WILL press on until my project is so cohesive you won't be able to put down the 100 page finished product!!

Everybody - don't let The Man tell you that you are not good enough. Do what you enjoy. If it's truly white collar working, then do it. If it's ping pong, do it. If it's stamp collecting, do it. Me? I enjoy watching and analyzing pornography, but even more, I enjoy discussing how to make both women's and men's lives more fulfilled, harmonious, and free of what oppresses us all! So keep tuning back and enjoy more pornographic discussion to come.

Deep Throat - A Trip Back to '70's porno

Oh, Deep Throat. Oh, Linda Lovelace and the clitoris located oh-so-ironically in the back of your throat. Let me tell you, folks, if you're not bored to tears by the first four minutes of the film, which are a continuous shot of Lovelace in a car, then you will be stunned by the sheer amount of pubic hair in this film from the 1972.

A little background about the movie
Deep Throat was directed by Gerard Damiano and released in the US in 1972. A film that caused a stir both in the courts and on the streets, Deep Throat follows actress Linda Lovelace's journey to find sexual satisfaction. Lovelace complains to her friend Helen (actress Dolly Sharp) that she enjoys sex but has never "gotten off" in her whole entire life. This is, indeed, a tragedy, so Helen lines up 12 different men for Lovelace to have sex with. After the plan also fails to produce an orgasm in Lovelace, she goes to see Dr. Young (Harry Reems). Turns out, the poor girl's clitoris is located not in her genitals, but in the back of her throat. The doctor recommends "deep throating" as a cure to Lovelace's troubles, and he hires her to perform such acts in order to satisfy her and his patients, who have weird sex fetishes. We then see Lovelace with some sort of test tube stuck up her vagina, only to have a man drinking soda out of it! The movie concludes with Lovelace finally finding a man who is "big enough" to marry, a man with a rape fetish portrayed by the director himself! We can see why this movie might turn a few heads.

Pros and Cons
From an entertainment standpoint, this movie was certainly interesting. It had a plot line, which is not always the case in pornography. I would argue the first four minutes is slightly boring, and the last 25 minutes or so did nothing to turn me on, but the fact that the film was developed is commendable. There were also many funny moments, such as when Dr. Young claimed he would be able to hear himself cum if his balls were in his ears. Not to mention the hilarious and ironic music that persisted throughout the film (although I was disappointed that I couldn't hear much moaning). It is evident that this film really attempted to be accepted by mainstream audiences as well as more pornographically aligned ones.

I definitely had a few complaints while watching this film. First, there was really too much music. It was very distracting, and since I get turned on by moaning, I don't know that I would be able to use this film in any sexual act. Second, about 45 minutes into the movie, the camera angles begin switching very frequently. Again, it was very distracting, and I would be hard-pressed (haha) to use this movie seriously in sex or masturbation. Third, between about 33 minutes and 45 minutes, the movie gets very boring pornographically - there is very little sex portrayed, and it is done so comically when it does. Okay for casual porn viewing, but AGAIN, hard to take seriously. Fourth, Lovelace is supposed to "nurse" a man whose sexual fetish is pretending to rape women. While this is solely a scenario, it is slightly troublesome that this type of situation would be included in the film. Since many feminists, and people in general, are opposed to pornography because they believe it depicts rape, I think the inclusion of the man's rape fetish is a bit risky. That scene also emphasizes sexist notions of women: Lovelace says, "I need a big, strong man" after giving up masturbating for the rape fetish man. The film also reinforces the idea that women need to be married. Fifth, there was other troubling language throughout the film. For example, Helen says, "Everybody gets a little piece of this action" about Lovelace - yuck. Other offensive and disgusting quotes in my opinion were: "What's a nice joint like you doing in a girl like her?" Helen's reference to cunnilingus as "breakfast" for the man, and "The man I marry has to have a nine inch cock," which sets up unrealistic standards for male viewers of their own dicks.

There were many positives to this movie, though which somewhat surprised me! The movie is full of average-looking men and women who have what would be considered average-sized breasts and dicks. Some are shaved, some not. Some are tan, some not! I feel that women and men can better relate to pornography when the actors and actresses look like normal people. The movie also includes a wide variety of sexual positions, such as missionary, doggy style, reverse cowgirl, and even a threesome! Female pleasure is in no way ignored - there is a lot of eating out performed in this movie for sure! This is somewhat balanced out by the number of blow jobs...but they are never more than about 5 minutes long, and do not include cum being squirted into Lovelace's eye. One may also notice that the men never cum inside the female actresses, and while I cannot rightfully guess the reason, it seems like it may be a respectful thing (since I doubt this was pulling out to prevent pregnancy). The close-ups on the actresses faces during the sex scenes also prevented viewers from being too distanced from the people behind the body parts, and I felt like the women were not totally objectified throughout the film like in some other pornographic films.

On an even more fundamental level, the movie acknowledges that the woman's pleasure center is in her clitoris, not her vagina! Since this movie was produced almost 40 years ago, this is fairly remarkable and an important feature to notice. It may seem demoralizing that a woman's clitoris is separated from the rest of her erogenous zones as a way to make including a lot of blow jobs seem okay, but I think this movie has a different message. Many women even today see blow jobs as degrading - I think this movie attempts to portray blow jobs as a thing that women can enjoy and do not have to resist on principle because everyone tells them it is "ladylike" to do so. Personally, I enjoy performing oral sex - it makes me feel sexy and like I have the power to pleasure my partner like no one else! So, while many could argue that this movie is degrading toward women, I would argue that it is no more degrading to women than it is to men, and that it portrays oral sex for everyone in a positive light.

Quick Conclusion
Overall, I would watch this movie simply because of the impact it had on society in its time, and because it is most DEFINITELY one-of-a-kind. Plus, the angry bushes are AWESOME and a definite fresh change from the total absence of pubes in modern pornography.

I don't see any adult content...

That's because this blog is brand new, folks! Prepare for a spot where you can watch and discuss pornography with fellow voyeurs! The purpose of this project is to create a space where the average Joe and Jane can talk about their experiences with pornography, or even sex and relationships in general, without being subject to scrutiny. This project is intended to foster a sense of community and tolerance regarding the free expression of sex and sexual practices, including but not limited to pornography!

It is also important to note that I am a pro-pornography feminist. So, while I will be discussing many types of porn from various sources, I will also be watching with a somewhat scrutinizing eye out for what is useful and not useful to women's sexuality. Be that as it may, everyone should feel free to discuss the material posted as candidly as possible.

Much of my academic work for the next two years will focus predominantly on pornography not only in women's lives, but in men's lives as well. Honest comments will prove just how useful pornography can be in our lives - and it may help someone else learn a little something about themselves or their sex lives! So while this project is a very serious one to me, it in no way has to be taken seriously!! Sit back, watch, experience, and comment away!

Welcome to WE!