A Blowjob At His Desk

So I’ve been rummaging around in the paid area at Sexually Broken, and … no, wait.

I’ve got some rambling to do. But, as I ramble, I’m going to keep dropping pretty pictures of this dude who is “slaving away” (ha!) at his desk while getting a bondage blowjob from Penny Pax:

Let me just be right up front here and say that I really strongly dislike the name of this porn site. For me “broken” means something like “irreparably damaged” (not sexy to me) or it means something like “forcibly tamed” (think unruly wild horses) which doesn’t map very well in my personal fantasy-space to any BDSM fantasies that could rescue it from being too creepy when applied to, you know, actual human women with the capacity to consent (or not).

So, that’s the name. The actual content, though, I like rather a lot better. It’s a rough-sex sort of approach that uses bondage to facilitate the fucking, with a lot of black-diamond-difficulty deep throating, athletic high-energy sweat-and-drool-and-cum squishy-messy sex, and “forced” orgasms facilitated by big powerful vibrators and bondage helplessness. It’s sex you watch for the sheer spectacle of the thing, more than sex you (meaning “middle-aged, moderately-kinky, very lazy persons like me”) actually are likely to engage in. The high energy on display reminds me a bit of the porn style they used to call “gonzo”, but in the bit of rummaging about the site that I’ve done so far, I haven’t spotted any of the hateful elements (the contemptuous spitting and slapping, the pointless verbal abuse) that always ruined gonzo porn for me. What’s more, some of the Sexually Broken movies contain enough pre-and-post-action interviews to make it clear (as gonzo porn rarely did) that the models are happy to be there and comfortable with the menu of shoot activities. The bondage, too, is kind of refreshing in its single-minded focus; there’s less of (not none, but less of) the whippings and canings and floggings, and a lot more of the “in these ropes you’ll be helpless to avoid being ridiculous amounts of pleasure inflicted on you” sexual purpose that BDSM-y fetish porn too-frequently lacks.

So, what does any of that have to do with brokenness? I dunno, I’m still not seeing it. But Sexually Broken has an “About” page that takes a whack at it, and if the name doesn’t make sense to me, the least I can do is let them take their own shot at explaining to the rest of you what they mean by it:

Matt Williams takes wanton beauties, ties them in breath taking positions, and systematically blows their minds sexually.

The girls are bound helplessly in predicaments they have never explored before. Weights are hung from their nipples and their tongues are forced out of their mouth. Matt Williams slides his massive hard cock down their throats till they can’t breath. He only lets them breath when he’s ready and then he begins pounding the backs of their throats. That’s not where it ends though. Matt continues to fuck them in each of their holes. He uses toys to take them to heights they’ve never been to before. In the end he leaves them Sexually Broken.

Updated three times weekly with full HD content, Sexually Broken is the place to find truly original hardcore sex.

For me, the pretty pictures don’t stop being pretty just because I can’t quite parse somebody’s porn site naming/marketing decision:

And I suppose it’s time to confess: I don’t really ever get tired of seeing Penny Pax on my computer screen. I’m a sucker for porn blondes with pretty eyes, what can I say?

But seriously, does this woman look sexually broken to you? Frankly I don’t even think she looks dented — to me she’s got that “really, mister, that foreplay was nice and all and I could use a breather, but I’m far from done here — what else you got?” look in her eyes:

I suppose I should explain that the “blowjob under the desk” scene we’ve been looking at comes from the November 19 update, where the update title is “Apartment 345: A Feature Presentation of Real Life Fantasies From Your Favorite Porn Stars!” It’s a real 45-minute porn movie (not just the more-common “a girl, a guy, a set, a rough bondage sex scene”) framed as Penny’s real fantasies, acted out for your viewing pleasure. And the plot is: she comes home horny, she rides in the elevator with some menacing men who get her erotic imagination going, she imagines one of them pushing into her apartment behind her and making her his abject sex slave for the next eight hours. There are at least five major bondage sex scenes (depending on how you count) of which the one we’ve been viewing so far is perhaps the third. In the last one, she actually gets a little bedraggled looking:

But that’s because (as the sales copy puts it) “he fucks her from behind while dunking her head underwater in the bathtub. She cums so hard…” Which makes (as you can imagine) a pretty edgy and intense bondage sex scene. Closed track, professional driver, et cetera.

After all of which she no doubt actually wanted and needed a bath, and the hot water was right there, right? You’ve got to love intense porn that shows you a bit of the self-care “after”:

But: “broken”? No. Just no. She’s not broken. And for me that’s a good thing.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• It Doesn't Take A Rocket Scientist...
• Hunting Rain DeGrey
• Joy And Reproach
• Smooth Leather Hood
• What It Feels Like To Deep Throat
• Sex Under The Desk

Hardcore Gangbang

Given that seriously hardcore porn is a distinct minority of the content I post here on ErosBlog, it’s ironic that I got email promoting Kink.com’s latest rough sex site (launched yesterday) while I was working on a big long post with lots of pics about a different not-so-new rough sex site (watch for it tomorrow). So all you get today is the name and the tagline, because I don’t have time to look at it today and I won’t have space to post non-redundantly about it until after the holidays:

Hardcore Gangbang: A Woman’s Fantasy Can Sometimes Get Rough

And, yes, if that title strikes you as somewhat redundant, it does me too. Is there such a thing as a softcore gangbang, after all?

I’ll show you on your way with a softcore photo of a hardcore gangbang to contemplate while you ponder that conundrum:

Similar Sex Blogging:

• "These Fucking Perverts Are Surprisingly Dull"
• James Deen: He Could Be Your Boyfriend
• Wedding Night Surprise
• Double Penetration
• Suck My Badger

Pulverized? Seriously?

So, I got some promo info about a new porn site called Tonight’s Girlfriend so I went to look at a few sample pictures. And it’s perfectly fine stuff:

But then I got to looking at the prose description and marketing text, which is almost always a mistake:

She’s here. My toy has arrived. I’m a huge fan of Dana Dearmond, and tonight she’s going to become my fan, because she’s going to do whatever I want, and she’s going to like it. I’m in town for a few days, and I’m lucky enough to be able to pay for her services for a night. Tonight she’ll take my dick deep down her throat and thank me for it. She’ll get her asshole pulverized by my cock and ask for more. She’ll do whatever I want, starting by wearing the outfit I ordered her and requested she bring. This is going to be my night, and Dana Dearmond will love it … because I will.

It’s not badly written by the standards of the genre, not for the most part. It supports and reinforces the fantasy theme of the site, which looks like the paid “girlfriend for a night with no sexual limits” high-end prostitution fantasy that got old Charlie Sheen in so much trouble. (“High-end” could be a pun here … or maybe that’s just me.)

But then I got to this line, which seems jarringly out of place: “She’ll get her asshole pulverized by my cock…”

Wait, what?

I’ve seen this word “pulverized” before in porn writing. But I don’t get it. Who finds the word “pulverized” erotic? In what universe is a pulverized asshole an object of erotic fantasy?

I know there’s a whole line of gonzo porn out there featuring painful anal sex that is intended to leave the recipients stretched and sore. It’s mostly not to my taste, but it’s a fetish like any other. I’m guessing this is a sort of hyperbolized gesture toward that tradition. Perhaps no literal pulverization is contemplated; instead, it may be an exaggerated way of suggesting really rough anal sex without regard to her comfort, or even with the intent of being very painful.

I think about this stuff too much, I know. I should stop.

That, or open a cannibal fetish site: “Minced assholes, with fennel and sage!”

Similar Sex Blogging:

• The Ultimate Asslock: As Seen On TV!
• They Call Her "Jeannie The Zucchini"
• Shooting With Max Hardcore
• Victorian Anal Sex
• Weapon Of Ass Destruction

Head-In-The-Toilet Sex

There’s a long-dead Canadian folk singer name of Stan Rogers who had a comedy bit in his live act where, at one point, he’d ask the audience for a show of hands from those not familiar with Morris dancers. Then he’d laugh an evil laugh and say “You lucky few!”

Well, I need to introduce this post in much the same way. Is there anybody here who hasn’t been exposed to the gonzo porn trope of the girl being fucked from behind with her head in the toilet?

You lucky few.

This trope can get almost infinitely gross and/or scary — the toilet may or may not be in use by the performers or by others, it might or might not get flushed during the scene, the girl may or may not have her faced pushed or held beneath the surface of the “water” — but it’s almost always presented as extremely degrading and disgusting.

No, I don’t personally grok the appeal, and I like me some fairly serious BDSM scenes from time to time. But I don’t have a sexual response to pee or poo or girls gasping for breath or crying uncontrollably or vomiting or screaming in terror — all of which I have seen in gonzo porn scenes of this sort.

Now, full-disclosure and eschewing all hypocrisy, back in 2005 or so Kink.com did put out one of these face-in-toilet scenes on one of its F/f BDSM sites, and I did blog about it approvingly under the title Bondage Porn, Hold The Patriarchy. Partly this was because I was in a grumpy mood after several days of wading through some really awful anti-porn “feminist” blogs. Partly it was because the face-in-toilet-ee was the lovely Annie Cruz, whose enjoyment of edgy BDSM play as both dominant and submissive is well-documented, and whose own strong will and personal agency could not be less in doubt. And partly it was because this underwater toilet-cam shot of Annie’s face remains to this day one of the most comical porn photos I have ever seen:

Anyway, there are just four photos in sequence that touch on the face-in-toilet part of the shoot, and they struck me at the time as being fundamentally different from the usual gonzo head-in-toilet disgusto-fuck. (It would be interesting to see if that impression survived contact with the actual video, which I haven’t watched.) Is it degrading and/or humiliating? Almost certainly. Is there anything wrong with that? Given that Annie signed up for it with her eyes open, I don’t think so. But it don’t matter — it’s just one of those editorial decisions I make every day, that we all get to live with. This one I remember, though, because it tracked close to a line I don’t usually cross.

I was reminded of all this when I encountered Ms Naughty’s blog post called How Sex With Your Head In A Toilet Bowl Can Be OK. She’s reviewing a movie called Tight Places, and describes one scene thusly:

Brooklyn, the haughty, dominant lesbian pauses in her frantic fisting and then whispers in the ear of Vai, her moaning, submissive female partner. She points to the toilet her lover is leaning on.

“Do you want to put your head in there?”

Vai, panting and flushed as the result of several gushing orgasms, looks a little hesitant. “Is it clean?” she asks.

Brooklyn nods. And so the eager submissive lifts the lid and places her face into the toilet, her hair dropping into the water as Brooklyn fucks her hard with a strapon.

She then writes:

Right now, anti-porn activist Gail Dines is touring the world, marketing her book that argues that porn has “hijacked men’s sexuality.” She maintains that the current crop of porn websites and movies is far more sexist and degrading to women than ever before. She cherry-picks examples from the dark alleys of internet porn to illustrate her point. One of the regular things she mentions are sites where women’s heads are pushed into toilet bowls while they’re fucked.

How interesting, then, to encounter the very same sex act in a film that aims to be feminist, sex positive and queer- and female- friendly; a movie that features a cast of lesbians and trans-identified people but doesn’t star a single straight man.

Clearly, this movie is not following Gail Dines’ script.

Neither was Annie Cruz, blowing her toilet bubbles back in 2005. I mention this merely to reinforce the point about cherry-picking. Gonzo porn has been around a long time; I find it fairly nasty as a category (with some exceptions because there are huge diversities of presentation even within the category) but you don’t learn much about “porn” as a category by pointing out the more extravagant excesses of one of its most excessive genres.

Back to Ms Naughty and the real point of all this:

This scene is a perfect example of how consent and intent make all the difference.

Though I was personally turned off by the sex act portrayed, there is actually nothing wrong with the scene itself. Both performers consented to being in the scene and, once it’s underway, Vai voluntarily puts her head in the toilet bowl. Indeed, it seems to increase her physical pleasure by ramping up the psychological arousal. Her partner may have done it to degrade her but the intent is benign; Brooklyn seeks to get her partner off rather than to exert power or make her look or feel bad.

It’s an important difference and one that pro-porn feminists are doing their best to illustrate. It’s not the sex acts that are important, it’s the ethics of consent and how the performers are treated.

If the goal is consensual female pleasure, who cares how the results are achieved?

Indeed, I’ll go a step further in defense of BDSM and its tropes than Ms Naughty has gone here. Assuming the performers have consented to perform the scene and have adequate safewords and procedures (since it’s tough to say “Richard Nixon” with a mouthful of toilet water) to ensure that consent is maintained throughout the scene, I don’t think it matters who puts her head in the toilet bowl. Nor do I think it matters whether Brooklyn’s intent is “exert power”. Indeed, if BDSM is about mutual sexual pleasure (which need not always be simultaneous to be mutual), exerting power or inflicting degradation may be perfectly valid, legitimate, sexual, loving acts. Whether we are talking sex or sexual performance, it’s really just “the ethics of consent” that need concern us, and not the details of the acts, nor how they play out in the scene.

What, then, makes these two movies different from some of the gonzo porn flicks that disgust me, and that happen to feature men sticking women’s heads in toilets instead of women sticking women’s heads in toilets? {Carrie Bradshaw voice}Am I giving lesbians a free pass on toilet fucking?{/Carrie Bradshaw voice}

Answer: no. Speaking only for myself, there are two differences. In the case of Kink.com, at least, I have lots of evidence for my belief that they are ethical producers, and that what I see under their brand is well-consented to. I don’t have that same degree of faith in some of the gonzo producers, for reasons too subjective and particular to detail here. The other difference is purely aesthetic. In the M/f gonzo scenes I’ve seen, there’s been an element of physical overpowerment, big beefy guys “forcing” much smaller and very young and scared-looking girls and manhandling them around, usually accompanied by lot of verbal abuse. It has looked like bullying. Even if we assume it’s all high quality acting, I so despise bullies that my reaction has been a version of: “That’s not sexy, that’s just mean and pathetic. Do not want!”

And that should be quite enough about toilet-fucking to hold y’all for awhile.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Loving Kink.com
• A Letter From Prisoner #44902-112
• Being Mean To Annie Cruz
• Two Smiles
• Painfully Beautiful
• Sex And Submission