Posts
Showing posts with label gay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Oh noes! Teh Dyke Iz Infecting Mah Gay Pr0n!
This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
All You Will Get Is Fake Peen
It's not that I'm dying to see flaccid penises on the big screen, you understand. I like 'em fine enough, but 1) if it's a porn, I'm going to expect to see it get hard, 2) if it's a mainstream film, I'm going to expect it to be either very brief and thus unimportant or unnecessary and distracting from the plot, or 3) if I'm hunting for celebrity masturbatory fodder, more non-genital nudity would go further than the peen, which I can construct just fine in my mind. So following that logic, I really shouldn't be so upset at the fact that I won't be seeing Sean Penn or James Franco's penises in the upcoming movie "Milk".And yet I am, and I'll tell you why.
(On a side note, I am sooo excited about "Milk", the biopic about the first openly gay politican Harvey Milk. I have to admit it- I'm not that much a fan of Sean Penn. Others love him, tell me he's great, but I just don't care for his personality. But just watching the preview, I'm super-stoked, not only because it looks tremendously well-made, but because I really think it has the potential to rally people. Think about it- angry GLBTQ folks fresh off of being denied marriage + a moving portrayal of political activism + newly politically mobilized youth = a new revolution. Maybe? I don't know. But I'm still excited.)
Anyways, back on topic. When the two characters shimmy down to nothing, their penises are going to be fake prosthetics, as James Franco told Jimmy Kimmel. The question I have, though, and which doesn't seemed to be addressed in any of the other blogs posting the news, is: "Why?"
The last two big prosthetic penises I remember seeing on-screen belonged to Transamerica's Felicity Huffman and Boogie Night's Mark Walhberg- one for the actress who didn't have one herself, and one for the man needing to portray some hefty porno endowment. Both of these were exceptional cases, ones that I just don't think are present in the case of "Milk". I don't remember hearing any rumor that Milk or his lover were hung like horses, thereby requiring filmmakers to provide historical accuracy by means of plastic genitals.
Mind you, I'm not faulting Penn or Franco. Not only must it be incredibly difficult to expose yourself to millions of strangers, making yourself vulnerable through the removal of protective clothes, but it also opens up the wide and ridiculous arena of penis commentary that is sure to follow. Anybody not swinging an enormous club is immediately subject to intense discussion and criticism- all we have to do is look at what happened to poor Jude Law. One outside changing of clothes and boom! everybody is talking about how small the guy is, despite the fact that he appears more than average to moi. (And I've read countless articles in "defense" of Jude Law's penis- from claims of shrinkage in the pool, a hairy bush hiding and diminishing the goods, all the way to the hydraulics of his crouching stance). Dropping trow is a huge risk to one's career, and if I were an agent, I wouldn't be recommending my male talent to be flopping freely in front of cameras, either. And who wouldn't rather put on a fake and let it take all the heat? Penn and Franco, it turns out, are victims of our size-obsessed culture.
I'm just very tired of penis size being yakked about so much. Even after Enzyte has been sued for its false claims and lack of peer-reviewed evidence (even though c'mon, anybody who bought it was an idiot!), I still have to see Bob's damn smiling face while a cheery announcer tells me all about natural male enhancement. Guys are incredibly worried about their size and national male anxiety increases tenfold. But there's little men can do about penis size without dropping serious cash or risking lumpiness (eek!). It truly is the most ridiculous thing to worry about- it just ain't changing. Best learn to love your penis (why are women encouraged to love their bodies, but men rarely are?), learn to modify your lovemaking skills and tool box if your lady/man says size is causing you to lack, and stop stressing.
But unfortunately, watching "Milk" will make sweat break out on your forehead all over again. You might feel better, having heard Franco regale audiences with his humorous tale, as you remind yourself that they're fake, and even Sean Penn, who bedded the eminently beddable Madonna, worried about his own size. Or not. Nobody seems to be calling out the fake penises for what it says about our culture and our sexual anxieties, and I don't care if it's been talked about to death. Somebody should say it and put it on the table, at the very least.
Until then, though, expect a new trend- Judd Apatow be damned- of the dicks being larger than life, because all you're getting is fake peen.
Ah, well. Go and see "Milk" when it comes out- for the story, instead.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Now That It's (Sorta) Over . . .
Well . . . we lost. Despite my fellow porn enthusiasts going out and buying to your heart's content, and despite voting (as I know you all did), we failed to defeat the ban on gay marriage here in California (a.k.a. Prop 8).
Of course, that doesn't mean defeat; the results were so incredibly close, support and opposition was huge on both sides, and, as Jiz Lee so wonderfully brought to my attention, the fight soldiers on. And hooray for that, because the last thing we need is to become demoralized and give up. We do not live in a democracy, where a majority rules our lives- we live in a republic, where the majority rules . . . so long as they don't infringe on our rights. I'd say refusing the right of marriage is one of those that we're entitled to (as citizens, taxpayers, and heck, human beings). So we'll turn to the blindfolded lady Justice and let her weigh it out in the times to come.
But now that all's said and done, I don't want an angry rant about homophobia, or a weepy rant about losing, or even an inspirational manifesto about overcoming. I want to ask: what are we doing?
It's incredible, I think, the amount of money we were able to raise in support of the "No On 8" campaign- a brilliant $38,432,873. We even beat out the other side with their $36,122,538 (not that it helped). I can hardly fathom these numbers- they seem fantastical. All for a few ads to try and sway the general public.
I don't mean to say that opposing Prop 8 isn't important- I hope that it's clear that it's a huge deal and one that certainly makes a difference in lives- it's not just about some abstract "rights", but about respect and tolerance and being acknowledged, in being able to be with your partner, and, for those already married, for staying that way. But was it worth such a price tag?
I'll admit that my thoughts have been seriously swayed by a book I bought a while back- Mattilda Bernstein's That's Revolting. In it are a bevy of essays asking the somewhat taboo question that doesn't get asked nearly enough in queer circles- the biggest of which is "Do we even need marriage?". Some will scream- of course we do! And on the other side of the divide is the radicals who would like to do away with the whole institution on the basis of what it used to be and maybe still stands for (the symbolic passing over of a bride from her father to her new husband as chattel?), or favor the philsophical approach that we don't need no stinkin' pieces of paper to prove our bonds. You've got queer folks who want to get married, queer folks who don't and never would, thinking it's too "straight", queer folks who want to have something but don't want to call it marriage, and those who won't stand for anything less than the M word. There isn't a queer around (I think) who says we don't deserve the right to marriage; that's a given. But as to whether we ought be fighting one of our many battles here, on this issue, and spending our money here, I just don't know if it's that clear-cut.
The various essays bring up strong, radical points that I don't always believe/agree with, but which are provocative nonetheless. Is marriage, and this fight for gay marriage, a fight that only benefits some queers? Does it represent a class of relatively elite, affluent, mainly white conservative (i.e. non-radical, not non-liberal) gays and lesbians, who have a vested interest in the institution of marriage, and the privileges it brings, both pyschological, in social reception, and least not in asset sharing and whatnot? How much of the fight for gay marriage has to do with wanting the status and privilege that comes with it, and the normalizing effect that goes with it? I'm not saying that queer folks are somehow less equipped or less inclined to go hand-in-hand with marriage. Gay marriage naturally belongs on the list of the gay agenda list (you know, the real one, not the one that has 'recruit and convert all the innocent chitlins on it).
My question is this: could that money have been put to other, better use? How many lives could have been bettered if the money went to helping the queers that get left out of the HRC meetings, or blatantly turned away? What if instead of waging a neverending battle against the lies thrown out by the Prop 8 supporters, the money was used for organizations with outreach and education? What if we created more and helped keep the public queer spaces open? How about providing aid to the GLBTQ homeless and at-risk youth?
Those are just some of the thoughts running through my head. Hmm.
Of course, that doesn't mean defeat; the results were so incredibly close, support and opposition was huge on both sides, and, as Jiz Lee so wonderfully brought to my attention, the fight soldiers on. And hooray for that, because the last thing we need is to become demoralized and give up. We do not live in a democracy, where a majority rules our lives- we live in a republic, where the majority rules . . . so long as they don't infringe on our rights. I'd say refusing the right of marriage is one of those that we're entitled to (as citizens, taxpayers, and heck, human beings). So we'll turn to the blindfolded lady Justice and let her weigh it out in the times to come.
But now that all's said and done, I don't want an angry rant about homophobia, or a weepy rant about losing, or even an inspirational manifesto about overcoming. I want to ask: what are we doing?
It's incredible, I think, the amount of money we were able to raise in support of the "No On 8" campaign- a brilliant $38,432,873. We even beat out the other side with their $36,122,538 (not that it helped). I can hardly fathom these numbers- they seem fantastical. All for a few ads to try and sway the general public.
I don't mean to say that opposing Prop 8 isn't important- I hope that it's clear that it's a huge deal and one that certainly makes a difference in lives- it's not just about some abstract "rights", but about respect and tolerance and being acknowledged, in being able to be with your partner, and, for those already married, for staying that way. But was it worth such a price tag?
I'll admit that my thoughts have been seriously swayed by a book I bought a while back- Mattilda Bernstein's That's Revolting. In it are a bevy of essays asking the somewhat taboo question that doesn't get asked nearly enough in queer circles- the biggest of which is "Do we even need marriage?". Some will scream- of course we do! And on the other side of the divide is the radicals who would like to do away with the whole institution on the basis of what it used to be and maybe still stands for (the symbolic passing over of a bride from her father to her new husband as chattel?), or favor the philsophical approach that we don't need no stinkin' pieces of paper to prove our bonds. You've got queer folks who want to get married, queer folks who don't and never would, thinking it's too "straight", queer folks who want to have something but don't want to call it marriage, and those who won't stand for anything less than the M word. There isn't a queer around (I think) who says we don't deserve the right to marriage; that's a given. But as to whether we ought be fighting one of our many battles here, on this issue, and spending our money here, I just don't know if it's that clear-cut.
The various essays bring up strong, radical points that I don't always believe/agree with, but which are provocative nonetheless. Is marriage, and this fight for gay marriage, a fight that only benefits some queers? Does it represent a class of relatively elite, affluent, mainly white conservative (i.e. non-radical, not non-liberal) gays and lesbians, who have a vested interest in the institution of marriage, and the privileges it brings, both pyschological, in social reception, and least not in asset sharing and whatnot? How much of the fight for gay marriage has to do with wanting the status and privilege that comes with it, and the normalizing effect that goes with it? I'm not saying that queer folks are somehow less equipped or less inclined to go hand-in-hand with marriage. Gay marriage naturally belongs on the list of the gay agenda list (you know, the real one, not the one that has 'recruit and convert all the innocent chitlins on it).
My question is this: could that money have been put to other, better use? How many lives could have been bettered if the money went to helping the queers that get left out of the HRC meetings, or blatantly turned away? What if instead of waging a neverending battle against the lies thrown out by the Prop 8 supporters, the money was used for organizations with outreach and education? What if we created more and helped keep the public queer spaces open? How about providing aid to the GLBTQ homeless and at-risk youth?
Those are just some of the thoughts running through my head. Hmm.
Friday, October 31, 2008
$2,096 Closer To Equality!
Well, first off, Happy Halloween! Be sure to be safe and all that tonight as you celebrate this delightful Paganistic holiday, flouncing around in your incredibly slutty costumes, as I'm sure you are.
Secondly, rock on, you awesome people! Of course you remember my urging you to buy porn AND simultaneously support "No On Prop 8" campaign, and ya'll came through.
The official numbers are out:
Comstock Films raised a whopping $1,596! Pink & White Productions raised $500! Both numbers are awesome!
Together, we can keep Shine Louise Houston (and many, many others!) married and able to do so.
And even though it's not directly Prop 8-related, I did a little something on my part (other than donating and blogging, that is):
It's not much, but it's something, right?
Secondly, rock on, you awesome people! Of course you remember my urging you to buy porn AND simultaneously support "No On Prop 8" campaign, and ya'll came through.
The official numbers are out:
Comstock Films raised a whopping $1,596! Pink & White Productions raised $500! Both numbers are awesome!
Together, we can keep Shine Louise Houston (and many, many others!) married and able to do so.
And even though it's not directly Prop 8-related, I did a little something on my part (other than donating and blogging, that is):
It's not much, but it's something, right?
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Prop 8: The Question Nobody's Asking
I really don't want to get political on this blog. That is to say, I don't want to mention the names of any politicians, unless they're doing something sex-related. I just don't want to be dragged down into that bog, because I've seen too many non-politically-focused blogs get overrun by political opinion posts. I don't want to be that blog, losing all of its fun with rants that can typically be found elsewhere, and often by much more informed folks than myself.
Moreover, I doubt it would have much effect, except perhaps for a cathartic effect for me as the writer. Almost everyone who reads non-news blogs has already formed an opinion, and probably won't budge very much . . . they read the same old things screaming either "Heck yeah! Dead-on!" or "Heck no! What an idiot!". And that's just not productive, satisfying as it may be. And for those moderates and undecided voters whose minds I could potentially sway, well, I'm pretty sure they will have decided with the help of bigger, better, famous-er blogs by the time they finally come to mine. I'm just not in the business of trying to convince you.
And yet, whenever I see a certain viewpoint missing in a discussion, I feel the call of duty, particularly since such discussions usually have reached a stalemate, locked in a dead heat between proponents and opponents who feverently believe in their cause. It's my opinion that nobody wants to somehow 'destroy America' the way some politicans would have you believe. We all have needs and desires, as individuals and as members of groups/communities with their own interests, and though I may disagree with some of those interests, I certainly believe that they all should be taken seriously. Political fanatics who don't listen to any reason are not just stupid and/or brainwashed, as we'd like to believe- they are made when they [sometimes legitimately] feel they are being pushed aside and not being listened to. If you think the world is against you from the start, there's no way you're going to listen to the well-founded criticisms you receive. And then we're back right again to that stalemate.
My inspiration today was in an op-ed piece about- what else?- California's Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban (for those of you who, as I often forget, don't live in Cali). Though it's certainly a serious topic, I can't help but read all the debates with amusement. The "yes" supporters often fall on arguments I find most ridiculous. But occasionally they do hit a strong nerve that can't be laughed away so easily, and one of them has been the accusation that allowing gay marriage would create legislative imperatives for those individuals and institutions who don't agree with it- i.e. churches having to marry gay folks, kids being taught about gay marriage in school, etc.). This has raised a series of commercials about who's lying- will kids know about the fact that um, there are gay people in the world, or will they be able to ignore this fact by locking themselves in their basements and being isolated from the general world? I'm going to skip the "Liar!" accusations and go right to the assumption that neither side really knows just how, exactly, the legislation will work. It's a nebulous thing, law. The Prop 8 supporters might be right about some changes taking place- and if they are, what then?
Case in point: the article offered several concrete, documented examples, wherein doctors were sued for not artificially inseminating a lesbian woman because of their personal religious convictions, churches lost some of their tax-exempt status for refusing to let a lesbian couple hold a civil union ceremony in its pavilion, and parents were refused the right in a court case to opt their children out of school discussions of homosexuality. Now, you, like me, are probably rolling your eyes, because you know that it's stupid and ridiculous for people to have their panties all in a bunch over homosexuality in this day and age. They're stupid, they're bigots, whatever, it's soo over. Deal with it. Don't try to legislate your homophobia and weird mixed up feelings onto me. But these are still big concerns to these people, and like I said above, when nobody listens to your grievances or dismisses them, you start launching ugly campaigns.
The problem, then, becomes one of competing rights. How do you bow to both without becoming discriminatory? And that's the question nobody's asking.
I believe people have the right to get married, because according to our Constitution, we have the right to, as individuals, voluntarily enter into contracts regardless of their nature. When we sign, by the fact that we pay taxes, the justice department will honor that in court, and make sure both parties hold up their end. Calling it 'civil unions' when it provides the exact same thing (which, actually, it often doesn't), is eerily reminiscent of the 'separate but equal' thing, which the Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education struck. And I believe that individuals have the right against the government forcing them to serve and interact with those they don't want to. So even though I get odd looks for saying it, I believe that a bigot who doesn't want to let a black person into his store, or hire a woman for a job just because she's a woman, for example, should have the right to do so. The government cannot do this, of course, because Lady Justice wears a blindfold and the law is impartial; there can be no discrimination in a democratic government, and injustices in hiring and whatnot should be brought to suit. But if you own a business or institution and wish to do the completely idiotic, counterintuitive and counterproductive act of turning away qualified employees or paying customers because of your bigotry, your business will suffer (and hopefully conscientious citizens will launch boycotts and raise awareness about how much you suck).
If there are some Prop 8 supporters who are truly motivated by the fears mentioned in this article and still feel that gays should have the right to marry, if it weren't for all these complications (and I'm sure there have to be some, right?), then nobody is asking the question: why don't we get the government out of our lives and have the best of both sides? If you don't want the government being able to say who your church has to marry, then you have to give up your tax exempt status (which has always bugged me, anyways, especially since I read Winnifred Sullivan's The Impossibility Of Religious Freedom, which made a wonderful argument that government's protection of religious "rights" privileges the religious over the non-religious and takes on the impossible task of deciding what constitutes a "true" religion, particularly when it comes to more hybridized folk faith). If you want to resolve the question of what students learn, you need to get the government out of education and turn to private schooling and homeschooling. If you want to be able to not treat/serve/whatever to various people in your business, you must get the government out of your business- and that includes the laws that benefit you.
Of course, I know not everybody shares these Libertarian thoughts, and it's far too extreme for our gigantic, bloated government to instantly do. But what irks me most is, again, that nobody is even offering this as a possibility to be shot down.
That's it for today's politics.
Moreover, I doubt it would have much effect, except perhaps for a cathartic effect for me as the writer. Almost everyone who reads non-news blogs has already formed an opinion, and probably won't budge very much . . . they read the same old things screaming either "Heck yeah! Dead-on!" or "Heck no! What an idiot!". And that's just not productive, satisfying as it may be. And for those moderates and undecided voters whose minds I could potentially sway, well, I'm pretty sure they will have decided with the help of bigger, better, famous-er blogs by the time they finally come to mine. I'm just not in the business of trying to convince you.
And yet, whenever I see a certain viewpoint missing in a discussion, I feel the call of duty, particularly since such discussions usually have reached a stalemate, locked in a dead heat between proponents and opponents who feverently believe in their cause. It's my opinion that nobody wants to somehow 'destroy America' the way some politicans would have you believe. We all have needs and desires, as individuals and as members of groups/communities with their own interests, and though I may disagree with some of those interests, I certainly believe that they all should be taken seriously. Political fanatics who don't listen to any reason are not just stupid and/or brainwashed, as we'd like to believe- they are made when they [sometimes legitimately] feel they are being pushed aside and not being listened to. If you think the world is against you from the start, there's no way you're going to listen to the well-founded criticisms you receive. And then we're back right again to that stalemate.
My inspiration today was in an op-ed piece about- what else?- California's Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban (for those of you who, as I often forget, don't live in Cali). Though it's certainly a serious topic, I can't help but read all the debates with amusement. The "yes" supporters often fall on arguments I find most ridiculous. But occasionally they do hit a strong nerve that can't be laughed away so easily, and one of them has been the accusation that allowing gay marriage would create legislative imperatives for those individuals and institutions who don't agree with it- i.e. churches having to marry gay folks, kids being taught about gay marriage in school, etc.). This has raised a series of commercials about who's lying- will kids know about the fact that um, there are gay people in the world, or will they be able to ignore this fact by locking themselves in their basements and being isolated from the general world? I'm going to skip the "Liar!" accusations and go right to the assumption that neither side really knows just how, exactly, the legislation will work. It's a nebulous thing, law. The Prop 8 supporters might be right about some changes taking place- and if they are, what then?
Case in point: the article offered several concrete, documented examples, wherein doctors were sued for not artificially inseminating a lesbian woman because of their personal religious convictions, churches lost some of their tax-exempt status for refusing to let a lesbian couple hold a civil union ceremony in its pavilion, and parents were refused the right in a court case to opt their children out of school discussions of homosexuality. Now, you, like me, are probably rolling your eyes, because you know that it's stupid and ridiculous for people to have their panties all in a bunch over homosexuality in this day and age. They're stupid, they're bigots, whatever, it's soo over. Deal with it. Don't try to legislate your homophobia and weird mixed up feelings onto me. But these are still big concerns to these people, and like I said above, when nobody listens to your grievances or dismisses them, you start launching ugly campaigns.
The problem, then, becomes one of competing rights. How do you bow to both without becoming discriminatory? And that's the question nobody's asking.
I believe people have the right to get married, because according to our Constitution, we have the right to, as individuals, voluntarily enter into contracts regardless of their nature. When we sign, by the fact that we pay taxes, the justice department will honor that in court, and make sure both parties hold up their end. Calling it 'civil unions' when it provides the exact same thing (which, actually, it often doesn't), is eerily reminiscent of the 'separate but equal' thing, which the Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education struck. And I believe that individuals have the right against the government forcing them to serve and interact with those they don't want to. So even though I get odd looks for saying it, I believe that a bigot who doesn't want to let a black person into his store, or hire a woman for a job just because she's a woman, for example, should have the right to do so. The government cannot do this, of course, because Lady Justice wears a blindfold and the law is impartial; there can be no discrimination in a democratic government, and injustices in hiring and whatnot should be brought to suit. But if you own a business or institution and wish to do the completely idiotic, counterintuitive and counterproductive act of turning away qualified employees or paying customers because of your bigotry, your business will suffer (and hopefully conscientious citizens will launch boycotts and raise awareness about how much you suck).
If there are some Prop 8 supporters who are truly motivated by the fears mentioned in this article and still feel that gays should have the right to marry, if it weren't for all these complications (and I'm sure there have to be some, right?), then nobody is asking the question: why don't we get the government out of our lives and have the best of both sides? If you don't want the government being able to say who your church has to marry, then you have to give up your tax exempt status (which has always bugged me, anyways, especially since I read Winnifred Sullivan's The Impossibility Of Religious Freedom, which made a wonderful argument that government's protection of religious "rights" privileges the religious over the non-religious and takes on the impossible task of deciding what constitutes a "true" religion, particularly when it comes to more hybridized folk faith). If you want to resolve the question of what students learn, you need to get the government out of education and turn to private schooling and homeschooling. If you want to be able to not treat/serve/whatever to various people in your business, you must get the government out of your business- and that includes the laws that benefit you.
Of course, I know not everybody shares these Libertarian thoughts, and it's far too extreme for our gigantic, bloated government to instantly do. But what irks me most is, again, that nobody is even offering this as a possibility to be shot down.
That's it for today's politics.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Monday, October 6, 2008
Queers Claim Webspace
Of course, this isn't a new thing- a small, but precious niche for queers has been carved out on the Internet, providing resources and information for a long time. And we gay and fey folk have done what's natural and created groups and networks on various non-queer sites to represent ourselves. And yet, there's a new trend sweeping by thatBut what I love and impresses me most about these new sites is the level of interactivity. Following off of famous models like Youtube, Myspace, and so on, they are often even better because they combine the best features of these various sites, creating a one-stop shop where you can catch up on news, write your own blogs, post pictures and post videos (hooray for these sites that allow for PG as well as X-rated videos and pictures!), chat in real time, talk in delayed time through forums, read literature, create your own 'page' to represent yourself, spread the word about events, befriend people in virtual space and leave them comments, play games with other users, join groups of like-minded people, take polls, search out members in your area . . . the list goes on.
Case in point: go visit that lesbian place where all the hot girls come, Digiromp, or FtM haven The Men's Room, where you can do all these things and more. And, to a lesser extent (both in terms of what you can do on the sites and in 'queerness factor'), nifty places like Sharing Is Sexy, Playful Bent, and Creative Filth (among others).
Compared to the sites of old, where information was one-way and hardly interactive, and it's evident that we've come far- very far (especially when these amazing websites are being created, not by super-advanced technological experts, but ordinary folks with just a little web design knowledge to their names). The community grows and evolves by the interaction of the users . . . which isn't to say that the big professional non-interactive sites where the information only comes from the creators (often limited by and dependent on sponsorship from advertisers) don't have their place as well. But there's something to be said for these new sites popping up, grass roots-style, with most content being collaboratively shared and created.
Or maybe I'm just being supremely influenced by my computer-assisted language learning class this semester and hence I'm all starry-eye'd at the idea of technology helping queers get together and learn together.
Either way, it's cool.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Boys and G0ys
It seems like every four or five months or so somebody surfaces from out of nowhere to remind me of the "g0y" movement. It's something I'd rather forget, to be quite honest.
At first glance, it seems like nothing new. People keep on coming up with labels for their own particular gender and sexual orientational crossroads- it starts as lesbian, breaks down to butches, and we add in the sexual components to get butch tops, butch bottoms, heck, even stone butches. And that's just one example. While it can be a doozy to keep track of all these terms, I generally like the creativity associated with them, the way they help to foster growing communities and battle stereotypes (helping to open up dialogues about diversity), and how they provide individuals with proud identities. Yeah . . . I'm not one of those people arguing "Why do we need labels? Who cares who you love?". I like labels and burgeoning identities.
So I really ought to be thrilled to see a new subset of the gay male, the g0y (yes, that's a zero in the middle, not an "oh", and no, I don't know how to pronounce it), who proclaims proudly that he is masculine, loves masculine men, and he doesn't have anal sex.
Only, there's more to it than that, you see.
A closer look at the g0y philosophy shows they have a lot of, shall we say, interesting ideas about gender and sex, and they come not from a place of personal preferences, but rather from a lot of theorizing and way more explanation than the above definition ought warrant. I mean, why would someone need several webpages defending and vehemently not apologizing for their personal identity in long, meandering passages?
G0y's do not only dislike anal sex for themselves- they dislike it for anyone. People who practice buttsex are labelled "phreaks" and deviants, and the reason for the practice's popularity is likened to the massive campaigns of the tobacco industry, and its affiliation with homosexuality compared to the Nazi takeover of the peaceful Indian symbol (note to the g0y's: actually, the symbol of the swastika is actually reversed, not as is). Strong words, stronger images. And all about a little anal play? Seriously? Nobody's punk'ing me?
But of course, the condemnation of anal sex is integral to maintaining a Christian front. Manipulate scripture as you will- I'm no theologist and could care less. I've heard various sources say that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah had to do with a lack of hospitality, not gay sex. I've heard some say it was all about man-on-man action, but it don't really matter, because Jesus never said a thing about guys getting together. I've heard some very smart people (okay, well, that's my subjectivity showing through) say that the Bible is reflective of the time in which it was written, and the social mores of that era, hence it can't be taken literally (moreover, there are lots of other things we have changed- women speaking out in church, for example- that wasn't in as much contention as the whole gay issue). But g0y's twist to the Word is a literal one- it's the anal sex that'll getcha sent to hell. Man-on-man lovin' is good in the eyes of the Lord, but "laying with a man as one would a woman"- nuh-uh, mister.
Funny, isn't it? I guess it all depends on your goals. If you're a gay guy longing to be accepted by God, you can tell yourself that. If you're a straight couple longing for some anal sex, though, well, you can talk your way to that, too- like the hilarious parody site Sex In Christ goes to show.
The other tenet of g0ydom is the emphasis on masculinity. Oh no, your Paul Lynde's and Buddy Cole's aren't welcome here. God only knows how they handle watching Jack on "Will and Grace". Now, I've encountered a lot of femme phobia- gay men who are squicked by the mincing and prancing and generally fun part of getting to be gay (you know, if you're so inclined). Every time I hear a gay man complain about stereotypical gay portrayals in the media, I sympathize, but at the same time, I hear those echoes of anti-femme- for effeminate gay men do exist. Some equality in representation of macho men and queens would be nice, but you can't eliminate either completely, no matter how much you wish you weren't associated with them. Your discomfort, I've always maintained, might just be your own hangup. But not so, say the g0ys. If you aren't a virile manly man, you've been brainwashed by the gays- another "phreak" delighting in your gender deviancy.
So. Do g0ys have some good points? Of course they do- that's what draws people to it in the first place (well, besides using their homophobic stances to draw in gay men in denial with self-internalized hatred). They quite correctly acknolwedge that media portrayals of gay men (or, I suppose, for them, "men who love men") are stereotypical and often negative (or at least, have negative connotations in a world that devalues femininity). And they have a very right-on view towards Christian treatments of homosexuality (discrediting the ex-gay movement, for example). And yet, the whole thing sounds like a macho Christian guy's attempt to make his homosexuality palatable with his church and his macho buddies.
I wouldn't have a problem with g0ys if they were what they proposed to be- anal-disliking masculine guys who like guys. But they're much more than that- what amounts to a cult that believes itself morally superior by separating itself from and then belittling and demonizing homosexuality. The only thing that gives me some comfort is that I still have faith in the general intelligence of women. Don't let me down, lesbians. If I find out there's a new "leZbian" subculture of girls who don't eat pussy, there WILL be hell to pay, ya'll.
At first glance, it seems like nothing new. People keep on coming up with labels for their own particular gender and sexual orientational crossroads- it starts as lesbian, breaks down to butches, and we add in the sexual components to get butch tops, butch bottoms, heck, even stone butches. And that's just one example. While it can be a doozy to keep track of all these terms, I generally like the creativity associated with them, the way they help to foster growing communities and battle stereotypes (helping to open up dialogues about diversity), and how they provide individuals with proud identities. Yeah . . . I'm not one of those people arguing "Why do we need labels? Who cares who you love?". I like labels and burgeoning identities.
So I really ought to be thrilled to see a new subset of the gay male, the g0y (yes, that's a zero in the middle, not an "oh", and no, I don't know how to pronounce it), who proclaims proudly that he is masculine, loves masculine men, and he doesn't have anal sex.
Only, there's more to it than that, you see.
A closer look at the g0y philosophy shows they have a lot of, shall we say, interesting ideas about gender and sex, and they come not from a place of personal preferences, but rather from a lot of theorizing and way more explanation than the above definition ought warrant. I mean, why would someone need several webpages defending and vehemently not apologizing for their personal identity in long, meandering passages?
G0y's do not only dislike anal sex for themselves- they dislike it for anyone. People who practice buttsex are labelled "phreaks" and deviants, and the reason for the practice's popularity is likened to the massive campaigns of the tobacco industry, and its affiliation with homosexuality compared to the Nazi takeover of the peaceful Indian symbol (note to the g0y's: actually, the symbol of the swastika is actually reversed, not as is). Strong words, stronger images. And all about a little anal play? Seriously? Nobody's punk'ing me?
But of course, the condemnation of anal sex is integral to maintaining a Christian front. Manipulate scripture as you will- I'm no theologist and could care less. I've heard various sources say that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah had to do with a lack of hospitality, not gay sex. I've heard some say it was all about man-on-man action, but it don't really matter, because Jesus never said a thing about guys getting together. I've heard some very smart people (okay, well, that's my subjectivity showing through) say that the Bible is reflective of the time in which it was written, and the social mores of that era, hence it can't be taken literally (moreover, there are lots of other things we have changed- women speaking out in church, for example- that wasn't in as much contention as the whole gay issue). But g0y's twist to the Word is a literal one- it's the anal sex that'll getcha sent to hell. Man-on-man lovin' is good in the eyes of the Lord, but "laying with a man as one would a woman"- nuh-uh, mister.
Funny, isn't it? I guess it all depends on your goals. If you're a gay guy longing to be accepted by God, you can tell yourself that. If you're a straight couple longing for some anal sex, though, well, you can talk your way to that, too- like the hilarious parody site Sex In Christ goes to show.
The other tenet of g0ydom is the emphasis on masculinity. Oh no, your Paul Lynde's and Buddy Cole's aren't welcome here. God only knows how they handle watching Jack on "Will and Grace". Now, I've encountered a lot of femme phobia- gay men who are squicked by the mincing and prancing and generally fun part of getting to be gay (you know, if you're so inclined). Every time I hear a gay man complain about stereotypical gay portrayals in the media, I sympathize, but at the same time, I hear those echoes of anti-femme- for effeminate gay men do exist. Some equality in representation of macho men and queens would be nice, but you can't eliminate either completely, no matter how much you wish you weren't associated with them. Your discomfort, I've always maintained, might just be your own hangup. But not so, say the g0ys. If you aren't a virile manly man, you've been brainwashed by the gays- another "phreak" delighting in your gender deviancy.
So. Do g0ys have some good points? Of course they do- that's what draws people to it in the first place (well, besides using their homophobic stances to draw in gay men in denial with self-internalized hatred). They quite correctly acknolwedge that media portrayals of gay men (or, I suppose, for them, "men who love men") are stereotypical and often negative (or at least, have negative connotations in a world that devalues femininity). And they have a very right-on view towards Christian treatments of homosexuality (discrediting the ex-gay movement, for example). And yet, the whole thing sounds like a macho Christian guy's attempt to make his homosexuality palatable with his church and his macho buddies.
I wouldn't have a problem with g0ys if they were what they proposed to be- anal-disliking masculine guys who like guys. But they're much more than that- what amounts to a cult that believes itself morally superior by separating itself from and then belittling and demonizing homosexuality. The only thing that gives me some comfort is that I still have faith in the general intelligence of women. Don't let me down, lesbians. If I find out there's a new "leZbian" subculture of girls who don't eat pussy, there WILL be hell to pay, ya'll.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Is Lindsay Lohan A Lesbian?
Honestly, I could care less.Actually, I do care a little bit . . . why does the media and collective world around me insist on using the word "lesbian" (or "gay") to describe people who have actively had opposite-sex relationships? Sappho, Oscar Wilde, and now Lindsay Lohan. The girl's dated a handful of boys (Aaron Carter, Wilmer Valderrama, Harry Morton, Calum Best, Riley Giles), so it's obviously just a ploy to capitalize on the shock factor of the L-word. Ah, when will bisexuality get some well-deserved publicity that isn't of the horrendous Katy Perry type?
But once again, I'm like an ADD-addled kid. That wasn't my point at all. Back to the question ("Is Lindsay Lohan lesbian/bisexual?") and my complete and total apathy for the answer.
So why am I blogging about it, you might ask?
Well, it's quite simple- it has nothing to do with Lohan, who hasn't registered on my radar since "The Parent Trap" (okay, okay, and the guilty pleasure that was her first hit, "Rumors"), or with celebrity girl-on-girl extravaganzas . . . it's because the lez-beau in question shocked me quite a bit by her, well, butchness.Every time my eyes wander away from the staring contest the Snickers bar and I are having at the checkout counter to glance the trashy tabloids, there's inevitably some girl kissing some other girl. It's unremarkable- they're both gorgeous femmes, it almost always looks staged, and if it wasn't, there was probably a good deal of alcohol and drugs involved as well. Ugh.
So I studiously stayed away from the rumors I was hearing about Lindsay Lohan (you know, mostly because my general impression was (is?) "skank" when I'm feeling mean, and at best a grudging "poor, messed-up kid" when I'm feeling generous). But somehow I managed to stumble over a picture of Lohan and the rumored girlfriend, and my jaw dropped.
Sam/Samantha Ronson is a total butch lesbian. Or, if you're going to get picky about it, at the very least, andro or "futch". She doesn't look like a girly Hollywood girl. She looks tough, punk (as a DJ'ing gal should be), and she has dyke appeal up the wazoo.
Butch has never had it so good since Portia snagged up Ellen and left all the straight, mainstream folk scratching their heads in confusion, or, for the younger crowd, Tila Tequila showed more interest in Dani Campbell than a house full of Barbie dolls.
Various media sources are all a-frenzy, from conspiracy theories of a publicity grab, that the gals are just friends, and whatnot. I can't say I really care. For once, people are talking about lesbian celebrity kisses, and it kind of seems more authentic than usual. People are talking about a butch gal, and it's not steroetypical or derogatory. And whether the love is real, or fake, or something that will later be deemed a "mistake" by publicists, maybe a few people can think about how butches can be sexy, wonderful partners, if a famous, sexy chick like Lindsay wants herself one.And that's enough to make me happy.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Porn Lags Behind The Genderqueer Revolution
This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.Thursday, April 24, 2008
Reality TV Butches (Another One Bites The Dust)
Dammit! There goes another one.I'm addicted to cooking shows. Seriously. I adore it, from staying up late watching old-school Japanese "Iron Chef" (the new American remake sucks!), Bam!ing with Emeril, lusting after Italian beauty Giada De Laurentiis and charming Tyler Florence. Nothing is sexier than someone who can cook, and cook well and with confidence. So of course I already loved Bravo TV's reality cooking show "Top Chef". Then I realize there's a freaking hot butch lesbian on the show . . . and I melt and tune in all the more fervently. Jennifer Biesty (pictured left) was adorable in her fauxhawk, charming and kind, and with none of the typical virulent reality-show star obnoxiousness. And I wanted to eat her. I mean, eat her food. (Damn Freudian slips!).
And then she got eliminated. Grrr. Anger directed at Padma Lakshmi and Tom Colicchio. But I guess that's the name of the game. I started thinking about all the other reality-show butches who have unfortunately been kicked off before their prime. I suppose there's something to be said for television that even gives butch gals a chance and some visibility (and is a sad indictment that we can't get some fictional butch representation on the airwaves). And yet they seem to fall so quickly in their prime, and while it may be perfectly legitimate (i.e. kicked off for bad performance and mediocre skills), it still means that I have one less piece of eye candy for me on prime time TV. :(
Just look at Josie Smith-Malave, the "Top Chef" Season 2 contestant. I wasn't much of a fan of her personality (something about her grated me), but she certainly spiced up the nights for me. (And there's something very cool about seeing some non-Caucasian butches). Turns out she was in fact the victim of a homophobic attack . . . . which is an even sadder and more demoralizing event than Jen packing up her knives and leaving.
I was actually out of the country and doing my own thang in Japan when one of the biggest butch visibility phenomena ever occurred. Which is probably better for me, because I would have wanted to kill Tila Tequila (#1 for just being her, and #2 for dropping the best thing she'd never have). But I came back and my online haunts are all abuzz with talk of Dani Campbell, and all I can do is gape to see such an amazing, sexy butch- sorry, apparently I must bow down and use her term 'futch'- making every 13-40 year old woman in America say "Damn! Maybe I'm not so straight after all . . .". You've got to give her props, though, for making it so far in the competition, and now, post-competition, keeping the momentum going: apparently she's starting a clothing line for butch/futch/whatever-you're-calling-her-hot-style girls. I hope it takes off . . . well-styled butches and tomboys are every lesbian/bisexual girl's dream. Look for "Futch" at shopfutch.com soon!
And then, even though I'm somewhat digging into the past, and maybe even ancient history, there were America's Next Top Model's (Cycle 5) Kim Stolz (right), lesbian and tomboy/butchy cutie, who had me all giddy. I didn't even get to see Briana Ramirez-Rial's short-lived foray onto American Idol (mostly because I detest and try not to watch any of the show but the funny initial rejections). But just look at that picture (left). That gal looks like a k.d. Lang in the making! *Sigh*So that's all I have to say for today. Start the funeral dirge for sexy, butch lesbian women on TV, bid farewell to heartthrob Jennifer Biesty, and pray for more.
That's what I'm doing, at least.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
I Watch So You Can Wank: "Couch Surfers: Trans Men In Action" Porn Review
Trannywood Pictures is a San Francisco-based newcomer to the porn scene, and are totally making waves with their hot FtM porn movies. Their first film, "Cubbyholes: Trans Men In Action" came out last year; since people are still discovering it, I'd love to do a review of that movie, too, but wanted to put down my thoughts on their most recent endeavor, "Couch Surfers: Trans Men In Action" first. So, without further ado, click below and let's first meet the guys in the film:
The engimatic cutie known as 'Lube Boy' [left] and Mark Van Helsing and Peter Pleas caught in a passionate embrace [right].
Suave hottie Ian Foxe [left] and G.I. Joe sexy Dex Hardlove [left].
Stud muffin Ian Sparks [right], and a smokin' Brett McCloskey [left].
Handsome CJ Cockburn [left] and Cupid racked by pleasure [right].
Now that you've met the hotties in the video, here's the movie breakdown:
Background Scene During Opening Credits: Mark Van Helsing (trans) and Peter Pleas (non-trans)
Scene Breakdown: The title and credits roll by as Peter leads Mark to the fated couch after which the movie is presumably named and the big bronze art piece of a male torso and rather well-endowed organ that hangs above (and serves as a nice zoom in/zoom out beginning and finish for so many scenes). Peter explores Mark a little bit and rims him while Mark jerks off, then the switch and Mark blows him (again, while enthusiastically jerking off). Mark next dons a harness and strap-on and fucks Peter in the ass, before finally finishing with some nice kissing.
My Thoughts: The entirety of the scene lasts only a minute and forty seconds, so there's really not that much to be said. While I think it's nice for there to be something playing to focus on during the credits, and to sort of get you hot and ready for what's about to come, it certainly seems like a waste of a good scene (might have been nice to put the full scene on the bonus disc, at least). Ah, well. I guess I'll have to leave it to my imagination.
Scene 1: Lube Boy (trans), Ian Sparks (non-trans), and Ian Foxe (trans)
Scene Breakdown: Lube Boy and Ian Sparks come up to the couch just as Mark and Peter are finishing up; they move off and some hot kissing ensues, only to be interrupted by poor left-out Ian Foxe ("Hey! You guys started without me."). He's quickly welcomed in, though, and kneels down in front of them, rubbing their cocks first through their clothes, working one in each hand after they pull them out of their pants, and finally sucking them while the boys kiss a little. Lube Boy runs off to go put on a cock while Ian F. dros his pants to show off his own underwear bulge. Ian F. sits on the couch and Ian S. rubs and tugs on his flaccid packing dick while mouthing his real trannycock through his underwear. Then Lube Boy arrives and it's fucking time: there's a brief try for a position bending Ian F. over the couch arm so he can get fucked at the same time he's sucking Ian S.'s cock, but it proves not-so-fantastic, so they move to the floor, this time on all fours in much the same configuration; again it doesn't do much, but third time's a charm, this time on his back. With a pillow under his head and ass, he's free to get fucked, rubbing Ian's cock a little in the beginning, but mostly leaving Ian to watch and jerk his strap-on off. After Ian F. comes, Ian S. gets his his "turn down on that cock" and sucks his [new, now erect] rubber cock while taking some lubed-up fingers to rub his trannycock at the same time. Lube Boy has Ian F. suck his cock a little bit but mostly sits back and watches and jerks off until Ian F. has a lovely orgasm and the boys share some wrap-up kisses.
My Thoughts: Once again, I love the fact that Ian Sparks dons a strap-on as he did in "Cubbyholes"; the queer factor goes through the roof for me when a non-trans man wears one. Must be something about the idea of there being an entire other cock down there getting turned on by his rubber cock being acted on . . . who knows. I also have to say that I had yet to see a packing dick in FtM or lesbian porn- it's always boom! raging hard strap-on, which is understandable. But as a girl who likes to watch the transition from soft to hard in non-trans guys, rather than simply starting off already erect, there's something really hot in Ian F. starting off soft and moving to hard. I don't know; the visual of Ian S. tugging on the flaccid cock really turned me on. So yippee for new and different things! This scene is fun and cute with a little dose of adorable awkwardness at times, some giggles and humor, and really hot sex and orgasms. There isn't really much intense passion and connection between the actors, though- they're having a good time, but if you're looking for the passionate "God, this is so hot, I can't wait to fuck you." sort of feeling from Dex and Ian F.'s scene in "Cubbyholes", it doesn't quite hit the mark. Also, the scene gets my mixed reviews about leaving in the parts where Ian F. gets himself comfortably situated; on one hand, I'm happy that there's a porn that shows that not everything feels good and is easy and perfect, and makes negotiation betwen partners a key element . . . and then on the other hand, there's my libido screaming "Man, I just started getting into it! C'mon!". So I'm still undecided on that front. But overall, the scene is hot, and I'll say it again- Ian Foxe has one of the most expressive faces I've seen in porn- I could get off just watching an above-the-neck view of him.
Scene 2: Ian Sparks (non-trans) and Brett McCloskey (trans)
Scene Breakdown: On a different couch in another room, Ian and Brett sit side by side and watch one another rub themselves through their towels before pulling them off and alternating between working on one another and watching each other while they play with themselves. Then Ian gets on his knees to suck Brett's trannycock until he comes and they switch roles and Brett gets to do the sucking until Ian declares he'd like to fuck him. They move and Brett gets on all fours to be taken from behind, is rolled onto his back for a little more, and they finally get Ian onto his back so that Brett can ride astride him. The scene doesn't really have a definite end; it's at this point in time, mid-fucking, when Dex Hardlove enters and starts the next, threesome-style scene.
My Thoughts: This is the passionate scene- the one where you feel like there's electricity crackling between the guys. As the only one-on-one scene in the movie (besides the opening one), it's also rather special. The guys have a close, fuck-buddy ease between them, an obvious knowledge of their bodies and how to go about pleasing them, and they just work together like clockwork. I don't know; I don't have much to say about this scene other than "It's good.".
Scene 3: Dex Hardlove (trans), Ian Sparks (non-trans), and Brett McCloskey (trans)
Scene Breakdown: This scene picks up with Dex Hardlove coming into the room to see Ian and Brett going at it. He dons some gloves, gets Lube Boy to pump him a few squirts, and approaches the boys with "How do you guys feel about getting some hands in your asses?" (they're all for it!). Brett and Ian stay in their previous position (Brett on top) for a little bit while Dex rubs and inserts a finger or two into each of them, but then they disengage and get on their hands and knees side by side for a more manageable position and Dex starts working on getting both of his hands into their asses while they each jerk off a little at the same time. After some nice handballin', the boys move, with Brett flipping over onto his back while keeping Dex's hand in him, and Ian getting the hand out of him completely to kneel over Brett. Brett frantically jerks off and comes hard (the first of many, uncountable times). There's lots more working over of his ass, interspersed with him coming, all while Ian jerks off over him, ocassionally getting his balls played with by Brett, and finally he shoots his load onto Brett's shiny spandex tank top. The scene ends with the exhausted boys lying together and thanking Dex. Ian declares himself done and ready for a shower, but Dex stops Brett when he would get up, telling him "Ah-ah-ah, not yet. I've fisted you, now I want to fuck you." . . . leading into the next scene.
My Thoughts: The ass-fisting in this scene never gets to sunk-in-to-the-wrists, gaping-loose kind of action you sometimes see in fisting scenes, but I still think it's pretty remarkable how well and quickly Dex gets in there (as well as just a general round of applause for sheer multitasking- fisting takes a lot of careful consideration and skill, so doing it times two is definitely comendable). My biggest complaint would be the positioning that never allows the camera to capture the looks of pleasure on Brett and Ian's (or even really Dex's) faces; that would've made it for me. As it was, I had to get by on the sounds they make (which are hot- particularly when, at a certain point, they both look backwards and sort of tilt their heads together and almost harmonize together in their moaning). The sheer raw pleasure you see in Brett is just enough to get anyone rock hard or dripping wet, I think- the guy holds nothing back. Hot, hot, hot. Just the setup of the scene itself- double ass fisting- warrants a big old kudos.
Scene 4: Dex Hardlove (trans), Ian Foxe (trans), and Brett McCloskey (trans)
Scene Breakdown: The scene continues from where the last left off; Ian scampers off and Dex rubs and lightly finger-fucks Brett a little before instructing Lube Boy to go fetch Ian Foxe, who's hanging all alone on the couch from the first scene, reading a sexy magazine with his hands down his pants. He comes on up, dons a glove and some lube under Dex's instruction, then gets to work jerking off and then fingering Brett, while Dex jerks off his own strap-on and supervises. Dex then dons a condom and has Brett suck him off while Ian does a multitasking feat, finger-fucking Brett with one hand and pulling out his own strap-on one-handed and jacking it off. Everyone then rearranges themselves; Brett gets on his hands and knees to suck Ian's cock while Dex fucks him from behind with some nice ass-slapping. Dex comes just that way and then passes Brett off to Ian. Dex watches and rubs his cock while Ian fucks Brett until they both come hard, and the scene ends with a very happy Brett getting his head petted and told "Good boy." by Dex.
My Thoughts: Yowza! This scene is so hot, writing about it might melt my laptop. It works on so many reasons: Dex is the ultimate top; he is very confident at all moments, even when there are condom difficulties and whatnot. He just exudes command and authority and leads the scene very well, giving it the perfect structure. He can also dirty talk like nobody else (and I'm a stickler for dirty talk . . . I love it, but so few can pull it off). This is by far the loudest scene in the movie and it just makes it. And of course, Brett as the focus of all this hot action just seals the deal. I also got a nice little thrill seeing Ian Foxe top (he's delicious bottoming, but switching things up is always good!). Also: hooray for the red handprint that Dex leaves on Brett's ass when he slaps it. Hot! This is my go-to scene when I want to get off; it's golden.
Scene 5: CJ Cockburn (trans), Cupid (trans), and Peter Pleas (non-trans)
Scene Breakdown: The scene opens up on Peter and Cupid fooling around on the couch, kissing and rubbing as CJ plunks himself down next to the twosome and turns it into a threesome. There's hot threeway kissing, a quick fade, and all boys are now naked or in jockstraps, touching and rubbing and grabbing for one another in a hot free-for-all. CJ gets down on his knees to suck Cupid's trannycock while Peter watches and jerks off and later kisses Cupid and rubs and slaps his chest. They switch things around and now it's Cupid and CJ working together on Peter (CJ sucking, Cupid doing the chest slapping and nipple sucking) while he lazily rubs Cupid's crotch. The scene fades to black and when we come back, Peter is on his back on the floor getting his cock sucked by CJ while Cupid crouches over his face, getting an enthusiastic eating-out. The scene fades again and now the boys are back on the couch: CJ is sitting with Cupid riding his strap-on and Peter jerks off behind them. The guys then pull off CJ's jockstrap and lay him out on the couch; Cupid starts sucking his trannycock and Peter leans up over the arm of the couch to kiss him upside down. CJ watches the action on himself and gives his thumb and fingers to Peter to suck and lick, before they move yet again, Peter going down on on CJ while Cupid nuzzles him and rubs his stomach and chest. The two of them share his trannycock for a short bit, then kiss a little, and Cupid takes over and Peter goes back to being the watcher/helper. They switch again and CJ comes from Peter sucking him off. The scene fades out and when it opens up again, CJ and Cupid are both alternatively sucking and jerking Peter's cock until he comes all over his belly, the boys smile, and the scene fades out.
My Thoughts: The guys in this scene are so quiet! Seriously, you can hear a pin drop. But it seems natural to them and I'd rather they be quiet than have bad or fake-sounding dirty talk or sounds. There's a lot of movement in this scene . . . while I liked the switching and turn-taking and new and different positions, part of me wished the boys would just stay put in one place for a while. And the constant fade-to-blacks, like they always do, tend to pull me out of the moment as I scratch my head, wondering "Okay, they were over there. How did they get over here?". But the sex is hot and the scene has a whole lazy, let's-enjoy-each-other feel to it that I really like. And for some reason, even though he wasn't particuarly remarkable (I mean, moreso than any of the other guys), I still find myself crushing on Cupid . . . he's just so dang cute. Also, the face-sitting scene was H-O-T; I rarely see that in porn but it definitely makes me want more.
And so, essentially, that's the movie. Much like "Cubbyholes", it comes with a bonus "First Timer's Guide To Playing With Trans Guys" (which gets so many thumbs up, I wish I had ten hands). There's also a bonus disc featuring a sexy, sexy preview or "taste", if you will, of what their upcoming film "Trannywood Goes Wild" will be like. I won't delve into it here, but let's just say that all the trans boys are lounging around and a little horseplay turns into, just, yumminess.
I'm going to sum up my last thoughts as a list of pros and cons, the things for me that really helped and hurt the movie (in my opinion).
Pros:
* I'm smitten with Brett McCloskey! I have to admit it; I'm not really that crazy about bears or bearish guys- they're just not my main type sexually (though they are cuties that I want to snuggle with). So when Brett came into frame, I felt a little lackluster. Boy, was I wrong! The best way a porn star can win me over is through their attitude and enthusiasm and passion, and Mr. McCloskey has all three in spades. You hear the words "fucking greedy pig" thrown around in a lot of porn, but when Dex calls him that, it's just true. Brett grunts and makes wild animal noises, groans and moans in his deep and twangy Southern drawl, plays with himself while giving a blowjob, and has a true sexual hunger- you can tell that it isn't "Oh, I'll suck this cock because it's porn and I should.", but because it really turns him on. While he's lovely one-on-one with Ian Sparks, Brett positively shines in the threesomes, when Dex Hardlove and later Ian Foxe are brought in. Can I cast my vote for Brett to be the focus of some future delicious gangbang?
Cons:
* Camera angles and set-ups. Although I try to forgive poorer camerawork and cinematography in smaller and more indie porn if the action is real and passionate, some of the movie's choices just seem really bad for the viewer- for example, the double fisting scene was hot, but the entire time I was wishing I could see the expressions on Ian and Brett's faces- something that could easily have been fixed by rearranging them so that they weren't facing the wall. On the other hand, though, the camera-from-above shot used in the last scene absolutely worked for me, and I found it totally increased the hotness.
* Same music. My discerning ear wasn't sure if every piece of music was recycled, but some of it definitely was. Yes, it was good the first time around . . . but nothing new?
Bah Bah Bah Bahhh . . . My Final Decree:
Altogether, I give "Couch Surfers" a hearty 4 1/2 stars, two big thumbs up, and a recommendation for anyone who wants some hot trans porn.
Now that you've met the hotties in the video, here's the movie breakdown:
Background Scene During Opening Credits: Mark Van Helsing (trans) and Peter Pleas (non-trans)
Scene Breakdown: The title and credits roll by as Peter leads Mark to the fated couch after which the movie is presumably named and the big bronze art piece of a male torso and rather well-endowed organ that hangs above (and serves as a nice zoom in/zoom out beginning and finish for so many scenes). Peter explores Mark a little bit and rims him while Mark jerks off, then the switch and Mark blows him (again, while enthusiastically jerking off). Mark next dons a harness and strap-on and fucks Peter in the ass, before finally finishing with some nice kissing.
My Thoughts: The entirety of the scene lasts only a minute and forty seconds, so there's really not that much to be said. While I think it's nice for there to be something playing to focus on during the credits, and to sort of get you hot and ready for what's about to come, it certainly seems like a waste of a good scene (might have been nice to put the full scene on the bonus disc, at least). Ah, well. I guess I'll have to leave it to my imagination.
Scene 1: Lube Boy (trans), Ian Sparks (non-trans), and Ian Foxe (trans)
Scene Breakdown: Lube Boy and Ian Sparks come up to the couch just as Mark and Peter are finishing up; they move off and some hot kissing ensues, only to be interrupted by poor left-out Ian Foxe ("Hey! You guys started without me."). He's quickly welcomed in, though, and kneels down in front of them, rubbing their cocks first through their clothes, working one in each hand after they pull them out of their pants, and finally sucking them while the boys kiss a little. Lube Boy runs off to go put on a cock while Ian F. dros his pants to show off his own underwear bulge. Ian F. sits on the couch and Ian S. rubs and tugs on his flaccid packing dick while mouthing his real trannycock through his underwear. Then Lube Boy arrives and it's fucking time: there's a brief try for a position bending Ian F. over the couch arm so he can get fucked at the same time he's sucking Ian S.'s cock, but it proves not-so-fantastic, so they move to the floor, this time on all fours in much the same configuration; again it doesn't do much, but third time's a charm, this time on his back. With a pillow under his head and ass, he's free to get fucked, rubbing Ian's cock a little in the beginning, but mostly leaving Ian to watch and jerk his strap-on off. After Ian F. comes, Ian S. gets his his "turn down on that cock" and sucks his [new, now erect] rubber cock while taking some lubed-up fingers to rub his trannycock at the same time. Lube Boy has Ian F. suck his cock a little bit but mostly sits back and watches and jerks off until Ian F. has a lovely orgasm and the boys share some wrap-up kisses.
My Thoughts: Once again, I love the fact that Ian Sparks dons a strap-on as he did in "Cubbyholes"; the queer factor goes through the roof for me when a non-trans man wears one. Must be something about the idea of there being an entire other cock down there getting turned on by his rubber cock being acted on . . . who knows. I also have to say that I had yet to see a packing dick in FtM or lesbian porn- it's always boom! raging hard strap-on, which is understandable. But as a girl who likes to watch the transition from soft to hard in non-trans guys, rather than simply starting off already erect, there's something really hot in Ian F. starting off soft and moving to hard. I don't know; the visual of Ian S. tugging on the flaccid cock really turned me on. So yippee for new and different things! This scene is fun and cute with a little dose of adorable awkwardness at times, some giggles and humor, and really hot sex and orgasms. There isn't really much intense passion and connection between the actors, though- they're having a good time, but if you're looking for the passionate "God, this is so hot, I can't wait to fuck you." sort of feeling from Dex and Ian F.'s scene in "Cubbyholes", it doesn't quite hit the mark. Also, the scene gets my mixed reviews about leaving in the parts where Ian F. gets himself comfortably situated; on one hand, I'm happy that there's a porn that shows that not everything feels good and is easy and perfect, and makes negotiation betwen partners a key element . . . and then on the other hand, there's my libido screaming "Man, I just started getting into it! C'mon!". So I'm still undecided on that front. But overall, the scene is hot, and I'll say it again- Ian Foxe has one of the most expressive faces I've seen in porn- I could get off just watching an above-the-neck view of him.
Scene 2: Ian Sparks (non-trans) and Brett McCloskey (trans)
Scene Breakdown: On a different couch in another room, Ian and Brett sit side by side and watch one another rub themselves through their towels before pulling them off and alternating between working on one another and watching each other while they play with themselves. Then Ian gets on his knees to suck Brett's trannycock until he comes and they switch roles and Brett gets to do the sucking until Ian declares he'd like to fuck him. They move and Brett gets on all fours to be taken from behind, is rolled onto his back for a little more, and they finally get Ian onto his back so that Brett can ride astride him. The scene doesn't really have a definite end; it's at this point in time, mid-fucking, when Dex Hardlove enters and starts the next, threesome-style scene.
My Thoughts: This is the passionate scene- the one where you feel like there's electricity crackling between the guys. As the only one-on-one scene in the movie (besides the opening one), it's also rather special. The guys have a close, fuck-buddy ease between them, an obvious knowledge of their bodies and how to go about pleasing them, and they just work together like clockwork. I don't know; I don't have much to say about this scene other than "It's good.".
Scene 3: Dex Hardlove (trans), Ian Sparks (non-trans), and Brett McCloskey (trans)
Scene Breakdown: This scene picks up with Dex Hardlove coming into the room to see Ian and Brett going at it. He dons some gloves, gets Lube Boy to pump him a few squirts, and approaches the boys with "How do you guys feel about getting some hands in your asses?" (they're all for it!). Brett and Ian stay in their previous position (Brett on top) for a little bit while Dex rubs and inserts a finger or two into each of them, but then they disengage and get on their hands and knees side by side for a more manageable position and Dex starts working on getting both of his hands into their asses while they each jerk off a little at the same time. After some nice handballin', the boys move, with Brett flipping over onto his back while keeping Dex's hand in him, and Ian getting the hand out of him completely to kneel over Brett. Brett frantically jerks off and comes hard (the first of many, uncountable times). There's lots more working over of his ass, interspersed with him coming, all while Ian jerks off over him, ocassionally getting his balls played with by Brett, and finally he shoots his load onto Brett's shiny spandex tank top. The scene ends with the exhausted boys lying together and thanking Dex. Ian declares himself done and ready for a shower, but Dex stops Brett when he would get up, telling him "Ah-ah-ah, not yet. I've fisted you, now I want to fuck you." . . . leading into the next scene.
My Thoughts: The ass-fisting in this scene never gets to sunk-in-to-the-wrists, gaping-loose kind of action you sometimes see in fisting scenes, but I still think it's pretty remarkable how well and quickly Dex gets in there (as well as just a general round of applause for sheer multitasking- fisting takes a lot of careful consideration and skill, so doing it times two is definitely comendable). My biggest complaint would be the positioning that never allows the camera to capture the looks of pleasure on Brett and Ian's (or even really Dex's) faces; that would've made it for me. As it was, I had to get by on the sounds they make (which are hot- particularly when, at a certain point, they both look backwards and sort of tilt their heads together and almost harmonize together in their moaning). The sheer raw pleasure you see in Brett is just enough to get anyone rock hard or dripping wet, I think- the guy holds nothing back. Hot, hot, hot. Just the setup of the scene itself- double ass fisting- warrants a big old kudos.
Scene 4: Dex Hardlove (trans), Ian Foxe (trans), and Brett McCloskey (trans)
Scene Breakdown: The scene continues from where the last left off; Ian scampers off and Dex rubs and lightly finger-fucks Brett a little before instructing Lube Boy to go fetch Ian Foxe, who's hanging all alone on the couch from the first scene, reading a sexy magazine with his hands down his pants. He comes on up, dons a glove and some lube under Dex's instruction, then gets to work jerking off and then fingering Brett, while Dex jerks off his own strap-on and supervises. Dex then dons a condom and has Brett suck him off while Ian does a multitasking feat, finger-fucking Brett with one hand and pulling out his own strap-on one-handed and jacking it off. Everyone then rearranges themselves; Brett gets on his hands and knees to suck Ian's cock while Dex fucks him from behind with some nice ass-slapping. Dex comes just that way and then passes Brett off to Ian. Dex watches and rubs his cock while Ian fucks Brett until they both come hard, and the scene ends with a very happy Brett getting his head petted and told "Good boy." by Dex.
My Thoughts: Yowza! This scene is so hot, writing about it might melt my laptop. It works on so many reasons: Dex is the ultimate top; he is very confident at all moments, even when there are condom difficulties and whatnot. He just exudes command and authority and leads the scene very well, giving it the perfect structure. He can also dirty talk like nobody else (and I'm a stickler for dirty talk . . . I love it, but so few can pull it off). This is by far the loudest scene in the movie and it just makes it. And of course, Brett as the focus of all this hot action just seals the deal. I also got a nice little thrill seeing Ian Foxe top (he's delicious bottoming, but switching things up is always good!). Also: hooray for the red handprint that Dex leaves on Brett's ass when he slaps it. Hot! This is my go-to scene when I want to get off; it's golden.
Scene 5: CJ Cockburn (trans), Cupid (trans), and Peter Pleas (non-trans)
Scene Breakdown: The scene opens up on Peter and Cupid fooling around on the couch, kissing and rubbing as CJ plunks himself down next to the twosome and turns it into a threesome. There's hot threeway kissing, a quick fade, and all boys are now naked or in jockstraps, touching and rubbing and grabbing for one another in a hot free-for-all. CJ gets down on his knees to suck Cupid's trannycock while Peter watches and jerks off and later kisses Cupid and rubs and slaps his chest. They switch things around and now it's Cupid and CJ working together on Peter (CJ sucking, Cupid doing the chest slapping and nipple sucking) while he lazily rubs Cupid's crotch. The scene fades to black and when we come back, Peter is on his back on the floor getting his cock sucked by CJ while Cupid crouches over his face, getting an enthusiastic eating-out. The scene fades again and now the boys are back on the couch: CJ is sitting with Cupid riding his strap-on and Peter jerks off behind them. The guys then pull off CJ's jockstrap and lay him out on the couch; Cupid starts sucking his trannycock and Peter leans up over the arm of the couch to kiss him upside down. CJ watches the action on himself and gives his thumb and fingers to Peter to suck and lick, before they move yet again, Peter going down on on CJ while Cupid nuzzles him and rubs his stomach and chest. The two of them share his trannycock for a short bit, then kiss a little, and Cupid takes over and Peter goes back to being the watcher/helper. They switch again and CJ comes from Peter sucking him off. The scene fades out and when it opens up again, CJ and Cupid are both alternatively sucking and jerking Peter's cock until he comes all over his belly, the boys smile, and the scene fades out.
My Thoughts: The guys in this scene are so quiet! Seriously, you can hear a pin drop. But it seems natural to them and I'd rather they be quiet than have bad or fake-sounding dirty talk or sounds. There's a lot of movement in this scene . . . while I liked the switching and turn-taking and new and different positions, part of me wished the boys would just stay put in one place for a while. And the constant fade-to-blacks, like they always do, tend to pull me out of the moment as I scratch my head, wondering "Okay, they were over there. How did they get over here?". But the sex is hot and the scene has a whole lazy, let's-enjoy-each-other feel to it that I really like. And for some reason, even though he wasn't particuarly remarkable (I mean, moreso than any of the other guys), I still find myself crushing on Cupid . . . he's just so dang cute. Also, the face-sitting scene was H-O-T; I rarely see that in porn but it definitely makes me want more.
And so, essentially, that's the movie. Much like "Cubbyholes", it comes with a bonus "First Timer's Guide To Playing With Trans Guys" (which gets so many thumbs up, I wish I had ten hands). There's also a bonus disc featuring a sexy, sexy preview or "taste", if you will, of what their upcoming film "Trannywood Goes Wild" will be like. I won't delve into it here, but let's just say that all the trans boys are lounging around and a little horseplay turns into, just, yumminess.
I'm going to sum up my last thoughts as a list of pros and cons, the things for me that really helped and hurt the movie (in my opinion).
Pros:
* I'm smitten with Brett McCloskey! I have to admit it; I'm not really that crazy about bears or bearish guys- they're just not my main type sexually (though they are cuties that I want to snuggle with). So when Brett came into frame, I felt a little lackluster. Boy, was I wrong! The best way a porn star can win me over is through their attitude and enthusiasm and passion, and Mr. McCloskey has all three in spades. You hear the words "fucking greedy pig" thrown around in a lot of porn, but when Dex calls him that, it's just true. Brett grunts and makes wild animal noises, groans and moans in his deep and twangy Southern drawl, plays with himself while giving a blowjob, and has a true sexual hunger- you can tell that it isn't "Oh, I'll suck this cock because it's porn and I should.", but because it really turns him on. While he's lovely one-on-one with Ian Sparks, Brett positively shines in the threesomes, when Dex Hardlove and later Ian Foxe are brought in. Can I cast my vote for Brett to be the focus of some future delicious gangbang?
Cons:
* Camera angles and set-ups. Although I try to forgive poorer camerawork and cinematography in smaller and more indie porn if the action is real and passionate, some of the movie's choices just seem really bad for the viewer- for example, the double fisting scene was hot, but the entire time I was wishing I could see the expressions on Ian and Brett's faces- something that could easily have been fixed by rearranging them so that they weren't facing the wall. On the other hand, though, the camera-from-above shot used in the last scene absolutely worked for me, and I found it totally increased the hotness.
* Same music. My discerning ear wasn't sure if every piece of music was recycled, but some of it definitely was. Yes, it was good the first time around . . . but nothing new?
Bah Bah Bah Bahhh . . . My Final Decree:
Altogether, I give "Couch Surfers" a hearty 4 1/2 stars, two big thumbs up, and a recommendation for anyone who wants some hot trans porn.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Hot 'N Queer: My Porn Recommendations
Lately, I've been getting a lot of questions from people asking me about various types of porn that I promote. I've finally decided to put all the information in one place for anyone who wants it. Enjoy! And if you have anything more to add, please leave a comment, since I definitely don't know about every piece of porn out there, and may have missed something really great.So we all know that the kind of porn that we watch doesn't necessarily reflect on our sexual orientations; if anything, the porn collections of most people will attest to that. I'm sure nobody could decide if I was a lesbian woman, gay man, straight man, straight woman, transperson, or anything by looking at the hodgepodge of stuff that I enjoy. But I do tend to stay away from a certain type of porn. The kind of porn I hate is fake and passionless. Everything about it is fake, from the boobs, hair color, tans, and smiles of its stars to the passion and the orgasms of its women. Nothing about it feels or looks like the kind of sex that I have, and because of that, I can't relate to it. it's often got this misogynistic tinge (or outright male chauvinistic message) that doesn't even bother with the pretense of female orgasms, calls women "bitches", "ho's", "sluts" (and not in the good way or in a specific BDSM-related context), and always seems to end with that cliched and standard facial cumshot (ugh). The lesbians in the porn I hate are not real lesbians- they are inept with one anothers' bodies, they gaze into the camera (and hence the presumed male viewer), and they adhere to a pornographic, heterosexual male standard of beauty and sexiness. The transwomen in the porn I hate are invariably given demeaning names ("shemale", "chicks with dicks"), the porn rarely exemplifies true trans experiences (like difficulty in getting erections when you've been on estrogen for a while), and are treated just as badly as non-trans girls in straight porn. The transmen in the porn I hate don't even exist. In the porn I hate, love, passion, and chemistry are all too rare, eschewed instead for big dicks, big tits, and wall-to-wall gangbang action that tries to make up for what it lacks with the 'quantity over quality' concept.
This list is not about the porn I hate; it's about the porn I love, the opposite of everything I listed above. It's realistic, it's passionate and loving (often with real-life couples), it treats women and sex as beautiful, positive things to be cherished, respected and enjoyed, it features safe sex, and it has real orgasms (my favorite!). Enjoy it. Buy it. Spread it around, because God knows that it's all too rare, and needs all the support it can get.
How To Read This List:
It's organized by the type of sex portrayed within (gay, lesbian, straight, trans, etc.), although you should remember that many of these categories can overlap and share areas with one another. I have them listed first with the production company, then the title, just to make it easier for you (as if putting clickable links wasn't kind enough!). Almost all of these movies can be found as VOD (video-on-demand) at Hot Movies For Her VOD, too, if you'd rather have it on your computer than as a hard copy or just want it instanteously instead of having to wait for it to ship.
Queer [Mainly Lesbian] Porn:
I add in "mainly lesbian" here as a qualifier because while this stuff is technically lesbian, it often features transmen in it, too, just to warn you, if that isn't your thing. All the porn listed here has a least one butch woman in it. I'm not saying that femme-femme porn can't be realistic, hot, and sexy (by God, of course it can!), but it's much easier to find positive and real femme-femme porn than it is to find butch-femme and/or butch-butch. Many of the videos and websites do have femme-femme in it, though, along with butches. So, in no particular order:
1) Pleasure Productions' "San Francisco Lesbians Series", Volumes 1-10
2) Factory Video Productions' "Working Girlz"
3) Pink & White Productions' "The Crash Pad". You can watch the preview trailer for the movie here.
4) Pink & White Productions' "Superfreak". You can watch the preview trailer for the movie here.
5) Pink & White Productions' "In Search Of Wild Kingdom". You can watch the preview trailer for the movie here.
6) Pink & White Productions' "The Crash Pad Series, Volume 1". You can watch the preview trailer for the movie here.
7) Early To Bed's "Coming Home"
8) Early To Bed's "Special Delivery"
9) S.I.R. Video's "Hard Love/How To Fuck In High Heels" (the two are sold together)
10) S.I.R. Video's "Sugar High Glitter City"
11) Fatale Media's "Afterschool Special"/"Turn Me Up, Over, and On" (the two are sold together)
12) Fatale Media's "Take Her Down!: Lesbian Erotic Oil Wrestling Party"
13) Fatale Media's "Full Load: Scenes From Ssspread.com"
14) Fatale Media's "Suburban Dykes"
15) Fatale Media's "Bathroom Sluts"
16) Dirty Pillows' "Pornograflics"
17) Mojo Video's "Real Butch Dyke Lesbians"
18) Hysterie Prod's "Pour Une Nuit"/"One Night Stand". And here is the film's Myspace, complete with lots of non-explicit preview videos.
19) Crash Pad Series Website
20) Good Dyke Porn Website
21) Cyber Dyke Website
Straight Porn:
I'm the first ot admit that I don't watch that much straight porn, for reasons cited above. So I don't claim to have all the great movies that you should be seeing. But here are the few that get my thumbs up, almost all from Comstock Films. NOTE: all of these are fabulous, because all have preview trailers on the sites so you can see what you're buying.
1) Comstock Films' "Jack and Marie: A Hardcore Love Story"
2) Comstock Films' "Xana and Dax: When Opposites Attract"
3) Comstock Films' "Matt and Khym: Better Than Ever"
4) LUST Films' "Cinco Historias Para Ella"/"Five Hot Stories For Her"
5) Libido Films' "Trial Run"
6) Libido Films' "Urban Friction"
Gay Porn:
I watch a ton of gay male porn; I love it SOOO much. But (I confess!) I don't purchase much of it because there's just so much of it available for free on the Internet, and it's of a high-enough quality and good aesthetic and message that it sates all of my needs. So I can't provide much information here, but I will list a few that have caught my eye for going above and beyond:
1) Comstock Films' "Damon and Hunter: Doing It Together"
FtM Porn:
FtM porn has gotten a lot of attention because of butch hottie and total amazing transguy Buck Angel, who put FtM's on the map in the porn world and has carved out a niche for himself. He's won awards, gotten recognized in the adult entertainment community, and paved the way for those who follow. Can we get three cheers for Buck? But there are a couple of people who came before Buck, and several who have come after, to increase the FtM porn out there from 'nil' to 'some'. Oddly enough, most of the FtM porn out there (and most of the videos on Xtube, too) seem to be gay male/trannyfag in nature . . . I'm not sure why that might be or what it means, but that's the state of things, so if you're longing to see transmen with girls, you might have to wait a little bit longer. I'd also like to caution that many of the FtM's here are alongside lesbians or gay men, so go through them on a case-by-case basis to see what'll appeal to you:
1) Fatale Media's "Full Load: Scenes From Ssspread.com"
2) Dirty Pillows' "Pornograflics"
3) Hysterie Prod's "Pour Une Nuit"/"One Night Stand". And here is the film's Myspace, complete with lots of non-explicit preview videos.
4) Morty Diamond's "Trans Entities: The Nasty Love Of Papi and Will"
5) Morty Diamond's "Trannyfags"
6) Christopher Lee's "Alley Of The Tranny Boys"
7) Christoper Lee's "Sex Flesh In Blood" (I can't find this movie for sale anywhere; if you know where to get it, PLEASE tell me)
8) Trannywood Pictures' "Cubbyholes: Trans Men In Action". You can watch it with video-on-demand here.
9) Trannywood Pictures' "Couch Surfers: Trans Men In Action".
10) Buck Angel's "Transexual Man" Website. Buck's a totally prolific actor and has tons of movies, far too many to list here, so you can view all of them here.
11) Crash Pad Series Website
12) Red Handed Porn Website
MtF Porn:
Like I mentioned above, most "shemale" porn feels just as exploitative as the name implies. Where are real transwomen? Unfortunately, I've yet to find much in the way of real transwomen, but here are some sources:
1) Red Handed Porn Website
2) Crash Pad Series Website (has the first post-op transwoman ever in a professional porn- that I know of, at least. Her name's Julie!)
In Summation:
I hope that helps everyone! What can I say; I love porn, and the only way I can make sure that the kind of porn I like continues to get made is to spread the word so that people keep buying it and they'll keep making it. Not to mention that I love helping out individuals and couples who thought their kind of sex and the sort of things that turn them on didn't exist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
