Articulating Thoughts On Porn
I am often asked what a 'bad girl' like me has against 'modern' porn. I'd like to go on the record and state that I am not against modern porn, *however*...
I am often asked what a 'bad girl' like me has against 'modern' porn. I'd like to go on the record and state that I am not against modern porn, I just happen to prefer the lovely old vintage pieces.
And, no, it's not because I think porn takes 'sales' away from sex workers, that's ridiculous. One has little impact on the other, for example, many purveyors of porn would never hire a pro (and vice versa). Sure, they are related. But there are differences in funds invested, availability & of course the desire that turns one on...
And that is where personal taste matters.
Porn, nudes, erotica, whatever you choose to call it, is like art. In fact, many call it art. But, like art, it elicits a response. In college, I was taught it is never enough to simply state 'I like it' of 'I hate it' when viewing art. You are supposed to be able to understand why like/dislike it, and be able to articulate that response.
So, being the scholar that I am I would like to give my thoughts on 'modern' porn vs vintage porn.
It is difficult for me not to compare the two when I discuss them. In part, this is due to the fact that we are talking about two classifications to nudes in general, and not specific pieces. But let's start at the beginning...
Beauty of the female form, to me, is a fact. Much like beauty in other forms, you just know it is. For the sake of simplicity, let's just say it lies in the curves. Curves have always been more interesting, more desirable. (That's one of the reasons why races are not in straight lines!) The female form combines curves with texture. The mind knows even as the eye travels the curves, how it feels to have the hands follow the curves...
Just as with flowers, you see the curve of the petals, you know how soft they are. And just as with flowers, there are certain things you just don't do when you see one...
When you hold a flower, you don't pull the petals off.
You don't expose the delicate insides, the most inner sexual organs (yes, that is what flowers are!). You enjoy them in their entirety, their wholeness. You marvel, you are awe-struck, at the mystery of how it all works together, sight, smell & touch, to give such beauty.
'Modern' porn views women's bodies not in their wholeness, but their hole-ness.
It strips back the petals. It removes the sense of beauty, and seems to now focus on parts, like a science text book. Labia are stretched so wide, that a woman's most inner organs are displayed, with cameras literally able to only focus on a small part, removing the mystery of how sight, smell & touch are all creating the beauty of a woman.
Even though when you are with a woman, you may desire to use your fingers to open her labia, to expose her fully, use your tongue to explore, the photos are not as intimate. Sure, as you lay with her, you may only see a small area, but you are also touching her smooth thigh. You are smelling her scent. You feel the warmth of her skin, her wetness. (And, if you are proficient, you are hearing her response to your actions!) In the photo, all you have is the shot of a stamen.
Not quite the same, is it?
The whole is the sum of all the parts. And women have many parts.
Not only are 'modern' porn pics simply parts oriented, they lack any personality, any signs of who the models are.
Classic pin ups had specific personalities. They used their assets of humor, fire, bitchiness, even shyness along with their tits & ass. Bettie Page was not just a body part photo, nor was she just a 'cold' photo. When you look at pics of Bettie, you can hear her laugh (well, maybe not her laugh, but a woman's laugh!). You know she was enjoying it.
A drop of cum on a woman's lower lip, just isn't the same.
Sure, it looks like she'll give oral sex, but so what? Does it tell you anything about how the chase would be? Do you hear her giggle as she teases you?
The classic pin ups, burlesque dancers, nude models etc. all used personality to sell the complete fantasy. You knew who was wicked, who was innocent, who was both. You knew who would make you breakfast in the morning, or who would be long gone by then. Some you were itching to spank, others would surely spank you!
There is a sense of play, of fun in these photos that the 'modern' photos lack. When you experience the personality along with the form of the woman in a photo, you get to imagine the thrill of the chase as well. That's what the 'classics' did, and still do.
You get to have it all ~ the first meeting, the wooing, the verbal foreplay, and yes, you will bed her!
If porn is for the mind to fantasize (and perhaps lead you to act out on your own body), isn't it that much better with the whole fantasy, than just a part of it?
Now, what this all says about Gracie & other useful things:
Going back to the artistic response, I am supposed to understand what this all says about me. So following the dotted lines, it would imply that I prefer to be turned on in totality, not in small bits. I perfer larger fantasies to smaller 'chunks of meat.'
And for those of you who would like your mate to join in your porn practices, perhaps you should think on this as well. Maybe your gal would rather have the whole fantasy too.
So try some classics, and see if you both don't enjoy your flowers with the petals still on...