Manly yes, but I like it, too!

If you're old enough, you probably remember a commercial in which an Irishman talks about his favorite soap, to which his colleen says, "Manly yes, but I like it, too!" Well, that's how I feel about porn videos that feature straight men for the gay viewer. They're straight men doing what straight men do (i.e., screwing straight women), but it's aimed at gay men. I'm going to describe how these videos differ from most straight porn (that is, porn made by straight men for straight men) and what's in it for straight women like me.

The Men The men are mostly beautiful, if not gorgeous. They have cute asses, and their penises are above average in size (not a surprise in any kind of porn). They don't have the giant cocks seen in some genres, though.  

This straight woman's response: What's not to like?  

The Women The women range from good-looking to almost plain, by porn standards. Most of them seem to have small breasts (again, by porn standards). I assume that's less distracting for the gay viewer.  

This straight woman's response: As a woman who doesn't look like a porn star and who has small breasts, I like to see women I can identify with.  

Clothing The men's clothing is nothing special -- not like the formalwear or workmen's togs seen in porn aimed at women. The woman often peels the man's clothing off slowly, taking time to relish his shapely butt and his semi-erect penis straining to escape from his undershorts. The women often keep their tops or dresses on during sex -- again, possibly to minimize distractions for the gay viewers.

This straight woman's response: I've got no complaints if someone wants to linger over a male ass or a penis and give me a good look! Regarding bottomless sex (for men or women), the way I look at it is that she or he was in such a hurry to have sex that they didn't have time to get their top off. And that's kind of hot.

 The Sex: Once the man gets his clothes off, the woman usually worships the male ass. There's more fellatio than cunnilingus in these videos, and the woman's orgasm is optional. Both of these things, sadly, are not unusual in male-produced porn. The camera caresses the man's body and gives less attention to the woman.  

This straight woman's response: I guess I shouldn't be surprised by the focus of these videos. This is the very male world of porn made by men for men who are interested in men. Still, I'd like to see the woman enjoying herself, too.  

The Cumshot and its aftermath The man always comes outside the woman's vagina, often onto his own torso. (After all, if she's got a top on, he doesn't want to stain her clothes, right?) Afterwards, one of two things usually happens: either she gently towels off his penis, groin, chest, and any other body parts on which cum has landed, or she licks or wipes up his cum and eats it.  

This straight woman's response: I always find it more romantic when the man comes while inside the woman (even if he's wearing a condom). I don't need to see spunk flying around the room to know that the on-screen lovers had a good time. That said, when the woman towels off the man, that's very cute. And cum eating? It can be hot if you're into that sort of thing.

Condoms in porn: should they be mandated?

Hey hi, all.  I missed you, did you miss me?  I've gotta put this out there before the election, but I promise I have some sexier topics in mind for writing about after Nov. 6.

I don't live in Los Angeles County, but I've been thinking about this measure they have on the November ballot, Measure B, which would require the use of condoms in all porn filmed there (vaginal and anal, but not oral).  Since a huge percentage of U.S. porn in made in L.A. County, this would have a big effect on the industry.  Some companies are threatening to move; others say that wouldn't be so easy.  Porn stars have come out against the measure.  I'm not sure how I feel about it.

Pro Measure B:

When I watch porn with unprotected sex scenes -- which is most porn I see -- I worry about the actors involved.  I really don't want them risking their health for my entertainment.  The industry argues that its customers don't want to see condoms.  I'm here to tell you that they don't speak for me.  I'd much rather see the man come with his penis in the woman's pussy than the common "come-shot," where semen goes flying everywhere.  Coming inside is so much more loving and romantic.  And if anyone needs proof of the man's orgasm afterwards, he can pull his condom-clad penis out, and we can see the rubber full of spunk.  (To see what I mean, check out this scene featuring the beautiful Persia Monir.)

Anti Measure B:

The industry argues that it has a testing regimen that (mostly) works, and that requiring condoms would infringe their free speech rights.  (You could argue that forcing people to wear seatbelts or motorcycle helmets infringes their free speech rights, too.  I don't buy that argument.)

I guess what sways me in the end is the Los Angeles Times' editorial opposing measure B.  They conclude:

If Los Angeles County could demonstrate that it was ready, willing and able to enforce a permit and condom requirement or that producers would not simply evade the requirement by leaving the county (and if audiences would choose to watch explicit sex scenes depicting condoms) [Note: I'm ready for more porn with condoms, as I said above.  -- V.P.], Measure B could merit support. Instead, it's impossible to predict the results of passage. Measure B then falls into the category of "Let's pass it and see what happens." That's a bad way to make law because it puts government, or voters, on a track toward regulating all kinds of conduct without any hope of enforcing the requirements fairly and equally, and that in turn undermines the power of government.

Performers should use condoms. Producers should encourage them to do so. But the power of law to make them do it is limited. So is the desirability of always turning to government and lawmaking to address all dangers.