|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » The Missionary Position |
| 1-14 of 14 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 02-18-09 08:28am - 5786 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
jd1961 (0)
Active User  Posts: 296 Registered: Jun 07, '07 |
The Missionary Position Something I find curious is that the porn industry rarely, or never portrays the missionary position. They have something they call the missionary position, but it isn't. This illustration is the missionary position: http://www.icame.com/images/kama%20sutra/Missionary.jpg The man and woman are parallel to each other, the man's body is straight with his legs straight back,the woman's legs around the man's waist in the air in symmetry. The man and womanare face to face. The porn industry's "missionary position" have the man in an upright position perpendicular to the woman with his legs wide apart. The woman's legs are in 2 differnt positions, usually one up, and one to the side. There is no face to face contact. You may think my observation is trivial, but remember, you never see the true missionary position. It's like it's against the law. You have every position invented portrayed, some of them quite ugly and circus like. Some videos will run the gamut of positions---except the missionary. I wondered why this obsession against the missionary position? You used to see it all the time. I came to this conclusion: with the preponderance of "gonzo" porn, sex is portrayed as a sport. The missionary position is the only one that has face to face intimacy, and intimacy is the opposite of gonzo sex. The porn industry and the performers might feel uncomfortable with intimacy when they're fucking like animals. And of course, the image of every scene with the man jacking himself off onto the woman, instead of climaxing inside of her is one of individual gratification instead of mutual. therefore, the missionary position is anathema to the current porn scene. Thoughts? Edited on Feb 18, 2009, 08:35am | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 08:56am - 5786 days | #2 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User  Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
A few years ago someone made a comment about porn positions. To paraphrase, they said that people having real sex in a normal way without cameras, choose totally different positions to porn. These positions are not porn friendly. It is generally not a good idea to try and show these in porn, because people viewing hardly get to see anything. It is so intimate that the viewer misses all the action. The necessity for porn is to show everything, which results in totally unnatural positions, different to what a couple would normally choose, if they were having "real" sex. Edited on Feb 18, 2009, 08:59am | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 09:06am - 5786 days | #3 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
I would agree with TheSquirrell ... it's because that position offers such poor camera angles. Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 12:20pm - 5786 days | #4 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Not only that but I think that having all sorts of strange and often times pointless positions just sort of adds to the fantasy take. What sounds like the better fantasy; having missionary sex with a pornstar or taking her while she's hanging upside down off the balcony? Porn ain't about intimacy, it's about everything but that it seems. | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 01:52pm - 5786 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
TheSquirrel and Khan make a lot of sense. You don't get to see much of interest when the couple is in the missionary position, other than the backside of the man on top and maybe the faces. Even Drooler would lose interest fast, since it's the woman's backside he wants to see, and not the man's. Edited on Feb 18, 2009, 01:58pm | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 02:43pm - 5786 days | #6 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
The Fox is righ --- I mean, the Squirrel's right, and Khan, too. And porn is about fucking. It's not about love. I think it would be very erotic to see a man and woman very much in love fucking the missionary position. You'd see their passion. And you could still get a cream pie shot if you really wanted it. ;) I saw photos of such in a sex manual way back in the '70's -- minus the cream pie, of course. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 03:12pm - 5786 days | #7 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Yes, as TheSquirrel said above, it is all about what the camera can see, and there is not much to see in missionary. It seems like something you see more in softcore or an R-rated film because it is a way to show sex without offending the delicate and sensitive audiences by showing the genitals (though if you like butts, you can at least see those). I would argue that there is at least some intimacy in all positions, though most may not be as emotionally intimate as this one, especially since the two are face to face and parallel to each other. Anybody ever seen a video where the actors are so indifferent to each other that they never even make eye contact? It may not ruin a scene, but it doesn't make it any hotter. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 02-18-09 08:04pm - 5786 days | #8 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Most of the points I might make are rather well made already before me, however - I did want to point out that the Reverse Missionary (as in the girl on top) solves a number of the camera issues with the exclusion of displaying the breasts. It is more common to see that than the missionary position in porn, but both are quite rare. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 02-25-09 08:20am - 5779 days | #9 | |
|
jd1961 (0)
Active User Posts: 296 Registered: Jun 07, '07 |
I know I must be getting old, because I no longer find it very crucial to see genital penetration at all times, I'm more interested in the eroticism. I guess that's why I have no problem with the JAV mosaic, as some people do. | |
|
||
| 02-25-09 07:07pm - 5779 days | #10 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I'm a classic porn movie guy so many of my favorite movies date back to the 70's. I don't know if it was by choice or not, but showing penetration did not seem very important. It was still there but the directors seemed to be going more for eroticism than actual raunch. One position that I really like and we don't see very often is where the girl is lying flat on her stomach and the guy is lying right on top and all you can see is him penetrating her. It doesn't allow for a greta view of the penetration, but I still think it's hot. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 02-25-09 07:54pm - 5779 days | #11 | |
|
badandy400 (0)
Active User  Posts: 869 Registered: Mar 02, '08 Location: ohio |
Pat, I believe someone has mentioned that position before. I have actually seen it in a few places, unfortunately I can not remember where now. It actually is interesting to watch. It works particularly well for anal. I have done this one in real life, it certainly is not bad. It is a great position for the girl if she is not into it, since she lays completely relaxed she can not complain about a headache! :) "For example, badandy400 has taken it upon himself to become the one man Library of Congress for porn with a collection that surely will be in Guinness Book of World Records some day." ~Toadsith~ PU Interview | |
|
||
| 02-26-09 06:33pm - 5778 days | #12 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
This was a common position in many movies that Ron Jeremy appeared in. I'll have to do some research. I have seen it in some recent movies as well. You are correct that it is often attached to anal sex. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-06-09 02:24am - 5770 days | #13 | |
|
HotMandy (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 12 Registered: Feb 03, '09 Location: London |
I think you see a lot more "real" sex in amateur porn, which is probably why I enjoy this so much more than the very hollywood glossy porn, which indeed has a complete lack of intimacy, and is more like to bodies that happen to be hitting each other, which I dont find a big turn on. As a female porn lover, I reckon Im pretty good at spotting fake "sex" which the people involved are very much acting out, which doesnt do a lot for me personally. Its the act of seeing other people actually loving what they are doing, which normally stems from an element of intamacy, which is the turn on for me. But each to their own xxx http://hotmandy.wordpress.com | |
|
||
| 03-06-09 07:13pm - 5770 days | #14 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
My experience with most of the amateur sex has been less than good. More often than not the guy has wood problems, the camera is never in the right place, the lighting is never adequate, editing(there isn't any). I'm hoping you can offer some movie titles or sites where I might see those movies that you enjoy. As a male porn lover, I am doomed to never be able to distiguish between a real and fake sex scene, but then again I am a guy and we can never tell if you are faking. (sorry for that lost one. I'm just crazy tonight). I also prefer to feel like the performers enjoy what they do. I can't always tell, but that may be because they are good actors. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 1-14 of 14 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
