Stuffy? Check. Run down? Check.
Jun. 22nd, 2006 07:40 amI'm diseased. Head cold.
Sucks.
That is all.
Sucks.
That is all.
Jun. 22nd, 2006
Okay, that does it. I give up on any porn "made in Japan." In the past week I've watched two porn "movies" (more like shorts, each about 45 minutes long). One was called "Red Hot Fetish," and the other of which I couldn't even read the title. The cases on the shelves were both covered in kanji, meaning that I was going to get a lot of digital mosaic body parts. I can live with that. (The smallest of the three "adult" stores in West Seattle specializes in fetishy video, and "fetishy" includes "made on the other side of the Pacific.")
The first was male/female, and the "fetish" is basically that the woman (same woman, lots of different guys) wears librarian glasses throughout the movie. That's it. Other than that, it's a series of degrading fuck scenes where the woman makes noises that to my western ear sound like distress and complaint, but she seems helpless to stop herself or the others from finishing out the act.
That seemed to be the common thread of all straight Jporn: that the woman, while participating in the fuck, is powerless to stop it even though her face, body, and voice all communicate distress and discomfort, and even though her partner's interest in her seems even more objectified and impersonal than it is even in western porn.
The second I had more hope for. It was all-male. Sadly, I was disappointed even there. It was a "prison setting" porn film. Now, in Western "prison setting" gay porn, the "prisoner" always gets to turn the tables on the "guard," and the fuck scenes are almost always about exchanges of power. Not so in this film. Like the woman in the previous one, in this one the bottom is "the bottom," and stays there throughout the movie, mistreated, used, and discarded. He doesn't even seem to be enjoying himself and his "captors" eagerly hold a bottle of amyl nitrite under his nose, not that being stoned diminishes his whimpers during anal intercourse.
Now, I like power-play during sex. One of my lovers and I describe our get-togethers as "throwing power around." But it's an equitable arrangement between equals, eroticizing both a willingness to submit and an ability to turn the tables at any moment. But the fact that this degrading and impersonal stuff is, as far as I can tell, the mainstream of Jporn, just turns me off completely.
The first was male/female, and the "fetish" is basically that the woman (same woman, lots of different guys) wears librarian glasses throughout the movie. That's it. Other than that, it's a series of degrading fuck scenes where the woman makes noises that to my western ear sound like distress and complaint, but she seems helpless to stop herself or the others from finishing out the act.
That seemed to be the common thread of all straight Jporn: that the woman, while participating in the fuck, is powerless to stop it even though her face, body, and voice all communicate distress and discomfort, and even though her partner's interest in her seems even more objectified and impersonal than it is even in western porn.
The second I had more hope for. It was all-male. Sadly, I was disappointed even there. It was a "prison setting" porn film. Now, in Western "prison setting" gay porn, the "prisoner" always gets to turn the tables on the "guard," and the fuck scenes are almost always about exchanges of power. Not so in this film. Like the woman in the previous one, in this one the bottom is "the bottom," and stays there throughout the movie, mistreated, used, and discarded. He doesn't even seem to be enjoying himself and his "captors" eagerly hold a bottle of amyl nitrite under his nose, not that being stoned diminishes his whimpers during anal intercourse.
Now, I like power-play during sex. One of my lovers and I describe our get-togethers as "throwing power around." But it's an equitable arrangement between equals, eroticizing both a willingness to submit and an ability to turn the tables at any moment. But the fact that this degrading and impersonal stuff is, as far as I can tell, the mainstream of Jporn, just turns me off completely.
James Dobson / Raul Julia slash
Jun. 22nd, 2006 01:43 pmI had this sick, sick, sick idea for some slash, where James Dobson (of Focus on the Family) reprises the Jean Claude Van Damme role' from Streetfighter (you can just see him in the blue beanie, can't you?) and takes on General M. Bison (played by Raul Julia doing an Evil Overlord to the hilt!) and has to fight his roundhousing self past swarms of fucking, sucking, dark-screen-helmeted but otherwise naked examples of human perfection-- oh, in many different ethnic displays of body type, too!-- who tempt him from every angle to give up his purity and instead succumb to their lascivious ways, stroking themselves and each other in his presence while he tries to keep his cool.
Because, y'know, that's how I imagine James Dobson imagines himself.
Because, y'know, that's how I imagine James Dobson imagines himself.
Annoyed and Amused at Red Robin
Jun. 22nd, 2006 03:56 pmRecently, when we took the kids out to their restaurant of choice, Red Robin, their placemats had a "space science" theme to them. Which I thought was kinda cool, but as I read them I came across this "factoid": "The Mars Rovers travelled 64 million miles and cost an out-of-this-world 820 million dollars."
I suppose that depends on one's definition of "out of this world." Consider that both Pathfinder and the failed Beagle 2 missions cost $200 million. For $600 million, NASA built Spirit, which is four times larger than its predecessors, and given that they were manfacturing one, for an additional $200 million they bought Opportunity. So for a four-fold increase in cost, NASA bought an estimated eight-fold increase in functionality and delivery weight, as well as doubling their chances of a successful landing. Beagle 2 died on impact. Pathfinder lasted three weeks. Spirit and Opportunity are still delivering photos and science two years after their landings.
Sounds like they were a bargain to me. For another "out of this world" price, remember that The Lord of the Rings (the movie) cost $400 million, and wasn't half as interesting.
On the other hand, I was highly entertained by a pyramid-shaped cardboard advertisement on the table. Being a curious monkey, I picked it up and looked underneath. On the bottom it read, "This is for everyone who didn't get a pony as a child. It's okay. Ponies are really hard to care for and they don't appreciate it very much."
I suppose that depends on one's definition of "out of this world." Consider that both Pathfinder and the failed Beagle 2 missions cost $200 million. For $600 million, NASA built Spirit, which is four times larger than its predecessors, and given that they were manfacturing one, for an additional $200 million they bought Opportunity. So for a four-fold increase in cost, NASA bought an estimated eight-fold increase in functionality and delivery weight, as well as doubling their chances of a successful landing. Beagle 2 died on impact. Pathfinder lasted three weeks. Spirit and Opportunity are still delivering photos and science two years after their landings.
Sounds like they were a bargain to me. For another "out of this world" price, remember that The Lord of the Rings (the movie) cost $400 million, and wasn't half as interesting.
On the other hand, I was highly entertained by a pyramid-shaped cardboard advertisement on the table. Being a curious monkey, I picked it up and looked underneath. On the bottom it read, "This is for everyone who didn't get a pony as a child. It's okay. Ponies are really hard to care for and they don't appreciate it very much."
I wonder if there'll be any confusion...
Jun. 22nd, 2006 10:43 pmI wonder if there'll be any confusion between this Accelerando (SFW) and this Accelerando (warning, NSFW). I don't think I'm going to mix up Charlie Stross with Yuki Seto, and a mash-up seems unlikely.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}