Vintage Lesbian Porn
OK, I used that title just so I could pick on it. But first, the vintage porn:
Now, what’s wrong with my title? In general, there’s a number of reasons why I don’t normally throw the word “lesbian” around loosely when characterizing what Rick Santorum might call “woman on woman” porn.
First of all, there’s the moron factor. Thirty years of greasy-idiot pornographers shouting “Hot Lesbo Fucking!” every time they get two naked ladies in the same photographic frame has sort of polluted the swimming pool.
At a deeper level, even when you’ve got two women actually doing sexual things to each other in a photograph, it’s never clear to me that you’ve got enough information to attach that “lesbian” label. Yeah, lesbian women have sex with each other (by all reports, anyway, I haven’t witnessed it with my own eyes) but even with my dim and primitive grasp of gender politics, I’m reasonably confident that there might be greater depth to lesbian identification. I don’t think you can reliably attach labels like that based on photographic evidence alone.
And finally, there’s the fundamental deceit present in all posed photographic art. Porn models tend to do what they’re paid to do, and it doesn’t say much about who they are. Calling a woman a lesbian because she poses sexually with another woman is like calling an author a Catholic because he writes a story with a priest in it.
Which is really my point about this picture. The suggestive touching is one thing, but I’m not seeing any enthusiasm in the faces of the models. Which would make this bad lesbian porn, if lesbian porn it were.
Over-analyze much? Why, yes thank you, I don’t mind if I do.
Shorter URL for sharing: https://www.erosblog.com/?p=1863
They do look rather underwhelmed. I’ve not yet seen lesbian porn that interested me. I’m hoping for something better in the future though…
Two problems with this picture:
a- Even back in the 60s I don’t think many lesbians wore their hari like that.
b- Their bored looks is rather off-putting. I find that even with modern porn the usual open-mouthed, half-closed eyes with high heels look is not very erotic. I like the fact that in the Jordan Capri ads in your advert bar the two women are actually smiling. After, sex is supposed to be enjoyable, right?
They do seem to be quite uncomfortable about touching each other so sexually. Their hands are just barely placed on the pubic mound.
Sure I’m all for girl on girl action, but at least try to make it look like you are genuinely enjoying it.
As for the title of lesbian being handed out like candy, that’s a whole different story! It makes me so angry that these days girls being bisexual is a necessary fashion accessory. I’ve heard stories of girls making out with each other just to get the attention of the boys they are interested in. How does that even make sense?
Or maybe this is new to them. Did everyone here jump in head first on their first sexual encounter? I doubt it. I bet you were nervous, didn’t really know what to do, and it was probably a less than pleasurable experience to boot.
OK, since the topic is up, why does the idea of two women having sex seem so hot to hetero guys – of which I am one. Any short explanations?
To me the one on the left, at least, looks questioning, “Like is this good for you?”
Hard to tell much of anything from a photo. I had a professionally-taken photo of a then girlfriend that I really liked, great smile, etc. She didn’t because she said she could remember that she wasn’t happy while it was being taken.
Right on Erin. These girls exploiting themselves for men is so backward. I watch TV and wonder how far we really have gone from when women were oppressed. We’re still objects, arn’t we? A lot of young women don’t understand what their ancestors have done to gain respect and they’re not appriciating their rights. I find that covering myself up and being mysterious attracts a better kind of man aswel :-)
Why does it have to convince us? At least porn was porn then – no conceit of the voyeur who is always oh so conveniently located, at the most unlikely of intimate moments. (And Erin, maybe it is this: the sense of always being watched – subject to the gaze – that encourages young women to perform their sexuality, to be the fantasy, rather than live it with real abandon.)
Bad beehive hairdo’s aside, I do like their normal bodies! [I’ve very much enjoyed your posts in the past Bacchus, touching on this same theme – forgive me if I repeat those sentiments here] Too many fembot hard bodies in contemporary porn, if I do says so. (And yes, I do know there are ‘categories’ for ‘normal’ – read, hairy, fat and old – though I’m still not sure why these categories are the fetish and the unrealistic bodies of porno-chic the norm… but I’m a simple gal.
You call that overanalyzing? I’ll show YOU overanalyzing!
First, I would say there’s no such thing as lesbian porn – or gay porn or even straight porn for that matter. These labels are appropriately applied to be applied to people or actions, not artifacts, applying as they do to desires. As you note, because porn is often if not usually directed and acted, we cannot easily guess what is real and false about the feelings of the people within it. Therefore, we are left with only actions to discuss. Whether or not the two ladies in question identify as lesbian, there can be not doubt that they’re engaging in, or at least simulating, a lesbian act. I am a man, but I have had sex with women who identify as lesbian – that doesn’t make me a lesbian, and it doesn’t mean I’ve had lesbian sex, right?
Anyway, I interpret their facial expressions differently. The way I read this photo, the two are just beginning to explore the idea of a sensual relationship (they don’t seem to have kissed, for example, since their lipstick is still very tidy.) The taller woman on the right seems more enthusiastic and experienced. Her expression is calm and reassuring, and both her hands are inside the other woman’s embrace, suggesting that she was the first to move. The shorter woman’s expression seems quizzical but intrigued to me, with a sly and slightly surprised smile as if she’s never tried it before, but game to give something new a shot. I think it’s very sweet.
I’d even go further than Jim. To me they both look quite interested and are checking out the situation.
But my main point is that I’d put money on it that they’re Brits. And that’s how about as openly hot as it got in those days… it’s all in the subtle looks (posed, or not)!
Interesting to think about whoever set up this photo. Someone, somewhere, thought those hairstyles were the sexiest ever.
I remember one time trying to figure why I liked looking at Lesbian pictures. I decided that being someone obcessively hetrosexual I was more comfortable looking at sex where everywhere I looked the object was female
Fret not labe;s/./ Calling a shot “lesbians” is for the viewer (reader) and not a description of a model’s hankerings.
yeah, i understand your point, the word is thrown around irresponsibly, but there is plenty of vintage porn with ACTUAL lesbians, and they arent that hard to find.
The one on the left looks like she might be Snooki’s mom….
i don’t know…….i kinda like it.
i think its funny lol. those models are definetly uncomfortable. it waz like 40’s/ 50’s. lesbian or not, it was shunned upon. so they were taking a pretty big risk, no wonder theyre uncomfortable. why concentrate on how erotic or un-erotic the picture is when its not real…. and yeah im gay so i would know. being with a woman is an original, beautiful experience with lustful exhilaration. want to get off or judge lesbians? go find that and then judge.
Just read a blog by a girl about how all girls are bisexual, or at least bisexually curious. Very insightful, I thought. Made me look up lesbian in google and found your site.
http://lovingly....com/
But maybe it’s us guys that like women together, not the women themselves……. like how uncomfortable they are in this pic. Or are they like that because back then it was very taboo?
You would make a very bad pornographer.
Why all that fuss with “identification” and “label”.
It’s called “lesbian porn” because it’s easier to memorize than “women who may or may not be actual lesbian and/or bisexual having sex together”.
It’s just the same everywhere.
A lot of “gay porn actors” are actually 100% hetero and happily married. Hard to believe ? Money buys everything.
Why the focus on lesbian porn ?
It’s just the same for every porn. No, for every kind of cinema. Actors do what they are told to. Sometimes they suggest some ideas, but that’s all.