A Blowjob At His Desk
So I’ve been rummaging around in the paid area at Sexually Broken, and … no, wait.
I’ve got some rambling to do. But, as I ramble, I’m going to keep dropping pretty pictures of this dude who is “slaving away” (ha!) at his desk while getting a bondage blowjob from Penny Pax:
Let me just be right up front here and say that I really strongly dislike the name of this porn site. For me “broken” means something like “irreparably damaged” (not sexy to me) or it means something like “forcibly tamed” (think unruly wild horses) which doesn’t map very well in my personal fantasy-space to any BDSM fantasies that could rescue it from being too creepy when applied to, you know, actual human women with the capacity to consent (or not).
So, that’s the name. The actual content, though, I like rather a lot better. It’s a rough-sex sort of approach that uses bondage to facilitate the fucking, with a lot of black-diamond-difficulty deep throating, athletic high-energy sweat-and-drool-and-cum squishy-messy sex, and “forced” orgasms facilitated by big powerful vibrators and bondage helplessness. It’s sex you watch for the sheer spectacle of the thing, more than sex you (meaning “middle-aged, moderately-kinky, very lazy persons like me”) actually are likely to engage in. The high energy on display reminds me a bit of the porn style they used to call “gonzo”, but in the bit of rummaging about the site that I’ve done so far, I haven’t spotted any of the hateful elements (the contemptuous spitting and slapping, the pointless verbal abuse) that always ruined gonzo porn for me. What’s more, some of the Sexually Broken movies contain enough pre-and-post-action interviews to make it clear (as gonzo porn rarely did) that the models are happy to be there and comfortable with the menu of shoot activities. The bondage, too, is kind of refreshing in its single-minded focus; there’s less of (not none, but less of) the whippings and canings and floggings, and a lot more of the “in these ropes you’ll be helpless to avoid being ridiculous amounts of pleasure inflicted on you” sexual purpose that BDSM-y fetish porn too-frequently lacks.
So, what does any of that have to do with brokenness? I dunno, I’m still not seeing it. But Sexually Broken has an “About” page that takes a whack at it, and if the name doesn’t make sense to me, the least I can do is let them take their own shot at explaining to the rest of you what they mean by it:
Matt Williams takes wanton beauties, ties them in breath taking positions, and systematically blows their minds sexually.
The girls are bound helplessly in predicaments they have never explored before. Weights are hung from their nipples and their tongues are forced out of their mouth. Matt Williams slides his massive hard cock down their throats till they can’t breath. He only lets them breath when he’s ready and then he begins pounding the backs of their throats. That’s not where it ends though. Matt continues to fuck them in each of their holes. He uses toys to take them to heights they’ve never been to before. In the end he leaves them Sexually Broken.
Updated three times weekly with full HD content, Sexually Broken is the place to find truly original hardcore sex.
For me, the pretty pictures don’t stop being pretty just because I can’t quite parse somebody’s porn site naming/marketing decision:
And I suppose it’s time to confess: I don’t really ever get tired of seeing Penny Pax on my computer screen. I’m a sucker for porn blondes with pretty eyes, what can I say?
But seriously, does this woman look sexually broken to you? Frankly I don’t even think she looks dented — to me she’s got that “really, mister, that foreplay was nice and all and I could use a breather, but I’m far from done here — what else you got?” look in her eyes:
I suppose I should explain that the “blowjob under the desk” scene we’ve been looking at comes from the November 19 update, where the update title is “Apartment 345: A Feature Presentation of Real Life Fantasies From Your Favorite Porn Stars!” It’s a real 45-minute porn movie (not just the more-common “a girl, a guy, a set, a rough bondage sex scene”) framed as Penny’s real fantasies, acted out for your viewing pleasure. And the plot is: she comes home horny, she rides in the elevator with some menacing men who get her erotic imagination going, she imagines one of them pushing into her apartment behind her and making her his abject sex slave for the next eight hours. There are at least five major bondage sex scenes (depending on how you count) of which the one we’ve been viewing so far is perhaps the third. In the last one, she actually gets a little bedraggled looking:
But that’s because (as the sales copy puts it) “he fucks her from behind while dunking her head underwater in the bathtub. She cums so hard…” Which makes (as you can imagine) a pretty edgy and intense bondage sex scene. Closed track, professional driver, et cetera.
After all of which she no doubt actually wanted and needed a bath, and the hot water was right there, right? You’ve got to love intense porn that shows you a bit of the self-care “after”:
But: “broken”? No. Just no. She’s not broken. And for me that’s a good thing.
Similar Sex Blogging:
Shorter URL for sharing: https://www.erosblog.com/?p=9122
[…] ErosBlog has nine photos of Penny Pax from inside the member’s area at Sexually Broken. In most of them, she’s wearing a tight rope harness and giving an under-the-desk bondage blowjob. […]
[…] Bondage Blowjob — December 2012 Under The Desk […]
I think perhaps they mean “broken” in the way that you “break” a horse when you first teach it to tolerate a saddle? In the end you actually end up with a horse that is the opposite of “broken” in the “working” sense, but we still call that a “broken” horse.
I think perhaps they mean “sexually broken” in that he teaches the women how to tolerate (and enjoy) these extreme sexual situations – that after that, they’re “Sexually Broken” just as a horse is “saddle broken” after he’s been trained to tolerate it.
Obviously, it’s porn fantasy and I’m sure the women know exactly what they’re in for (unlike the poor horse), but there is a way to read this that isn’t quite so head-scratching.
-D.R.
Yeah DeeAre, I think you’re probably right. In fact I had an incomprehensible sentence in my post gesturing in that direction. I’m just not sure it makes me like the name better.
I always thought — and this is likely to be wrong, I don’t come from horse country — that “breaking” in the animal-training sense has a component of breaking an animal’s will — training it to not want the freedoms it formerly wanted. Mapped onto humans, that raises uncomfortable consent issues — not “in real life on the porn set” but in the fantasy-space this marketing handle is directed toward. The idea of “training her so she doesn’t dislike the things she used to dislike” is a perfectly respectable BDSM fantasy but it’s just close enough to “training her to consent to the things she previously didn’t consent to” to make me twitchy. And because connotations leak between different meanings of the word, I’ve still got Spanish-inquisition “broken on the wheel” imagery sliding into the edges of my peripheral vision when I see “broken” in a BDSM porn name.
There’s a meta-level at which my dislike of the name is fairly foolish. Virtually all porn has both an objective reality (behaviors captured on a screen) and a marketing gloss that attempts to impose a meta layer of fantasy on what’s visible on the screen. There’s a porn site out there involving sex in vans, but there’s a whole meta fantasy in the site name and marketing copy that tries to convince you the girls are randomly met on the street and being persuaded to fuck for money for the first time. The schtick is kinda silly but it’s also fairly condescending (lots of talk about the girls being stupid, slutty, and tricked) and it makes me dislike the porn in question even though the pictures are perfectly fine. As far as I know the porn is perfectly-ethically produced, but the marketing meta detracts from its attractiveness (for me). There’s no rational reason why this would be so. When I think about it, one of the things I very much like to do on this blog is to grab erotic images and strip them of distracting context (sometimes even cropping things in an image) to make it easier to appreciate an erotic aspect that’s caught my attention.
I acknowledge that caring about frequently-bogus marketing meta-information is odd, and perhaps overthink. But sometimes the meta layer is so offensive as to destroy my ability to enjoy the porn. (For instance, I can’t bear to watch or mention porn sites with “abuse” in the name — and yes, they are out there.) This is not one of those times. I’m saying “the meta picture being painted over this porn by this porn name is confusing to me and to the limited extent I understand it, it’s not working for me.” I’m not saying “the meta-layer imposed by this name is detracting from my enjoyment of the porn” because, in this case, it’s not.
I understand what you mean and obviously I wouldn’t patronize your establishment if I didn’t enjoy a little overthinking of my porn. ;)
I find the blurring-of-consent thing to actually be a bit on the hot side. I completely understand the rational concern about it (and I hope I don’t have to say it, but just in case I do, I am always scrupulous about acquiring and respecting consent in real life). But after consent is given, it can be fun to do pretend situations where consent is questionable, and I think this sort of thing falls in that category.
I’ll also note not all participants are completely in control of what they desire. To give a specific example, I’m in a relationship right now with a woman who was raised in a very conservative Christian household. (As a consent-aside, of course she gave no consent for for how they trained her originally). She is now, consciously, a grown-up 30-year-old woman who wants to come into her own, sexually – and yet still finds herself knee-jerk uncomfortable (orgasm-killingly so) giving into her sexual desires, especially when she’s in the presence of others.
I play a bit in the BDSM realm, and the reason she and I have a sexual relationship (we’d long been friends) is because she is interested in *precisely* this sort of “breaking” – she views, consciously, her unconscious negative feelings about sexual situations to be something she wants to be rid of.
Now, obviously, it’s nothing as extreme as all this – but the BDSM trappings that she “has” to do what I tell her allow her to experience things without “having a choice about it” (recognizing of course that in the *real* world she does, but in play world she doesn’t.
Anyway, I certainly can see this sort of porn as being interesting to that sort of person, as well. Like a lot of sexual stuff, I think there are many different internal mental states that present with similar outward behavior. Some of those mental states can be healthy, and some can be dangerous, but it’s very difficult to tell simply from outward behavior (or even marketing slogans!) which it is.
-D.R.
As many years as I’ve been at this, I still sometimes having trouble relaxing into the idea that a thing that makes me uncomfortable can be (and surely is) hot as hell to people coming from a different mental place with a different set of experiences, fantasies, and knee-jerk reactions. Which means that sometimes what strikes me as a terrible marketing decision turns out to be a perfectly reasonable marketing decision that just isn’t well-targeted to me.
There are porn site companies out there who do one photoshoot and then package it with different marketing copy into three or more different porn sites catering to different fantasies. (Or, there used to be when internet porn was at its financial peak.) I used to think they were crazy, but maybe they were just trying to do a good job of catering to diverse customers.
I think it’s even deeper than that – there are people who think the uncomfortability itself is what’s hot as hell. I find that aspect of the bottom side of BDSM to be really fascinating. Some are into serving, but some are into being *made* to serve. People who are turned on specifically by *humiliation* are fascinating to me. They’re certainly out there, and I’ve played with a few.
Personally I find all of it to be arousing, I don’t need much in the way of particular trappings (though I’m definitely a top and not a switch). But I know my partners run a continuum from light “I want to be praised for serving you” to “it makes me hot to be called names and spit on”. I think the former is easier to understand in some sense, even if you don’t share the kink. I have nothing but admiration for those who can recognize that humiliation turns them on – and then have the self-confidence to seek it out and ebrace it.
You are assuredly correct about the folks who find arousal in mental discomfort or outright humiliation, but I’m aware of that in the same way I’m aware of some exotic religion mostly practiced on another continent — I’ve seen photos of the rituals but have no emotional understanding of the practices. My own neuroses are such that I can’t even typically bear to watch the sort of TV comedy that tries to make humor out of awkwardness and embarrassment. I’m so aversive to humiliation (my own or other people’s) that it always raises my eyebrows to be reminded of people finding it arousing.
I’m completely there with you on not finding that sort of thing funny or even bearable to watch.
Somehow it’s different when I know she’s actually getting turned on by it, and it does feed back into my own personal kink of the power-exchange dynamic, so it really is win/win in those cases. It’s really beautiful when people have compatible kinks, I think, regardless of the messy details. :)
Merry Christmas!
Very interesting discussion.
re: “Some are into serving, but some are into being *made* to serve.”
I also find myself fascinated somewhat with humiliation and the “humiliatrix”, etc.
I have often heard it postulated that those in humble positions in everyday life fantasize about dominating others in the bedroom, where those in everyday positions of power, fantasize about being dominated in the bedroom.
I’m not certain that this is necessarily true, but I’ve subjectively run into quite a bit of it over the years, where I know a good bit about the players personal lives.
An example might be that a person in a position of management at the office, where his job is to hire someone to scrub the toilets, and to instruct them to do so as well, might secretly desire that person in a housecleaning position to “force” them (the business manager or owner), to do this sort of thing in an outside-of-the-office role reversal. Whereas the toilet scrubbing worker, desires to turn the tables on management, and force the person normally in a position of power, to serve THEM instead, in a bedroom situation.
This sort of idea was nearly explored in the 1980 movie “Nine to Five”, starring Jane Fonda, Dolly Parton, and Lily Tomlin. The office “girls” in the movie (who at one point had their boss gagged and suspended in cuffs and chains), tried to seize a position of power and control whenever and wherever they could:
[in the movie, a hospital newly hired candy-striper, with a ‘Buffy’ name-tag, approaches the character Violet, who’s rolling (stealing) a corpse on a gurney under a sheet]
BUFFY: Excuse me. Could you tell me where the coffee shop is?
VIOLET: [nervously] The what?…
BUFFY: Oh, you’re a doctor! I’m sorry, I didn’t see your badge.
[Violet looks down at her badge and finally realizes that the white lab coat she’s just stolen is a doctor’s]
VIOLET: Oh yeah… I’m a DOCTOR. So why the hell am I talking to YOU? PISS OFF!
…and in another instance, the character Doralee says: “I’m gonna get that gun of mine, and I’m gonna change you from a rooster to a hen with one shot! And don’t think I can’t do it.”
A woman who’s at least once been the “victim” of a cum facial, may find pleasure in tying a man by his ankles to a ceiling hook, and masturbating him until he comes on his own face. The man who has perpetrated such an act on his partner, may enjoy the humiliating role reversal.
[…] recent conversation about humiliation in the comments on this post were fresh in my mind when I stumbled over this photo on the front page of a site called Cum […]
[…] that’s an after-the-shoot photo from the most recent update at Sexually Broken. I still maintain that’s a stupid name for this website. Does Alice look broken to […]
Bacchus, In reference to your confession of finding the enjoyment of humiliation mystifying, it may help you to keep in mind that finding oneself humiliated in a sexual scenario is usually not experienced the same way as a non-sexual public humiliation. There are countless ways in which many of us experience some sort of humiliation in normal everyday interactions that are entirely painful and are avoided (if possible), by what most of us consider to be healthy human beings. Then there are those (many of which belong to the SAME set), who may actively seek humiliation in a more private sexual environment. A man may consider having a strap-on rubber penis inserted into his rectum humiliating, and get more fulfillment from that mentally than he might from any actual physical enjoyment from the sensation itself. If this is his nature, he will experience even greater joy if his wife invites her best friend over to witness the scenario. In fact, any rise in the level of humiliation will likely bring greater joy. She may want to dress him in a garter belt and nylons beforehand. This same man, who may find this arrangement arousing, would be painfully disappointed (humiliatited), if he struck out at the plate at the office baseball game, before a bleacher full of his contemporaries.
Thanks, Dr. Whiplash! I’m with you to the extent that I understand that it is so for many people, but still I find it remarkable that it is so. Of course I don’t mean to kink-shame anybody by saying so; if people weren’t wired differently life would be very boring. Just because something pushes all my buttons in a bad way doesn’t mean I have a problem with those practices, it just means I may not be able to emotionally access the appeal of them.
Bacchus: I believe I have stated in the past on this blog, that I endeavour to add as many fetishes and practices to my repertoire as a I possibly can. I like orgasms, so I want to expand my ability to become aroused and sexually satisfied as much as is possible. This however isn’t easily done, but like enjoying science fiction movies, you have to at least temporarily suspend disbelief. The first time I ever heard of the practice of cuckoldry, I found it abhorent. “Who would want to be humiliated in that fashion?”, I thought. Then I tried to understand it by reading such erotica with a bit of empathy (for lack here of a better term…), and I found that with a skillfully written scenario, I was surprisingly able to find myself somewhat aroused, even though nearly four decades later, I’ve never felt compelled to attempt to arrange such a situation, so I can certainly understand your aversive position as well. With fantasy, in order to enjoy it, it’s important to “get your head right” first…
Dr. Whiplash, you are a true sexual adventurer and explorer! In all my days it never seriously occurred to me that one should try to expand one’s sexual horizons beyond “Well, maybe in the right circumstances” all the way deep into “Are you fuckin’ kidding me?” territory. It makes sense when you say it, though…
Is this part of the benefit package?