>>12626577There are 3 ways to process something youa re watching.
1) Voyeurism.
Self explanatory, getting off to other people having sex.
2) Self insertion.
You're using the scene to imagine yourself doing what the man is doing. This is living vicariously, and is similar to pure voyeurism, but not exactly.
3) Detached, conceptual.
The spectacle is processed ona conceptual basis, you make use of no sense of self nor do you consider the people on screen as people. It's strictly getting off to the scene, the woman's body, a rod slipping in and out of her pussy, her pleasure, and so on. This is difficult to describe, but I do know it is distinct.
Regardless, I agree. If porn is used at all (which perhaps it shouldn't be) it should be solo, ideally amateur. eg striptease, masturbation, casual nudity, etc. I think what I would say is that the decisions of some director should not supplant your own desires and internal fantasy It should be a seed for your own use, rather than a fully formed construct that you are contorting and conforming to. An example would be, well, ya know, this woman is absolutely gorgeous however the camera keeps switching to the dude's face or filming from behind him. Or oh, this woman is attractive but she's also covered with tatoos and doing xyz unwanted thing. And so you say well, okay, I guess I'll have to ignore the bad and take what I'm given, she is very attractive, so what if I have to look at some tattoo covered degenerate's face and balls here and there...
Nope, sorry globalists. I know all about Pavlov and thensome.
