Cum shot

Illustration of an oral cumshot, in which a man ejaculates onto a woman's tongue.

A cum shot, cumshot, come shot,^[1][2] pop shot, or money shot are slang terms used to describe a person ejaculating (in film or video, or image in a pornographic magazine), usually onto a person or object. It is typically used by the cinematographer within the narrative framework of a pornographic film, and since the 1970s has become a leitmotif of the hardcore genre. Cum shots have also become the object of fetish genres like bukakke.

Origin and features of cum shots

Although earlier pornographic films occasionally contained footage of ejaculation, it was not until the advent of hard-core pornography in the 1970s, that the stereotypical cum shot scene became a standard feature—displaying ejaculation with maximum visibility.^[3][4] An oft quoted influential work of this era, Stephen Ziplow's The Film Maker's Guide to Pornography (1977), states "There are those who believe that the come shot, or, as some refer to it, 'the money shot', is the most important element in the movie and that everything else (if necessary) should be sacrificed at its expense. Of course, this depends on the outlook of the producer, but the one thing is for sure: if you don't have the come shots, you don't have a porno picture."^[5][3] Nowadays, facial cum shots are regularly portrayed in pornographic films and videos.^[6]

Cum shot scenes may involve the female actor "calling for" the shot to be directed at some specific part of her body.^[7] Cultural analysis researcher Murat Aydemir^[8] considers this one of the three quintessential aspects of the cum shot scene, alongside the emphasis on visible ejaculation and the timing of the cum shot, which usually concludes a hard-core scene.^[4]

As a possible alternative explanation for the rise of the cumshot in hardcore pornography, Joseph Slade, professor at Ohio University^[9] and author of Pornography and sexual representation: a reference guide notes that pornography actresses in the 1960s and 1970s did not trust birth control methods, and that more than one actress of the period told him that ejaculation inside her body was deemed inconsiderate if not rude.^[10]

"Money shot" terminology

Main article: Money shot

Originally, in general film-making usage the term "money shot" was a reference to the scene that cost the most money to produce;^[5] in addition, the inclusion of this expensive special effect sequence is being counted on to become a selling point for the film. For example, in an action thriller, an expensive special effects sequence of a dam bursting might be called the "money shot" of the film.

The use of "money shot" to denote the ejaculation scene in pornographic films is attributed to producers paying the male actors extra for it.^[3][5] More recently, the meaning of the term "money shot" has sometimes been borrowed back from pornography by the film and TV industry with a meaning closer to that used in pornographic films. For example, in TV talk shows, the term, borrowed from pornography, denotes a highly emotional scene, expressed in visible bodily terms.^[11]

Pornography and erotica without cum shots

Two exceptions to this expectation are softcore pornography, in which penetration is not explicitly shown and "couples erotica",^{[citation needed]} which may involve penetration but is typically filmed in a more discreet manner intended to be romantic or educational rather than graphic. Softcore pornography that does not contain ejaculation sequences is produced both to respond to a demand by some consumers for less-explicit pornographic material, and to comply with government regulations or cable company rules that may disallow depictions of ejaculation.

Cum shots typically do not appear in "girl-girl" scenes (female ejaculation scenes exist, but are relatively rare) and orgasm is normally implied by utterances, cinematic conventions, or body movement.

Other meanings

While the term "cum shot" normally refers to filming of the ejaculation scene in a pornographic movie (the term "shot" in "cum shot" refers to the filming, or "shooting" of the scene), the term is also used more loosely to refer to the actual physiological event of male ejaculation.^{[citation needed]}

Television

On the long-running Dutch family game show Lingo, on 2 march 2011, a male contestant guessed 'cumshot'. The word was approved by the jury, because it actually is included in the Dutch dictionary. Through weblogs and social media, the episode quickly sparked international attention.^[12]

Criticisms

Relating to misogyny

In Padraig McGrath's review of Laurence O'Toole's book Pornocopia – Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire, he rhetorically asks whether "...women enjoy having men ejaculate on their faces?" He suggests that the role of such a scene is to illustrate that "...it doesn’t matter what the woman likes – she’ll like whatever the man wants her to like because she has no inner life of her own, in turn because she’s not a real person". McGrath argues that there is a "power-aspect" to depictions such as cum shots. He suggests that the "...central theme [of pornography] is power...[,] implicitly violent...eroticized hatred."^[13]

Gail Dines, writing in Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, describes the money shot of a man ejaculating on the face or body of a woman as "one of the most degrading acts in porn".^[14] To Dines, the ejaculate on the female performer's body "marks the woman as used goods", conveying a sense of ownership, and she quotes veteran porn actor and producer Bill Margold as saying, "I'd like to really show what I believe the men want to see: violence against women. I firmly believe that we serve a purpose by showing that. The most violent we can get is the cum shot in the face. Men get off behind that because they get even with the women they can't have."^[14] She adds that at least for some posters on adult forums discussing such scenes, the pleasure is derived from watching a woman suffer.^[14]

From feminists

Susan Faludi, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and the author of Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women, argues that pornography scenes depicting women performing oral sex on men objectify the male performer, in that the male performer's entire body, except for the erect penis, is off-camera.

In the article "My Son's Penis" from Masthead magazine, Richard Jeffrey Newman, who cites Faludi, writes: "the male performer's [in porn] primary function is to make her [the female actress'] performance possible. He is her straight man, her foil, or as Susan Faludi puts it in her essay 'The Money Shot' her 'appendage, the object of the object.'"^[15] The article states that the woman in such a scene may appear like a "machine".^[15] It also states that with "the cum shot, the pleasure of which is expressed not in what the man on the screen felt in his own body up to and including the point of his ejaculation, but rather in what it means for him to ejaculate onto the body of a woman." She argues that the way cum shots are depicted in pornography is a "more or less absolute yoking in heterosexual pornography of male sexual pleasure to a woman's presence.", and that focus on having the man ejaculate onto a woman "... has a moral fervor, an intellectual certainty" that is usually associated with "religious or scientific pronouncements."^[15]

From directors

Another critic of "cum shot" scenes in heterosexual pornography is the US porn star-turned writer, director and producer Candida Royalle. She produced pornography films aimed at women and their partners that avoid the "misogynous predictability" and depiction of sex in "...as grotesque and graphic [a way] as possible." Royalle also criticizes the male-centredness of the typical pornography film, in which scenes end when the male actor ejaculates. Royalle’s films are not “goal oriented” towards a final "cum shot"; instead, her films depict sexual activity within the broader context of women's emotional and social lives.^[16]

Counterarguments

Sexologist Peter Sándor Gardos argues that his research suggests that "... the men who get most turned on by watching cum shots are the ones who have positive attitudes toward women" (on the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex in 1992).^[17] Later, on The World Pornography Conference in 1998, he reported a similar conclusion, namely that "no pornographic image is interpretable outside of its historical and social context. Harm or degradation does not reside in the image itself".^[18]

Author Lisa Moore suggests that it is the pleasure the actresses exhibit that the male partners enjoy, and that it is more accurate to think men want their semen to be wanted.^[19] Women's activist Beatrice Faust stated "Since ejaculating into blank space is not much fun, ejaculating over a person who responds with enjoyment sustains a lighthearted mood as well as a degree of realism. This occurs in both homosexual and hetrosexual [sic] pornography so that ejaculation cannot be interpreted as an expression of contempt for women only." ^[20][10]

Cindy Patton, activist and scholar on human sexuality, claims that in western culture male sexual fulfillment is synonymous with orgasm and that the male orgasm is an essential punctuation of the sexual narrative. No orgasm, no sexual pleasure. No cum shot, no narrative closure. In other words, the cum shot is the period at the end of the sentence.^[19]

See also

Sexuality portal

• Bukkake
• Creampie (sexual act)
• Facial (sex act)
• Gokkun
• Money shot
• Pearl necklace
• Snowballing (sexual practice)

Notes

1. ^ Mieke Bal (2004). Narrative Theory: Political narratology. Taylor & Francis. p. 297. ISBN 041531660X. http://books.google.com/books?id=Ys9xdkc01QAC&lpg=PA298&dq=cum%20shot&pg=PA297. 
2. ^ Cindy Patton (1996). Fatal Advice: How Safe-Sex Education Went Wrong. Duke University Press. p. 3. http://www.questiaschool.com/read/1067656. 
3. ^ ^{a b c} Linda Williams (1989). Hard core: power, pleasure, and the "frenzy of the visible". University of California Press. pp. 93–95. ISBN 9780520066526. http://books.google.com/books?id=OMa96WrLnhQC&pg=PA93. 
4. ^ ^{a b} Murat Aydemir (2007). Images of bliss: ejaculation, masculinity, meaning. Univ. of Minnesota Press. pp. 95–. ISBN 9780816648672. http://books.google.com/books?id=_MkshgDS6WgC&pg=PA95. 
5. ^ ^{a b c} Jane Mills, The Money Shot: Cinema, Sin and Censorship. Pluto Press, Annandale 2001. ISBN 1-86403-142-5, p. xix; Extract
6. ^ Violet Blue, (Sep 2001) A First Timer’s Guide to Watching Porn, "Facial ejaculation (men ejaculating on women’s faces) is pretty much a standard."
7. ^ Linda Williams (1989). Hard core: power, pleasure, and the "frenzy of the visible". University of California Press. p. 101. ISBN 9780520066526. http://books.google.com/books?id=OMa96WrLnhQC&pg=PA101. 
8. ^ http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.aydemir/
9. ^ "Ohio University Faculty". http://www.tcomschool.ohiou.edu/faculty/slade.html. Retrieved 2008-07-28. 
10. ^ ^{a b} Slade, Joseph W. (2001). Pornography and Sexual Representation: A Reference Guide Vol. 2. Greenwood Press. pp. 654–656. ISBN 0-313-31520-5. http://books.google.com/books?id=ZaGTZySRzeYC&pg=PA654. 
11. ^ Laura Grindstaff (2002). The money shot: trash, class, and the making of TV talk shows. University of Chicago Press. p. 19. ISBN 9780226309118. http://books.google.com/books?id=5pyLV0KM0wEC&pg=PA19. 
12. ^ "NRC Handelsblad - Zevenletterlingo: C U M S H O T?". http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/03/03/zevenletterlingo-c-u-m-s-h-o-t/. Retrieved 2011-03-07. 
13. ^ Padraig McGrath. "Pornocopia – Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire - by Laurence O'Toole". Three Monkeys Online. Archived from the original on 2008-06-11. http://web.archive.org/web/20080611070220/http://www.threemonkeysonline.com/review_pornocopia_laurence_otoole_review.htm. 
14. ^ ^{a b c} Gail Dines (1 July 2010). Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality. Beacon Press. p. xxiv. ISBN 9780807044520. http://books.google.com/books?id=2ZOjb8Sk1bUC&pg=PR26. Retrieved 18 February 2011. 
15. ^ ^{a b c} Masthead
16. ^ "Girls on top" by Lilly Bragge, The Age, June 16, 2004.
17. ^ Bruce Herschensohn; Bill Clinton; Sexologists in San Diego; Future Sex 2 by Bruce Herschensohn.
18. ^ Excerpt from "Among the Pornographers," Matt Labash's coverage of the 1998 World Pornography Conference for The Weekly Standard.
19. ^ ^{a b} Moore, LJ (2007). Sperm Counts: Overcome by Man's Most Precious Fluid. New York University Press. pp. 84. ISBN 978-0814757185. 
20. ^ Faust, Beatrice (1980). Women, sex, and pornography: a controversial and unique study. New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-537050-2.