You're walking down the street in the city. A gust of wind lifts a pretty girl's skirt. For a tiny sliver of a fleeting moment you get a partial glimpse of her bare ass. Involuntarily, your eyes widen and pulse quickens. And your imagination goes to work. Is she wearing a skimpy thong, or is she bottomless? Will the wind work its magic again? Should you approach her? Does she know? Is she aware of what others have just seen? Is it deliberate, is it a provocation, an invitation? Oh, what a tease this beauty is! And within moments you've imagined scenarios, envisioned outcomes, woven a rich tapestry of fantasy. All based on a quick glimpse of exposed skin.
The film begins. The performers are totally nude. She is wet (although you don't know if the lubricant is spontaneous or synthetic) and eager. He is erect and obviously ready for business. The action begins immediately. She sucks his cock with ravenous abandon, always being sure that her hair is pushed back and not blocking the shot. He eats her pussy, but it's only a brief, seemingly obligatory interlude before the main event. When they fuck it's an athletic and acrobatic performance. The couple bends and twists into camera-pleasing positions that test their stamina and strength. After hitting their marks, somebody, the director one assumes, can be heard off-camera delivering a cue. He pulls out, she hits her knees, he strokes and explodes. She smiles awkwardly as semen smears her elaborate eye make-up.
In the first scenario, the viewer's imagination was ignited by an image that appeared and disappeared instantly. In the second, no shred of imagination is required, all is on view, completely and explicitly. The second scenario can absolutely provide the viewer with excitement and stimulation, but it achieves its effect with blunt force and not a shred of subtlety or story.
Which of these two "viewing experiences" would you consider more erotic? Clearly, if you're sitting down to enjoy some erotic entertainment, it's a lot easier to watch a video than it is to watch a beautiful, mysterious, sexy girl have her skirt blown up on a city street. But is there a way to combine the two extremes?
As a member of SexArt you know the answer to that question, and it's an emphatic "yes!" On one level, sex is sex. She blows him, he eats her, they fuck, he comes — sometimes she does, too. But adding some emotional depth, some human connection, some intimacy, intrigue, and imagination to the simple sex act is where the art comes in.
Sometimes watching people have by-the-numbers sex is enough. But if you're after a richer, more complex, more involving erotic entertainment experience you want more than that. Not more explicit, but more nuanced. Not harder, faster, wilder, or more "extreme," but something believable, relatable, more genuine, and more human.
Would you rather watch "sluts and studs" put on a sex show? Or would you prefer to see "women and men" enjoying each other in honest, passionate, intimate, and imaginative ways? If you chose the second option you're definitely in the right place.