Sure, but it's hard to find anything I'll watch without liberal use of the fast-forward button. I don't know why directors think the average viewer wants to spend 10-15 minutes watching the same people in the same position; I seriously get really bored without some progression or variety.

I think the adult industry, especially in films, to cater more to a female audience. The problem is, at least from what I've seen, almost everyone got it totally wrong. They took the general theory that men are stimulated visually and female stimulation is predominantly mental. I think there's probably some validity to that generalization, whether it'biological, mental, or social distinction--in my experience, the oversimplified belief that 'women read erotica, men watch visual poem's does have some weight. Its also got a whole lot of exceptions--I love 'dirty books,' but I also dig looking at naked people; and most guys I know are quite happy to read erotic stories. Unfortunately, even armed with this incredibly general and very stereotypical but kinda-sorta-semi-legit imate knowledge, they still blew it (no pun intended).

I think the new working theory of the adult film industry can be boiled down to two major points--1.) women don't want to look at ugly naked guys; and 2.) women want porn with a plot. I'm not going to argue point #1--I would definitely rather look at attractive naked people (of either sex), and I think male porn actors are, overall, more attractive than they used to be. Someone FINALLY caught on that men are infinitely more interested in looking at the glory of their penises than women are. I'm not saying a big dick doesn't help, but that's not usually ALL we look at, unless Ron Jeremy's attached to it and we frantically force our eyes not to wander any farther. (I actually do like Mr. Jeremy, and think he's a fascinating man who's good at his job, and I'm sorry for insulting him to illustrate my point.)

Ok, so the guys are hotter, and I'm quite pleased about that. Unfortunately, I don't think many people making adult films understand the actual definition of 'plot;' they seem to confuse it with 'setting' and 'premise.' So instead of watching random people in somebody's living room get naked and fuck, do some oral action, change positions and fuck some more, go anal, then admire his money shot on her face/breasts/ass/best friend, we now have the pleasure of watching people dressed as pirates in a dark room resembling someone's idea of a pirate captain's quarters speak a few lines about a pirate getting his revenge on his rival's daughter or something once she's caught stowing away on his ship dressed as a boy for some reason in someone's idea of pirate-speak get naked and fuck, do some oral action, change positions and fuck some more, say "Arrrhg!" occasionally, go anal, then admire his money shot on her face/breasts/ass/his 'galley wench' or whoever, provided we don't get sick from the camera moving to apparently emulate a rocking ship. (Sorry, I'm not intentionally trying to make this hetero-oriented, it's just one of the most common and tragic examples of pornographic failure).

Ummm...admittedly based on absolutely no authority besides being a woman, I'm fairly confident the pirates appeal to women no more than the random naked people, with the possible exception of injecting a comic element genuinely worthy of an official "Mystery Porn Theater" to celebrate its sheer stupidity. In this aspect, I think mainstream porn is actually less appealing to EVERYBODY--disappointe d women who were hoping for more, confused men who are wondering wtf's up with this pirate shit, confused men who are disappointed because this pirate shit was supposed to turn their wives on, and probably for the actors who were forced to say "Arrrhg!" while having sex.

Sadly, I think even when someone actually understands the difference between 'scenery and costumes' and 'telling a story,' the movies still disappoint more often than not. Stupid dialogue can ruin an otherwise smokin' hot sex scene, or a well-written story can be demolished by bad acting and gratuitous sex scenes added only to make sure the movie has 'enough' sex.

Again, speaking as just one woman, I would choose quality over quantity in porn every time. I get bored watching a woman bounce on a man in reverse-cowgirl for 15 minutes; changing the location and the people involved doesn't make anything more interesting; up-down-up-down may be fun to do, but it's pretty damn boring to watch after 2 or 3 minutes, no matter how many different performers are involved, where they are, or what they are/were wearing. Give me the 6-hour PBS "Pride and Prejudice" with one scene whe're Mr. Darcy shoves his cock into Lizzy's impertinent little mouth, and you've got a really happy Dame Demi!

The most overall 'successful' porn movies, for me, are those that give a nod to plot, but tell the story--not through costumes or dialog that requires fairly good actors--but through simple PROGRESSION. I think most of Candida Royalle' films really illustrate how simply linking events in a logical way excites women more than all the fancy costumes or expensive sets in the world. The movies themselves progress--brief, uncomplicated dialogue and actions lead naturally from one sex scene to the next. Providing a framework that just gives the sex some context is much more effective than trying to express your inner Shakespeare through porn and failing miserably.

I'll end this unexpectedly and unintentionally long dissertation on the importance of PROGRESSION as the key element in making adult films more appealing to women with my biggest personal problem with most mainstream (and increasingly more 'amature') porn movies--the gross overuse of editing. Progression is probably the most realistic solution to making adult films that manage to have a story without totally sucking. That said, I miss progression most in the actual sex scenes. Whatever the context, story or just 'MILFS vs. Co-Eds," the scenes I find most arousing are scenes where the sex has a beginning and follows through to its conclusion. Most of what I see is some variation on 'bounce-bounce-bounce cowgirl'--MORPH--'suck it-suck it-suck it baby'--MORPH--'you like it in the ass, dontcha?'--MORPH--'bou nce-boun...' "Wait--is that even the same woman? Where did that second guy come from?" I feel like some perverted Scotty is up there somewhere, beaming my sex scenes around! I don't think porn movies are ever appeal to a wide female audience when the writers/directors/prod ucers can get away with being lazy. It's bad enough so many movies just give the audience 15 minutes of monotonous bouncing; it's worse that most of them don't even bother to provide any transition but 'cut scene' to lead to the next 15 minutes of...whatever. By that point, I've ceased to care...provided I'm even still awake.

So there is my completely uneducated and inexperienced opinion on how to make porn more appealing to the female masses: begin the scene...let us see them make eye contact; build the scene...let us see them kiss, let us watch them undress each other with the same anticipation they feel; then just let us watch them...do whatever, what MILFs or pirates or lovers do. The most important thing is to just LET US WATCH. Changing positions isn't always graceful, but that's part of the fun--don't edit it out. I don't care if you're showing me people making love or just fucking like animals, as long as you Just SHOW ME. And every scene needs a climax (pun fully intended), but whether its internal or a facial, make it a climax, not a money shot. Women love sex; I think the elusive 'secret' to drawing a wider female audience is to make porn that actually depicts it. less