Cum shot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article or section does not adequately cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
This article has been tagged since February 2007.


A cum shot (sometimes come shot, pop shot or money shot) is the film recording of a man ejaculating onto his partner's body — especially the face, breasts, or buttocks — conventionally displayed, in pornographic film, in order to indicate the completion of a sexual act.

Contents

[edit] Role in pornography

First used in the 1960s, the cum shot was usually an ejaculation near or onto the vulva or the small of the back, depending on the sexual position portrayed.[citation needed] Since the 1990s, cum shot, as a term, broadened to refer to any ejaculation, onto someone or something.[citation needed]

If semen is directed at the recipient's face, the camera shot is called a facial. A film's editor may emphasize orgasm by multiple ejaculation scenes or replays of ejaculations. It is believed the cum shot adds a sense of authenticity to a staged sexual act because, unlike a facial expression or dialogue, it cannot be faked.[citation needed]

There are several variations of the cum shot, including the creampie and cumsumption (see the see also section below). The "creampie", an ejaculation into the vagina, anus or mouth of the actor's partner, is called a cum shot if the camera lingers past the moment of orgasm and then records the orifice oozing or expelling semen. Objects or clothing may be targeted in ejaculation, such as stocking-clad legs or a container. The consumption of semen — sometimes advertised as "cumsumption" (a portmanteau of "cum consumption") — is the primary feature of the Japanese gokkun genre of pornography.

[edit] Origin of related term "money shot"

The cum shot may be referred to by pornography professionals as the money shot, mainstream filmmaking slang for a singularly costly climactic scene. Pornography appropriated "money shot" by analogy; according to Stephen Ziplow, author of The Film Maker's Guide to Pornography , "...the cum 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."[citation needed] Like explosions and bursting dams in mainstream cinema, the cum shot may have become such a common device that viewers expect it.

[edit] Pornography and erotica without cum shots

Cum shots do not appear in "girl-girl" scenes, in which orgasm can only be implied by exaggerated moaning and body movement, softcore pornography, which is by definition less explicit, and "couples erotica", which, unlike softcore pornography, may depict penetration but in a manner intended to be romantic or educational rather than graphic. Softcore is produced to fill a market for less-explicit pornography, as well as to comply with regulations or cable company guidelines that specifically disallow certain kinds of scenes.


[edit] Controversy

The cum shot has been criticized as an expression of misogyny, male domination, and objectification, especially of women. Padraig McGrath, reviewing Laurence O'Toole's Pornocopia – Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire, asks "Do women enjoy having men ejaculate on their faces? Not being a woman, I wouldn’t know, but I doubt it." McGrath asserts that pornographic film is a juvenile province, whose "...central theme is power...eroticized hatred."[1] Bill Margold, an actor in more than 400 pornography films, has called the cum shot "vicarious revenge exacted upon the cheerleader by X-number of men who could not get that cheerleader."[2]

David Steinberg, by contrast, in his column "Erotic by Nature", asserts that he once heard an expert say "... the men who get most turned on by watching cum shots are the ones who have positive attitudes toward women."[3] Matt Labash, reviewing the World Pornography Conference in 1998 quoted the same source as stating that "no pornographic image is interpretable outside of its historical and social context. Harm or degradation does not reside in the image itself".[4] Tommy "The Truncheon" Degas, former adult actor and director, states, "Hosing the female lead down at the end of the scene is of crucial importance to the viewer. It is a signal that he needs to get a move on, fast forward to the next scene or rewind back to the start. It's got nothing to do with feminism or misogyny. It's about a guy trying to get his rocks off. It's not as if he's blowing his load in the face of a female senator!"[citation needed]

American pornography writer Candida Royalle, a director and producer, also criticizes cum shots. Interviewed by columnist Lilly Bragge in 2004, Royalle describes producing pornography while avoiding what she calls "misogynous predictability" and a depiction of formulaic sex, which is "...as grotesque and graphic as possible." Royalle criticizes male-centered pornography in which the scene ends when the male ejaculates. Royalle’s films are not “goal oriented” toward a final cum shot; instead, her films depict sexual activity with contexts of emotional and social lives.[5]

[edit] See also

[edit] Footnotes

  1. ^ Padraig McGrath's review is available at http://www.threemonkeysonline.com/review_pornocopia_laurence_otoole_review.htm.
  2. ^ http://www.billmargold.com/
  3. ^ Bruce Herschensohn; Bill Clinton; Sexologists in San Diego; Future Sex 2 by Bruce Herschensohn; available at: http://www.nearbycafe.com/loveandlust/steinberg/erotic/cn/cn2.html
  4. ^ Excerpt from "Among the Pornographers," Matt Labash's coverage of the 1998 World Pornography Conference for The Weekly Standard; available at: http://www.nerve.com/Dispatches/voicebox/MenOnPorn/Labash_excerpt.asp
  5. ^ Girls on top By Lilly Bragge June 16, 2004, published in The Age; available at http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/15/1087244912619.html.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/u/m/Cum_shot.html"
In other languages