Sex: How to do everything

budgemook

Just started on 3E. More trash from the trashiest of stations.

Anyways, reason I started the thread was it just showed a man giving himself fellatio. I thought the male erection was banned from television. What's the story there?

Lux23

Could you actually see his penis?

budgemook

Lux23 wrote: »

Could you actually see his penis?

Yes. It was at the start of the show saying what's coming up. It will show it again.

Lux23

Eh, wouldn't be that fussed.

ArtSmart

It's no coincidence that you'll never hear a woman encouraging her man to take up yoga.....

budgemook

Lux23 wrote: »

Eh, wouldn't be that fussed.

No... nor I.

But anyways - erections - are they allowed on TV?

fryup

any *ahem cough* fit women in it??

budgemook

fryup wrote: »

any *ahem cough* fit women in it??

Yes lots of hot naked women

flutered

most men need a rib removed in order to give themselves a bj, will they give a free ad to the surgon who done it. anyways he cannot be called a wanker any more.

DazMarz

Remember the good old days? When the air was clean and sex was dirty?

Since the 1960's, what went on behind closed doors has increasingly been coming out on public forums. The envelope gets pushed and pushed with each passing moment. Lenny Bruce was arrested multiple times for "obscenity" back in the 1960's... for saying things such as "fúck" and "shít" in his stand up routine. Nowadays, saying "fúck" and "shít" is incredibly common in stand up routines, television, films, songs... everywhere.

This is nothing new. At all. Caligula (1979) was absolutely infamous at the time for the nudity and sexuality contained therein. But by today's standards, it is fairly tame. It is also a shockingly bad film. Not even the star power of the likes of Malcolm McDowell, Peter O'Toole and Helen Mirren can save it. But it broke so many taboos and it remains banned in many countries. Despite the fact that a 30 second search through Google would reveal much more explicit stuff than what went on in this film.

The film 9 Songs (crap film, btw) became notorious for the sexually explicit scenes. They were not all that shocking, but it pushed a huge envelope. This was a mainstream, generally released film, not a pornographic feature. It, amongst other things, had the first on-screen ejaculation in a non-pornographic film. It may be critically panned and a bad piece of film, but it provided a platform by breaking many taboos in terms of what could be shown in mainstream cinema. The sex between the actors was real. While this will not catch on too soon, it has been done and will no doubt be done again.

Yes, other films did un-simulated sex before 9 Songs, but none truly generated the press that this film did and this is the reason behind its (fairly lacklustre) success; because of the controversy, rather than the controversy hindering the success of it.

The taboo of showing the human form has gradually eroded to the point in where it is not as risky any more. Or if it is, it is done for shock value and to get cheap publicity via controversy generated. There is very, very little that can be used nowadays to shock the general public at large; nudity, drugs, violence, profanity, et al. It's all been done before, it's all been seen before and if your kids have ever had access to the internet before, you can be damn sure they've seen it too. Regardless of how old they are.

In the age of Smart Phones, unrestricted access to the internet is a reality for everyone of every age. And it is not a bad thing either. Yes, there are things that only people above a certain age should see, but there is so much more out there on the internet that expands knowledge and is of great benefit to people

budgemook

DazMarz wrote: »

Remember the good old days? When the air was clean and sex was dirty?

Since the 1960's, what went on behind closed doors has increasingly been coming out on public forums. The envelope gets pushed and pushed with each passing moment. Lenny Bruce was arrested multiple times for "obscenity" back in the 1960's... for saying things such as "fúck" and "shít" in his stand up routine. Nowadays, saying "fúck" and "shít" is incredibly common in stand up routines, television, films, songs... everywhere.

This is nothing new. At all. Caligula (1979) was absolutely infamous at the time for the nudity and sexuality contained therein. But by today's standards, it is fairly tame. It is also a shockingly bad film. Not even the star power of the likes of Malcolm McDowell, Peter O'Toole and Helen Mirren can save it. But it broke so many taboos and it remains banned in many countries. Despite the fact that a 30 second search through Google would reveal much more explicit stuff than what went on in this film.

The film 9 Songs (crap film, btw) became notorious for the sexually explicit scenes. They were not all that shocking, but it pushed a huge envelope. This was a mainstream, generally released film, not a pornographic feature. It, amongst other things, had the first on-screen ejaculation in a non-pornographic film. It may be critically panned and a bad piece of film, but it provided a platform by breaking many taboos in terms of what could be shown in mainstream cinema. The sex between the actors was real. While this will not catch on too soon, it has been done and will no doubt be done again.

Yes, other films did un-simulated sex before 9 Songs, but none truly generated the press that this film did and this is the reason behind its (fairly lacklustre) success; because of the controversy, rather than the controversy hindering the success of it.

The taboo of showing the human form has gradually eroded to the point in where it is not as risky any more. Or if it is, it is done for shock value and to get cheap publicity via controversy generated. There is very, very little that can be used nowadays to shock the general public at large; nudity, drugs, violence, profanity, et al. It's all been done before, it's all been seen before and if your kids have ever had access to the internet before, you can be damn sure they've seen it too. Regardless of how old they are.

In the age of Smart Phones, unrestricted access to the internet is a reality for everyone of every age. And it is not a bad thing either. Yes, there are things that only people above a certain age should see, but there is so much more out there on the internet that expands knowledge and is of great benefit to people

Yes I realise there are films with erections in them but these are classified by organisations such as IFCO. A television programme, AFAIK, does not have such classifications.

I remember seeing some documentary before and in it they mentioned that you cannot show a male erection on a television show. I was asking of this is true or not.

Anyway, they showed the guy at himself again and it may not have been an erection after all. He was lying on his back with his legs behind his head and the penis might just have been dangling into his mouth rather than actually being erect.

Jesus Christ why am I writing posts like this or watching shows on 3E...

evilivor

DazMarz wrote: »

Remember the good old days? When the air was clean and sex was dirty?

Since the 1960's, what went on behind closed doors has increasingly been coming out on public forums. The envelope gets pushed and pushed with each passing moment. Lenny Bruce was arrested multiple times for "obscenity" back in the 1960's... for saying things such as "fúck" and "shít" in his stand up routine. Nowadays, saying "fúck" and "shít" is incredibly common in stand up routines, television, films, songs... everywhere.

This is nothing new. At all. Caligula (1979) was absolutely infamous at the time for the nudity and sexuality contained therein. But by today's standards, it is fairly tame. It is also a shockingly bad film. Not even the star power of the likes of Malcolm McDowell, Peter O'Toole and Helen Mirren can save it. But it broke so many taboos and it remains banned in many countries. Despite the fact that a 30 second search through Google would reveal much more explicit stuff than what went on in this film.

The film 9 Songs (crap film, btw) became notorious for the sexually explicit scenes. They were not all that shocking, but it pushed a huge envelope. This was a mainstream, generally released film, not a pornographic feature. It, amongst other things, had the first on-screen ejaculation in a non-pornographic film. It may be critically panned and a bad piece of film, but it provided a platform by breaking many taboos in terms of what could be shown in mainstream cinema. The sex between the actors was real. While this will not catch on too soon, it has been done and will no doubt be done again.

Yes, other films did un-simulated sex before 9 Songs, but none truly generated the press that this film did and this is the reason behind its (fairly lacklustre) success; because of the controversy, rather than the controversy hindering the success of it.

The taboo of showing the human form has gradually eroded to the point in where it is not as risky any more. Or if it is, it is done for shock value and to get cheap publicity via controversy generated. There is very, very little that can be used nowadays to shock the general public at large; nudity, drugs, violence, profanity, et al. It's all been done before, it's all been seen before and if your kids have ever had access to the internet before, you can be damn sure they've seen it too. Regardless of how old they are.

In the age of Smart Phones, unrestricted access to the internet is a reality for everyone of every age. And it is not a bad thing either. Yes, there are things that only people above a certain age should see, but there is so much more out there on the internet that expands knowledge and is of great benefit to people

I watched In the Realm of the Senses again recently - and the actors are clearly having real sex on screen, complete with graphic penetration, fellatio and a money shot.

Quite out there for a 1976 movie from a major director.

del_c

By the standards of that channel, I think this is a pretty good show... It's funny, and why not have a "how to" on Sex, when there are 100s of cookery, gardening, home decor..... Shows on every week..... Yawn

Just because it has tits, doesn't make it trashy or dirty

TwoShedsJackson

budgemook wrote: »

Originally Posted by Lux23 View Post
Could you actually see his penis?


Yes. It was at the start of the show saying what's coming up. It will show it again.

Eh eh, could be, could be taken on holidays, ooo-er missus etc. etc.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

dangermouse123

Just watched this disgraceful show. It seems to have a desire to degrade men.

In this episode the man said he wouldn't be into anal and the host said" well we'll see about that" (paraphrase) Imagine the genders reversed and a male host saying that to a woman not into anal sex!!!!

dangermouse123

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

they has their sex chat lines, their psychic rip of... now forcing men to be objects of female mater hood.... one man said he wasn't into anal and they said "well we'll see about that" can you imagine a male host saying that to a woman?

dangermouse123

Lux23 wrote: »

Eh, wouldn't be that fussed.

how about three woman saying they will get a man to do anal sex?... when he has said he doesn't want to?

SamAK

I get my kicks from Davestation instead. Phwooooar hot stuff!

sawdoubters

a man giving himself fellatio

now that's a gray comment

ixoy

DazMarz wrote: »

The taboo of showing the human form has gradually eroded to the point in where it is not as risky any more.

True in Europe, even the UK & Ireland, but absolutely not true for the mainstream US networks. Funny how things have changed over there but you have to head for premium cable in the US and even then there are limits - they wouldn't show an erection, I don't believe, on HBO, Starz, Cinemax etc.

Happyman42

Why do dogs lick their b**ls?














Because they can.

syklops

dangermouse123 wrote: »

In this episode the man said he wouldn't be into anal and the host said" well we'll see about that" (paraphrase) Imagine the genders reversed and a male host saying that to a woman not into anal sex!!!!

dangermouse123 wrote:

they has their sex chat lines, their psychic rip of... now forcing men to be objects of female mater hood.... one man said he wasn't into anal and they said "well we'll see about that" can you imagine a male host saying that to a woman?

dangermouse123 wrote:

how about three woman saying they will get a man to do anal sex?... when he has said he doesn't want to?

I think you're up past your bedtime.

syklops

geraphel wrote: »

I haven't seen the show, could you forward link etc. so I may see what all the fuss is about

TV3, ~10pm ish. Not sure if its on their player.