FEMALE EJACULATION – MYTH OR REALITY?

Ok, bear with me here—I know a lot of you don’t give much of a crap about the scone-snarfing crackpots who make, watch, and rate porn in the UK. They’re prudes over there, after all, with warm beer and bad teeth, and up until just a few days ago, they wouldn’t allow female ejaculation to be shown even in pornographic films. According to BlueViolet’s latest San Francisco Chronicle article, the BBFC wouldn’t allow even R18 certified (read: hardcore porn) films to show squirting because the “expert medical advice” they were going on “maintained there is no such thing as female ejaculation, and therefore any depiction of a woman’s ejaculation was pee porn” [emphasis mine].

Sweet jumping Christ on a pogo stick, are you serious? I’ve been writing for jizz rags for two years now, and this isn’t the first time I’ve come across this kind of small-minded three-ring-circus of male-centric, pseudo-scientific jaw flapping. I’ve reviewed numerous films that featured Niagara-like gushers, but in the reviews I couldn’t mention the truly impressive waterworks because our distribution lists in “European countries” would consider it urination and not legally be able to sell the magazine. I assumed these countries must be backward Medieval places like Uzbekistan or Belarus or, I dunno, fucking Poland even. But apparently my editor meant Great Fucking Britain, home of some of the greatest thinkers, universities, and sexual deviants in the world. Where men still wear wigs in court, drink tea, and consume crumpets. Unbefuckinglievable.

But, thank god or whoever is in charge of the interests of the porn viewing public, all that is slowly, painfully, inching toward change like the boner of one of the old men at the BBFC. Apparently this pioneering pornographer, Anna Span, director and producer of a new film series called “Women Love Porn” and author of several DIY books on women’s pleasure, took a stand against England’s outdated notion that women not only don’t, but can’t ejaculate. When she turned in her latest squirting scene, she had a statement ready to hand the BBFC, complete with scientific documents supporting the existence of female ejaculation, a recent article on the subject from The New Scientist, a detailed description of the differences between the acts of urination and ejaculation, and a sample of the performer-in-question’s ejaculate, tested by a lab to prove it wasn’t urine.

Are. You. Kidding? All that, to prove that women are capable of squirting when they feel good? To prove that women even can feel good? The fact that she got a board of old fogies, probably in wigs, to agree that she had a point and that female ejaculation is not the same as urination, is actually great and it’s fantastic that the U.K. is finally on board with the rest of the sexually liberated world. But it’s startling and upsetting to me, as a woman who approves of female pleasure in all its various forms, that there is even a contest on that point in 2009. Women have been having visible, gushing, furniture-soaking orgasms for centuries. Literature on it goes back thousands of years, to some of the earliest known sex manuals and medical texts dating from Ancient Greece. Just because it wasn’t put on film until recent years is not even close to an excuse for the medical, film, and general communities, in England or anywhere else, to pretend it doesn’t exist. What a bunch of pricks.

And the sad fact is that most women who can ejaculate probably didn’t even know there was such a thing until very recently because so many men were convinced that the fairer sex couldn’t possibly have an analogous sexual response to heir own. Women have been convinced for hundreds of years that they weren’t even able to have orgasms, let alone the squirting kind, then that they could have them, but that if they did they were “bad” people, and then that the only acceptable kind of orgasm was the vaginal orgasm during intercourse (the scientific jury is still out on the very existence of this type of orgasm, by the way). All because men were terrified to think of the implications of women enjoying sex and getting off on it as much as they did. And everyone believed all this women-are-cold-blooded nonsense for so long that now that women are starting to come into their own (pun very much intended), enjoy sex, and enjoy coming, the establishment doesn’t even believe it’s possible.

Frankly, I think women who are not only comfortable enough with themselves to ejaculate when they orgasm, but who are also brave enough to do it on camera in the face of such prejudice and prudery, should be given medals of valor. It takes cajones to come when the establishment tells you it’s disgusting and very probably just urine, not any legitimate indication of sexual pleasure. Cause women don’t really have sexual pleasure.

It’s disgusting and sickening, and so on and so forth, that in the Year of our Lord Jesus Christ, A.D. 2009; the idea of women’s pleasure is still a sticking point. Just because some old British dudes sitting around sipping Napoleon Brandy have never given their wives a real orgasm that might involve squirting, they think female ejaculate must be pee. It’s pathetic. Anybody who’s ever seen a woman ejacluate, on screen or off, knows the difference, and any woman who’s ever ejaculated knows damn well it’s not pee.

Thank god there are women out there like Anna Span advocating for women not only to gush when they feel good, but to also put it on film, and watch what else is on film, and enjoy it. This whole ridiculous line about women being bloodless and not interested in porn is just as much a social construct as the idea that women don’t have orgasms — and should be smashed. Women who tell themselves they sincerely don’t — or shouldn’t — like porn are as brainwashed as the BBFC fogies. It’s about damn time someone starts listening to these broads and taking them seriously. — Miss Lagsalot