Porn for the blind

[chani]

I was reading tweets from a very serious media when I ran across this:

Porn for the Blind is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to producing audio descriptions of sample movie clips from adult web sites. This service is provided free of charge.

Okay I had never thought of blind people and porn, and now that I think about it, I find the idea a bit weird because porn is essentially visual, but I guess those descriptions can be useful, and some people are more into "hearing naughty stuff" than watching.

The guy who recorded the audio descriptions was kinda selfless (or maybe he just gets off on describing stuff out loud?) but for a non blind person some descriptions and offbeat comments are just pretty hilarious.

Just listen to the ending of Lisa Ann's Jail Time !!! LOL

What can I say? I've been translating medieval Latin texts, that deal with theology and canon law, for days, I need to take my mind off it!

Comments

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

It sounds very silly. I do wonder whether the average blind person would be more aroused by a porny fanfic being read aloud than something like this...

So what did they do for porn in the Middle Ages?
(I read once - don't know if you can confirm - that historians have absolutely no idea what women's underwear looked like in the 14th century. Our only source for what clothing looked like back then is illustrated manuscripts, and while a daring mediaeval monk might paint Eve naked in the Garden of Eden, he'd never dream of painting a modern woman en déshabille. And so the mystery of what women wore under their robes back then is lost to time...)

[frenchani.livejournal.com]

I do wonder whether the average blind person would be more aroused by a porny fanfic being read aloud than something like this...

I don't know. A blind woman probably.

As for Middle Ages porn, it isn't my special field but I'm sure there must have been drawings in spite of The Church's influence.

Underwears are mostly a recent thing. I can't think of female (or male)underwear prior to the 16th century, even in the upper society. Women just wore a long shirt under their dress, just like men. Everybody used to go commando back then! I know that Catherine de Medicis tried to make "la culotte" trendy but she failed and a century later when Mme de Lafayette fell from her horse once everybody saw her bare arse and had a good laugh (including Louis XIV). BTW for a long time "culottes" were only worn by whores, virtous women did not, it was wrong (because of possible rubbing?).

The Revolution changed a lot of things, including the clothes people wore.

I believe it's only in the 1800's that French women began to wear panties...a custom that would have been imported from England.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

The book I read specified female underwear because we do know what men wore under their robes - since artists sometimes drew men stripped to their underwear to be horribly tortured or executed. :-/

<-- Jacques de Molay is wearing underpants!


Fascinating information! Although now I'm left with a vision of the Sans-Culottes of 1789 burning their knickers, like 1960s women would burn their bras... I know, different kind of culottes

[frenchani.livejournal.com]

No, it's unlikely that men wore those under their clothes, but the artists couldn't represent Molay completely naked hence the loin cloth in the picture above. Don't forget that les Grandes chroniques de France like any other chronicles were written by clerks! Other pictures show heretics, even Templars, being fully clothed at the stake. So it really depends on the artist's choice.

Pictures can be useful, but like for Antiquity or even Modern Times, they don't necessarily show the reality. We have to be careful. For instance we can't be sure that Egyptian women wore see-through dresses just because the iconography show them like that. Art is art.

[sister-luck.livejournal.com]

Random thoughts:
Hm. There are audio descriptions for all sorts of films and tv shows available - we get them quite often on the non-commercial television channels and of course, everything that's filmed is essentially visual. (I've got a German language version of "One, Two, Three" with audio description on video somewhere and when I watched it with a class at school I couldn't change the stereo channels, but the pupils loved it...)
Yes, in porn the dialogue is more or less superfluous, though the sounds aren't. I suppose without the visuals porn must be terribly boring.

[frenchani.livejournal.com]

This is where I must confess something rather embarrassing. It happened last year. I was watching a film on tv, starring Edward Norton and taking place in China, and after 20 minutes in, I was really getting annoyed by the constant voice-over...I guess I had pushed a button on the remote control without realising it.

Yes it took me that long to understand that the audio-description thingy was on and that it was NOT a voice-over!

Post Comment

[(Anonymous)]

Yes this is our world today and I'm afraid this probably neither of which can be done:)