Why does bareback porn have to be raunchy?

[bend me over]

I hear you HolePunchSD. The only director who was ever able to make scripted dialogue for porn stars work was Joe Gage--and even for him it was hit and miss.

But simpler scenarios would be hot:

The top reaches for a condom; the bottom grabs it out of his hand and throws it across the room.

The bottom hand the top a condom; he takes it and puts it on the bottom's dick as he slides his own into the bottom's ass. Or he just sets it, unwrapped, on the bottom's stomach. Or the bottom is on hands and knees, passing the condom back, and the top tosses it, unwrapped, right in front of the bottom's face either right before or right after he slides his dick home.

The top starts to roll a condom on; the bottom pulls it off.

No big discussion. No dialogue. But in all of them an exchange.

I'd like him to start out with a rubber then say "I can't feel shit" and rip it off and fling it across the room.

[Guest Matias47]

I guess i just feel that just because one barebacks, it does not equal nasty, raunchy, piggy or anything else. I enjoy bareback sex, because it feels much better to me, but def am not raunchy. I love my passionate vanilla sex.

I gotta go along here. I'm not into raunch -- and I do get mildly tired of raw being equated with it.

[CincyBttm]

I know it's vanilla, but I do like the bb stuff that both Sean Cody and Corbin Fisher have been doing lately. Internal cumshots and everything!

[pipesmokin'manfucker]

Reading & thinking abt. the responses to this thread I began asking myself why circles have to be round or why water has to be wet.

[Rawmanfinland]

Its hard for me to get turned on by porn if it is too sensetive. I like to see some hard fucking when top use bottoms like a slut. If i wanna see something sweet, i watch romantic comedys. So im not very intrested about vanilla stuff.