Suspension of disbelief is central to all fantasy, whether the players are riding literal rockets or figurative ones. If not for our ability to switch off reason for a while, to willfully accept the fantastic and implausible for the sake of emotion, the world of fiction would be a lot less successful, and a lot more banal. Who wants to watch movies where everything is perfectly reasonable, where the extraordinary plays no part in a story that explores realistic lives, trials and tribulations? Film-nerds like me, that’s who. And we don’t count.

Believe it or not, there's a science to this stuff.
Obviously, I know, err, nothing about pornography, but the psychological phenomenon of suspended disbelief is perhaps nowhere more present than in porn, as Slovenian sociologist Slavoj Žižek ascertains in his Freudian analysis film “The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema” and his earlier book, “Organs Without Bodies”. As the outlet for a very prominent and primary urge the sizable influence of sexual imagination over the other components of the average person’s fantasies is obviously reflected in media trends, which is why pornography (or erotica, as the times permit) has historically been the first form of content to establish a functioning presence. This is true in just about every new media since the days of Gutenberg, and it stands as proof of the massive psychological and sociological impact that pornography holds. It is that same depth of impact, plus its taboo nature, that creates such a need in porn for suspension of disbelief, as distractions prevent the full immersion the genre has required from the days of fertility idols to Tijuanna bibles to stag films to Deep Throat to internet porn, all throughout the genre’s multifaceted timeline.
… but obviously I know nothing about pornography. The subject of today’s article was brought up in a conversation I had with some very progressive and savvy nuns I was helping to reroute traffic away from some baby ducks. Yeah, that’s the ticket. I was frankly shocked by the sisters’ language, but those baby bunnies needed help. I mean, ducklings, whatever. Thanks for reading the site, mom.
The obvious question arises: if suspension of disbelief is so integral to porn, then why do the stories in porn often come across as so ridiculously far-fetched? We all know (I mean… YOU all know) that porn is often laughably unrealistic; horny adulteresses and co-eds welcoming suspiciously postured pizza delivery men into their homes are a lot rarer in day-to-day life. But this is accepted because the viewer is assumed to be distracted (Žižek holds that it actually has to do with the uncanny valley effect, but I won’t go into that because I don’t hate our readers THAT much). Whatever these cockamamie (or mommy, sometimes) stories are, they’re abandoned in favor of footage of intercourse quickly enough that nobody really notices. The story of a porno has a small window before it overstays its welcome- we’ve all been there. I mean YOU’VE all… never mind.

This image is a remarkably tame example. You're welcome.
One very successful online pornography production company (whom I shall refer to today as “the company” to avoid the billion porn-search results a real name would get us) stands as an excellent example of what can happen when suspension of disbelief falls apart for porn. The company is actually a key player in the development of a very successful business model in the online porn industry informally referred to as the “tree model”. The tree model has been in effect for more than a decade now and will most likely filter down to more meanstream media companies in the next few years as the importance of the internet media market bludgeons them to death. It’s a great example of niche marketing: many specific fetish sites operate under the same company, each catering to a different pocket demographic of porn viewers. Cougars and MILFs, mock lolitas, teacher and boss fantasies, plus far, FAR weirder avenues (of which if you are unaware you may wish to remain blissfully ignorant. So throw away your computer right now), all of these preferences are catered to by one production company through a multi-tier distribution plan which often utilizes the same stars through several subgenres. It’s remarkably similar to how early mainstream cinema was produced in the 1910’s and 20’s, but if you want to know more about that then you still probably won’t want to read my treatise “Charlie Chaplin to Christy Canyons, 100 Years of Factory Entertainment and Gold Digging”. It’s dense and unappealing, very academic.
Two of the most popular niche sites for The Company are a “friend’s mother” series and a “sex with teachers” series, which I’ll call… Mom Sex and Teacher Sex. Wait, those are actual titles, let me try again… Sex Teacher… nope. Sex Professor… nope. My Friend’s Hot Mom and… no… Motherfuckers… no… goddammit, all of these are taken. Fine, we’ll call them Teleiophilic Media X and Academiphilic Media Y, there’s no way those are… GOD DAMMIT.
They do a plain MILF series and a teacher fucking series, and many times one actress will do installments in both. The episodes are titled in a set fashion- in both cases the actress is referred to as “Mrs.” and then her last name. A porn actress will therefore be credited as “Mrs. Stevens” or “Mrs. Roxxx” to lend a slight sense of authority and age to the admittedly shallow character they’re portraying. It’s also worth note that it’s always “Mrs.” and never “Ms.”, which probably relates to some alpha-male instincts that play into adultery fetishes, for whatever reason. If it works it works, and this obviously does, as they’re both very popular series. However, if you’re the sort of person who cares about nerdy film things, and admitting to be so is I think only slightly more shameful than publicly admitting you have a thing for interacial gramma gang-bangs etc., then there’s something odd you might notice about The Company’s mom-and-teacher-fucking lines.

If you think 69X2=fun, then how the hell do you figure out general relativity? I'm starting to think you're under-qualified to teach this course, ma'am.
A few years ago, The Company changed the naming convention for the teacher-fucking series from “Mrs.” to “Dr.”. This is a sensible shift, as having the same episode title for two films made by the same company and starring the same actress probably led to some confusion. However, the convention changed again after only a handful of films, this time to feature “Professor Rockets” where once there would have been a “Dr. Rockets”, despite the latter being a far catchier name. What was the reason for this shift? I’m shameless enough to admit that I noticed it, and it was distracting to the degree that’s the point-of-no-return for porn. It… um… interrupted the process.
By which of course I mean I couldn’t concentrate on the baby ducks, whatever. Filthy nuns.
Why did The Company stop titling its films with the doctor title? A little digging provided the answer to this conundrum: as it turns out, the state of California has a law that requires works of fiction to feature disclaimers regarding the status of characters as doctors. At first I thought this was nonsense, as there are thousands of TV shows and movies that feature fictional doctors, but as it turns out the law only applies to online media. This makes more sense, as the internet runs on a backbone of pharmaceutical scams and the like, although I doubt it’s a law that’s very often enforced (and most likely won’t remain on the books for long as internet distribution continues to skyrocket). However, one of the first rules of the sex trade and all its offshoots is that a company has to remain as legitimate as it possibly can, as they fall under far greater scrutiny by authorities. Therefore, to avoid any inquiries at all into the matter, The Company didn’t even bother with disclaimers and just started calling their porn stars playing teachers “professor”. Problem solved.

Dr. Sprinkle, PHD. Yup.
Actually, the best part of all this is that there’s still an actress billed as doctor, industry legend Annie Sprinkle. Ms. Sprinkle actually has a PHD and therefore appeared in one film credited as “Dr. Sprinkle”, though she had a non-coitus part. The film actually appeared just after the Dr./Professor shift and was Sprinkle’s first pornographic film in years, so I think we can assume it was a surprisingly sly act of rebellion. The real irony is that Annie did another picture ten years earlier, still technically a doctor, but billed as “Mrs. Sprinkle” while portraying a naughty nurse. I wonder if she saw this as a professional slight, a “I didn’t go to eight years of school to be called “MRS. Sprinkle, thank you very much” sort of situation.
Obviously this is all very film-nerdy and can hardly be considered a massive derailment for most people, but I like to think that the average regular customer of The Company’s mom-fucking and teacher-fucking lines noticed something of it. How does one maintain his (and I guarantee it’s a “his”) suspension of disbelief when the same 28-year old porn actors who are still regularly in high school detention halls every week go from bending “Mrs. Blossoms” over her desk to tossing “Dr. Crystal”’s salad up against the chalkboard? Obviously the boys finally graduated, and we followed them as part of some unseen narrative- they’re in college now. But the college was discredited, probably for all the porn stars they hired giving blowjobs to students every day, and the quality of the staff education level dropped dramatically. At this point I half expect Rodney Dangerfield in a Hawaiian shirt to start cracking jokes and pulling pranks on the dean, but that’s not… well, like I said, there are a lot of fetishes out there.
Really that’s the only explanation, but at least there is one. Without it, one’s thoughts are shooed away from “sex good, she look good for sex, yaay sex happens” and towards “Wait, why is there an ABCs banner pinned around the walls of Professor Legz’s high school geography class?” and that’s just no good. Suspension of disbelief is key.

1 Comment »