Part Two starts with a quick recap of Part One by showing off the dry outfit and starts with the last scene of Part One where the panties are filled with shaving cream and chocolate syrup and thoroughly worked into and out of the panties. It features the complete covering of parts of the outfit being slowly covered in cream until a solid white, slowly drizzling chocolate over it, rubbing it in, and starting all over again with each layer and different parts of the dress. It is as if starting all over only each time this is repeated, the dress and the many layers get more and more gunged until the mess is complete and total.
This scene is slow, sensual, erotic and very, very messy. There are tons of closeups of my hands massaging the mess deeper and deeper into the clothing, and of course on my bare breasts. My favorite part is when I slowly pull down the slip and allow chocolate syrup to run right behind the falling material until the breasts are covered in dripping chocolate. This is a mess lovers dream where it seems like the gunging is continual and ongoing, beautifully and methodically shown, and complete and thick. This scene is truly beautiful and artistic. I promise that you will love every second of this film as much as I enjoyed making it!
Truth, beauty, art, and porn are all in the eye of the beholder. I have never thought of WAM as being pornographic though it certainly can be a part of pornography. I always considered it as more of a fetish and fetishes can be pornographic too. I like what Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said in 1964 about porn... "I know it when I see it."
In response, William T. Goldberg said, "I know it when I see it" can still be paraphrased and unpacked as: "I know it when I see it, and someone else will know it when they see it, but what they see and what they know may or may not be what I see and what I know, and that's okay."
And it is okay. I actually get turned on by seeing beautiful women fully clothed and wet, sometimes covered in certain substances, and have been known to do what my girlfriend calls "wam off" when I am soaking in a tub fully dressed a few thousand times. But when it comes to pornography and WAM, it depends on the person. Messmaster here at the UMD had to define it for practical purposes, and the line is masturbation. But if a woman is fully clothed and you never see private parts, is it still pornographic? Is it art? Or is it just a fetish???
Interesting! Thanks for your input guys, I would love to hear more from the rest of you!
I always think of wam as an add on fetish, as its usually (see most forum replies) what the models are wearing or doing whilst getting messy that gets people excited, personally, you could have the sexiest woman in the world being pied naked, and I would rather see someone traditionally considered less attractive getting messy in normal clothes, with stockings and nice underwear, with her knowing, and enjoying the reaction she will be getting. It is odd how specific a substance, or clothing, or reaction can ruin an otherwise fantastic shoot.
Now you've done it! You've opened up an old can of worms ...'Is non-sexual fetishism or erotica (like clothed wam) 'porn' or not?
Some here think anything that you 'fap' to is 'porn'....some do not. Fetishism (esp. commercially produced fetish videos) are generally categorized as 'porn'...just for convenience sake.
Personally, by view is that clothed or semi-clothed, non sexual (no sex or masturbation) wam is more akin to Burlesque (especially if there is humor involved). Now, if you go to a live show and watch a funny erotic routine (that's Burlesque), but if you watch it at home on video (where presumably one might masturbate), then it's 'porn' ('spank material', as a friend called it).
but it is possible to enjoy an erotic entertainment without getting so aroused that one eels the need to masturbate
This is why I distinguish between porn and erotica (or fetish erotica).
Now, if you look at the meaning of the word 'porn', which is 'prostitute' (someone who gets paid to have sex or engaged in a sexual act) then calling non-sexual wam 'porn' becomes tenuous.
Imagine how few models Rich would get if he described his shoots as (pie) 'porn' to a prospective model 9who would NEVER do nudity or porno)! Or, imagine if you said to your girlfriend or wife (who has been indulgent of your fetish until now)..."Hey honey, would you make another porn video with me?"
wamajama said: Now you've done it! You've opened up an old can of worms ...'Is non-sexual fetishism or erotica (like clothed wam) 'porn' or not?
it is possible to enjoy an erotic entertainment without getting so aroused that one feels the need to masturbate
Everybody's line is somewhere on the spectrum, but if the definition of porn is "visual stimulation that makes me masturbate", then those hot girls on the evening news, women playing professional tennis, and those beautiful women in old black and white film noir count as porn to me lol!