Facial (sexual act)
After the prerequisite level of sexual stimulation has been achieved, and ejaculation becomes imminent, the male will position his penis in a way that allows the discharged semen to be deposited onto his partner's face.
[2] In addition to mainstream pornography, the popularity of facials has led to creation of its own niche market,[8] like video series that specialize in showing the act.
In 2010, psychologist Ana Bridges and colleagues conducted a content analysis of best-selling heterosexual pornographic videos showing that over 96% of all scenes concluded with a male performer ejaculating onto the body of his female partner.
[10] When feminist pornography emerged in 1980s, pioneer Candida Royalle always excluded facial cum shots, and with few exceptions all other male external ejaculations, from her sex scenes.
[14] In the early works Tristan Taormino (since 1999), facials were also deliberately excluded, but after her thinking about feminist porn gradually changed, she sometimes included such acts in her later productions.
[21] Since potentially infected semen could come into contact with broken skin or sensitive mucous membranes (i.e., eyes, lips, mouth), there is a risk of contracting an infectious disease.
Treatment options for semen allergy include avoiding exposure to seminal fluid by use of condoms and attempting desensitization.
"[27] Daily Nexus columnist Nina Love Anthony views the practice of facials in a non-threatening light, feeling that it adds variety to the sexual experience.
"[28] Sociologists Gail Dines, Robert Jensen and Russo echo these sentiments in the book Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality.
"[21] In Padraig McGrath's review of Laurence O'Toole's book Pornocopia – Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire, he rhetorically asks whether "…women enjoy having men ejaculate on their faces?"
He suggests that the role of such a scene is to illustrate that "…it doesn't matter what the woman likes—she'll like whatever the man wants her to like because she has no inner life of her own, in turn because she's not a real person".
[31] To Dines, the ejaculate on the female performer's body "marks the woman as used goods", conveying a sense of ownership, and she quotes veteran porn actor and producer Bill Margold as saying, "I'd like to really show what I believe the men want to see: violence against women.
[25][26] It is widely recognised amongst sex-positive feminists that the fact that people see facials in porn can lead them to want to do it in real life with their partners as well, and that this could (but, according to some, does not necessarily have to) have a negative impact on real-life sexuality.
She produced pornographic films aimed at women and their partners that avoid the "misogynous predictability" and depiction of sex in "…as grotesque and graphic [a way] as possible."
'[14] Lust (2007) retorted, mocking 'the Church of the Pure Feminist Porn Producers... declaring that certain sexual practices that me and other women across the world happen to like, are a sin.
She goes on to say "Logically, if sex is natural and wholesome and semen is as healthy as sweat, there is no reason to interpret ejaculation as a hostile gesture.
[41] Sexologist Peter Sándor Gardos argues that his research suggests that "… the men who get most turned on by watching cum shots are the ones who have positive attitudes toward women" (on the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex in 1992).
[21] In her essay "Speaking Out: Teaching In", Patton reached the conclusion that critics have devoted too little space to discovering the meaning that viewers attach to specific acts such as cum shots.
