A picture is worth any number of words

Should one take a tour of the movie catalog of the average adult video store, three concepts will immediately cement themselves in one's mind. The first is that the functional vocabulary of the adult movie producer is about as robust as a newly verbal toddler with Tourette's. The second would be that they seem to attempt to compensate for the anemic shallowness of their lexicon by stringing them together with the skill and unabashed energy of a simian throwing feces. Lastly, the titles seem to suggest that words have no power beyond shock.

I am not the first person stop and ask, "What in the name of Kali's kippered crotch-crickets is the deal with porn titles?!" I shan't be the last either. Calling someone a "little yellow cum-dumpster" is acceptable to market an Asian porno? Trot out that little gem in damn near any other venue and you'd be lucky to escape sharp, severe censure for uttering a racial slur. Nope, not in this wonderland of naked cinematography. Black titles are liberally sprinkled to allude to inner-city gangs, pimps, or even toss in a "negro" or two into the copy. I live in apprehension of ever running across something like, "[Insert name of black male actor] iz tha Nigga Drilla" in some suppliers listings. Latino titles have so far seemed not to flirt so closely with the epithets, but Sweet Mother McCree on a crumpet the "putas" fly fast and thick. And as was suggested earlier, the Asian array of titles runs thick with "slant-eyes," "artistically" broken English, and sleazy parodies of a stereotypical Chinese take-out menu.

Even leaving race out of the picture, it seems like every bloody movie must refer to women as whores/sluts/meatholes/cum-guzzlers. Every guy is simply a cock/monster rod/python or source of copious ejaculate. No effort has been spared to reduce the subject matter into the shortest, crudest, most dehumanizing terms possible.

One thing you will notice is that no one is arguing the point. It's just rank upon rank of people pointing out the flaccid, disgusting monster that has just ruined the carpet and is wiping it's ass on the curtains. It really is that bad and everyone knows it.

The question to my mind is why the fucking hell it's a non-issue to the production companies. Obviously, it isn't or they would be titling their products differently.

My theory is that the answer is to be found in another phenomenon that is demonstrated on a daily, if not hourly basis. Customers cannot be bothered to read. Signs as far as they are concerned are nothing more than unimportant decor to make the store look official. Therefore, movie packaging is designed to exploit that behavior. The title only serves two purposes; distribution tracking and to stop a potential customers eyes long enough for the picture to snare their interest. The former purpose is largely immaterial to consumers unless looking specifically for that video. The latter is vital as soon as it hits the floor.

Adult movies are chosen because the customer liked what they saw on the cover. It isn't because they liked what they read on the cover, it's that nice glossy, airbrushed image of some girl in skimpy clothing in some sexualized pose and some expression of alleged passion. The banner could proclaim in bold, bright letters "You are a stupid cunt to buy this" and all that will lodge in their mind if they even notice it even has words is, by order of priority, "cunt," "you buy this."

Porn is sex aimed at the lowest common erection and since not every swinging dick can puzzle out words, we have pictures. If you think I'm full of shit, set out the same movie on the shelves with two covers; one displaying only the text, one displaying only the pictures. Three guesses which one will move first and the first two don't count.

That is why the terminology of porn remains eternally uncouth.