New Femdom movie coming soon: My Mistress

Sorry I haven’t posted anything new in a while but my social calendar has kept me busy. In fact, I am heading to B-more later today and will be spending a few days with my sisters. James has been a good boy, working hard, doing his chores and making sure my needs are met. We haven’t “played” in a couple of weeks but I hope to make time for that later this week.

 

I have been receiving a lot of e-mails lately from my readers and as always I appreciate your feedback and words of encouragement. Just yesterday I received an e-mail from Michelle and since I used to review FemDom movies, she informed me of a new movie coming out called “My Mistress”.

It looks most interesting, kind of the Femdom answer to “Fifty Shades of Grey”, which is also currently running its movie trailer in various places, only “My Mistress” has the extra taboo of the male sub being a teenager. Here is the premise of “My Mistress”:

 

 

It’s a long hot summer for Charlie Boyd. He’s sixteen and his hormones are racing.  When a tragic family event tumbles Charlie into a world of pain, a pain so intense he thinks no-one can help, he tries to escape. Desperate and alone, he meets Maggie, the mysterious woman who lives down the street. She’s a professional and she specialises in pain. Giving it, exploring it, and sharing it, all for money. 

So Charlie insinuates his way into her life and despite herself Maggie can’t stop from going along with his wishes. However dangerous their relationship may be, she knows he needs her.  She needs him too. As much as she tries to deny it, she needs his sort of love, because in the part of her life she keeps from Charlie, she has been judged and found wanting, and is paying the price. Maggie is drawn to this troubled boy who takes all the pain she can give and uses it to heal himself.  As Charlie heals, he turns that love back onto her, his Mistress. 

Here is the website so you can watch the trailer: http://www.mymistressmovie.com/ 

I hope it plays in a city near here so I can go see it. That might make for a wonderful femdom night out, taking hubby with me, and maybe Ginger and her hubby could join us. It would be fun to see the kind of people in the audience. I’m sure a lot of femdom enthusiasts would be there.

Psychopathia Sexualis

Directed by Bret Wood 

Starring:  Ted Manson,

Daniel May,

Jane Bass,

Daniel Pettrow,

Kristi Casey,

Lisa Paulsen,

Veronika Duerr,

Rachel Sorsa  

Release: 2006 

Length: 98 minutes 

 

Richard von Krafft-Ebing was a German psychiatrist who spent the first years of his career working in asylums. Eventually he became disillusioned with the institutional approach and switched his focus to education, becoming a professor of psychiatry at the Universities of Strasbourg, Graz and Vienna. 

Although he published numerous articles throughout his life, Krafft-Ebing is best known for the book, "Psychopathia Sexualis" (Psychopathy of Sex), which was first published in 1886 and eventually became an international best seller.  

“Psychopathia Sexualis” was actually Krafft-Ebing's second book.   His first, "A Textbook of Insanity", was published in 1879 and contained an elaborate system for categorizing mental diseases that earned him a reputation as a masterful classifier.   

Though Krafft-Ebing is best known for beginning the study of sexual behavior, his work in psychiatry, criminology, and forensic psychopathology also helped advance psychology as a clinical science. He was also a forensic psychologist who investigated the legal and genetic aspects of criminal behavior and was often consulted by the courts as an expert witness. 

“Psychopathia Sexualis” is widely regarded as the first modern pornographic book and is particularly notable because it was written intentionally as medical science. Krafft-Ebing went to great lengths to describe the technical terms in Latin and was successful in transforming what many would consider an interest in sexual deviance into scientific inquiry and compassion. The extensive catalog of sexual positions and non-procreative sexual activities identified names and descriptions for acts that were considered unspeakable, sinful and criminal. His work re-named these behaviors as “sexual perversions” and influenced recognition of Sexology as a new branch in the study of psychiatry. Krafft-Ebing also coined the terms "heterosexual", "fetishism", "exhibitionism, "sadism" and "masochism".

Krafft-Ebing coined the word "masochist" from the sexual desires of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, a well-known novelist of the time who was said to enjoy being humiliated by women.  In 1869, Sacher-Masoch wrote "Venus in Furs", a novel about a man with strong masochistic desires, including the desire to be whipped by a woman while her body is adorned in fur.  

Many of Krafft-Ebing’s ideas were shadowed for years after Freud shifted the view of homosexuality to be defined as a psychological problem. The Catholic Church was also disturbed by Krafft’s attempts to draw a connection between sanctity and martyrdom with masochism and many found his research morally offensive at the time. Despite the controversial nature of his work, Krafft-Ebing pioneered an approach to exploring and classifying sexuality that was accepting and sympathetic.  

So what does all of this have to do with a movie review? Writer and Film Director Bret Wood attempted to bring to life Krafft-Ebing's notorious and groundbreaking taxonomy of sexual variation. In his 2006 movie “Psychopathia Sexualis” Wood depicts sadomasochistic rituals, vampirism, same-sex attraction, lust murder and fetishism through a series of dramatizations.  Krafft-Ebing is played by Ted Manson and we see him interviewing patients, dissecting corpses and attempting to diagnose what he believes are mental and sexual disorders.

 

 

The book “Psychopathia Sexualis” had 238 case histories. This left Brent Wood with the unenviable task of choosing a dozen or so for his movie version of the book. He chooses to include the sort of sexually deviant material that made Krafft-Ebing's book well-read and notorious. There’s the case of the French sex killer Emile Fourquet (Patrick Parker). There's the tale of Jonathan (Daniel May), a proper young man of some means who develops a blood fixation and abuses the family maid until his mother (Jane Bass) has him committed.  

There is the case of a famous episode of necrophilia (a sexual fetish characterized by a sexual attraction to corpses) from Krafft-Ebing's book. It is recalled by puppeteer Caglios (Rob Nixon) in a command performance staged for a rich baron (Greg Thompson).  

There's the story of a young gay man (Daniel Pettrow) whom Krafft-Ebing tries to “cure” of his homosexual desires with hypnosis.

 

 

 

  

And there is the long narrative thread where the Governess Lydia (Lisa Paulsen), a long-repressed lesbian tutor whose desires are awakened by young student Annabel (Veronika Duerr).  Krafft-Ebing believed that "woman is passive . . . if properly educated, she has very little sexual yearning". Lydia would rather spend her life alone than give in to her urges, even when her new charge, Annabel Lindstrom, reciprocates enthusiastically.   

What about Femdom? The movie depicts the Femdom tale of an aristocratic gentleman who likes to be trampled by scantily clad prostitutes. I call this a Femdom scene based on what we know today about the male desire for female domination. However, Krafft-Ebing classified this as male masochism and believed it was an abnormal sexual desire. Interesting enough, Krafft-Ebing saw women as basically sexually passive, and recorded no female sadists or fetishists in his case studies. Behavior that would be classified as masochism in men was categorized as "sexual bondage" in women. 

 

So what are we to think about a highly regarded psychiatrist who believed that women did not enjoy sex? Time, education and the advancements in the field of psychiatry has proven Krafft-Ebing wrong in many of his diagnosis, including homosexuality and the male desire for female domination.  

To his credit, Krafft-Ebing was sincere in his pursuit to understand the correlation between the human mind and the human sex drive. Perversion can exist if the human mind is not sane. However, Krafft-Ebing had tunnel vision and he saw through the glass darkly. His research was flawed by categorizing genuine expressions of sexuality (such as Femdom) along side actual acts of perversion (such as necrophilia).  

Be that as it may, Bret Wood was intrigued by the fact that many people read Krafft-Ebing's book "Psychopathia Sexualis" not because they wanted to learn about mental illness. People of his day read his book because it was full of actual cases of sexual deviance. The Science community believed it to be a groundbreaking and important book but the general population read it for its shock value. Wood thought perhaps a 2006 audience would view it the same way.  

Despite this film's low budget, Wood's images are evocative. Wood seems fascinated by Krafft-Ebing's efforts to scientifically dissect and categorize the vagaries of carnal desire, but his larger point is elusive. There is some titillating imagery among the Victorian corsets and knickers in this erratic film. However, this is not an erotic film.  

There are scenes that are not for the squeamish, and I don’t mean that in a good S&M way. Stories of serial killers, psychopaths, male sadists who want to injure women and fringe fetishes (such as the man who pays a prostitute to stomp a chicken to death in front of him) are not a good mix with tales of forbidden yet erotic desires (Femdom, Lesbianism, etc). And that is the problem with both Krafft-Ebing's research and with Wood's film. Perhaps one or more of these stories would make an interesting movie in and of itself, but as a series of dramatizations, as seen through the eyes and analysis of Krafft-Ebing, the movie comes up short.  

For the readers of my blog, the best chapter in the film (Chapter 6 on the DVD) is the section on Masochism. Here you will witness a very brief scene of a woman whipping a man, emasculating him through what we today would call pony play, and trampling him by standing on his humbled body (the prostitute looking disinterested the entire time, playing to Krafft-Ebing's analysis that all women are passive and have no interest in such activities but are merely doing it for money).

 

This leads to the dramatization where three prostitutes at a brothel play out a fantasy scenario for a paying male client who desires to be dominated. The experienced prostitute admonishes the novice prostitute, “Follow my lead and don’t look at him, don’t say a word. And for God’s sake, whatever you do, don’t laugh”. (Again playing to the theme that women could not possibly enjoy dominating and controlling a man.)  

Once the male client is lying on the floor, eyes closed, the two women circle him (wearing corsets, fishnet stockings and ankle high leather boots) then proceed to stand on him, one at time and then both together, until he rings a bell to signify his unspoken safe word.

 

Next enters the third prostitute, dressed like Marie Antoinette in a wig, white corset, white boots and wearing a mask. The other women leave the room while the Antoinette figure begins to whip the male client with a dozen long-stem roses until he uses his safe signal by ringing his bell.
 

You might find this scene to be erotic but I doubt it. The client is made out to be a weirdo (and I might add a wimp since he rings his bell before his session has the chance to get interesting). Perhaps this Krafft-Ebing case study was undeniably of a peculiar man but I wonder what would Krafft-Ebing think today were he to browse the internet, where thousands of women are making a living offering professional domination be it over the phone or in person. Would he view the innumerable male clients of these women as all being worthy of his book? Imagine that, an immeasurable number of men just like Leopold von Sacher-Masoch? 

And what would he say of all of us dominant women that achieve sexual arousal and wet pussies when we are sexually dominating the men in our lives? Would he still hold to the belief that women are passive and have little interest in sex? 

I know I should not be too hard on Richard von Krafft-Ebing because he was living in a different time and in a different society. He was sincere in his research and he did groundbreaking work in the area of forensic psychology. He attempted to diagnose some very difficult and in some cases quite disturbing sexual acts. Freud was wrong in many of his theories as well but his work was still highly influential. The same can be said for Krafft-Ebing.

 

So what is my overall opinion of Bret Wood's attempt to make “Psychopathia Sexualis” into a film? I must confess that I found it to be a fascinating film to watch. I would not classify it as erotic or entertaining but it kept my attention for the nearly 100 minutes.  

It really comes down to your motivation for watching this film. If you want to be entertained or if you want to have your D&S senses aroused, you will be disappointed. However, if you are seeking an educational experience, to view fetishes through the mind of the famous Richard von Krafft-Ebing, you will probably find this film worthy of your time. For me, it's a split decision.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

 

Love Me like you Hate Me

 

Directed by: Erika Lust 

Starring: Venus O’Hara,

Anna Linng 

Released: 2010 

Language: English  

Length: 6 minutes

Back in 2012 I was contacted by a gentleman who was one of the organizers of the Fetish Film Festival, the subcultural film conference that meets in Kiel, Germany each year. The Fetish Film Festival explores narrative works about consensual erotic encounters. This gentleman was a fan of my movie reviews and he extended a personal invitation for me to attend the Fetish Film Festival. He also sent me a list of the Festival’s winners for 2011.  

A flick that caught my attention was one of the nominees for best short film, a D&S goodie titled “Love Me like you Hate Me”. It didn’t win the award for best short film (that honor went to a film called “Fourplay” about a cross-dressing male prostitute).  However, the star actress of “Love Me like you Hate Me”, Venus O’Hara, did win the award for best actress in a short film.  

And when I say short film, I really mean ‘short’ film. “Love me like you Hate Me” is a mere six minutes in length. Yet, I loved every second of it and that surprised me a little because although the film is about D&S (and more specifically female domination) the film explores female dominating female.

 

Why did I like it so much? That’s a good question (and I’m glad I asked it). I think I liked it for a number of reasons.  

For one thing, seeing that I have red hair, I am kind of partial to red headed dominant women. I think we are a fraternity (or sorority if you prefer) unto ourselves. Red hair, fair skin, and freckles are not the easiest body traits for a teenage girl to deal with when she is coming of age in a society that is obsessed with sunbathing, tanning beds and bronzed skin. When the Beach Boys (and later David Lee Roth) sang “I wish they all could be California girls”, well thank God they didn’t get their wish because that wasn’t me.  

Growing up I always felt a kinship with Katharine Hepburn, Maureen O’Hara and other famous red heads. These women were sexy and glamorous and I idolized them. Of course some people liked to stereotype me with zany female red heads such as Lucille Ball and Carol Burnett. But that’s the beauty of red heads. We can be glamorous, sexy, wacky, fiery and very dominant.  

So maybe I was drawn to Venus O’Hara because of her hair color. I had never heard of her before but Venus O’Hara is a fetish model, an actress, and a writer.

 

 

In fact, “Love Me like you Hate Me” is also a book, a coffee table book, written by Venus O’Hara and another woman, Erika Lust. Here is a brief synopsis of the book; 

“This book provides a modern perspective on a variety of practices that may be considered taboo for many women: to be tied up oneself or to tie someone else up, role-play and dressing up, giving pain or receiving it, being a strict dominatrix or being a submissive slave, punishing our partner or being punished by them... Explore with Venus O’Hara and Erika Lust the seductive thrills of domination or the fear and excitement of submission.” 

 

The short film “Love Me like you Hate Me” is based on the book with the same name and it stars Venus O’Hara. Oh, did I mention that she plays all the parts in this short film? I didn’t realize it the first time I watched it but when I went back and watched it again, sure enough, all 7 characters in this short film are indeed the red-headed Venus O’Hara. She plays herself plus six additional personas of her personality, including 3 dominant personas as she interacts with and dominates … well … herself, in a variety of role-playing scenarios.

 

 

She is the strict French teacher who spanks her female student when she isn’t able to comprehend the lesson.
 

 

She is the cruel housewife who humiliates and exploits her female housekeeper by throwing her cigarette on the floor that the housekeeper is scrubbing and grinds it with her shoes, all the while verbally degrading the submissive housekeeper about the poor job she is doing.
 

 

She is the evil Dominatrix who abuses her female slave. She locks her in a closet and only lets her out after she begs. She verbally humiliates her about her hygiene, binds her in a tub, and cruelly dunks her head under the water. All of these characters are played erotically by Venus O’Hara.
 

 

How does she pull this off? With the help of another actress, Anna Linng. We never see Anna’s face but she is the stand-in when the camera captures female hands spanking female bottom or female legs and shoes standing in front of the submissive housekeeper or the gloved hand of a Dominatrix pushing the head of her slave under the bath water.
 

 

 

It’s very clever and I love the haunting piano music that accompanies the scenes as it adds to the domination, the cruelty and the intense humiliation.   

 

So do I have different dominant personas? Absolutely! I can be the cruel Dominatrix or the fun-loving independent spirit or the sensual temptress or the quiet intellectual or the spoiled brat who is accustomed to getting her way or the fiery Irish Bitch with the bad temper.  

Do I have submissive fantasies? No, I can’t say that I do but I have known dominant women who like to be on the other end as they explore their submissive fantasies with other dominant women. Back when I was active in ClubFEM, I had a dominant woman in our group who asked me if I would be open to dominating her within a role-playing scenario. She didn’t want any of the other Mistresses (or submissive men) knowing but she had a long-held fantasy that involved a specific role-play where she was submissive to a woman. And believe me, she was dominant in real life, and very dominant with her husband. Did I oblige her request? Now, now … that’s private information between just me and her.  

 

So even if you’re not into seeing a woman dominating another woman, “Love Me like you Hate me” should still be an erotic viewing experience. I think you’ll find Ms. O’Hara’s dominant style to be quite arousing.   

You can see the film at this link http://xeeex.wordpress.com/2013/11/17/love-me-like-you-hate-me-short-film-erika-lust/ 

One final thought about this short and that’s the title. You may recall that I explored my hubby’s masochism and one area that I had difficulty comprehending is when he would ask me to be cruel. I finally caught on and what he was really saying was … love me like you hate me. To a submissive and a masochist, when a woman agrees to treat him cruelly, she is in fact demonstrating to him that she loves him. She is giving him what he needs, what he craves. To refuse to be cruel is to be cruel. To grant him the cruelty he longs for is to love him.    

Of course I am talking about role-playing and D&S exploration. To take this into everyday life and treat someone cruelly 24/7 would be unhealthy for all involved. I could never be cruel as it is more in my nature to be tender-hearted. But I do enjoy being cruel in our D&S play. Yes, I admit it. When it comes to my hubby, I enjoy loving him like I hate him. 

 

 

Rating: 5 out of 5 stars

 

My Tutor

 

 

Directed by: George Bowers  

Starring: Matt Lattanzi,

Caren Kaye,

Kevin McCarthy,

Clark Brandon,

Bruce Bauer,

Crispin Glover  

Released: 1983 

Language: English 

Length: 97 minutes

The 1980’s were full of teen exploitation sex romp movies.  I hated most of them, to tell you the truth. Perhaps that’s because I’m a woman and most of the movies of this genre were sophomoric and crude. In other words, written to appeal to high school and college-aged males whose hormones would lead them to go see any film that had lots of female nudity.

The 1983 film, “My Tutor”, certainly has plenty of nudity but it also had something else to attract young men. The movie was dedicated to the prevalent teenage boy's fantasy about having an affair with a beautiful older woman who could “tutor” him about sex. This was only the third film that George Bowers had directed at the time and he had worked mainly as an editor in low budget sex comedies (“The Pom Pom Girls”, “Galaxina”, “The Beach Girls”) before throwing his hat into the ring as a director. 

The plotline no doubt drew many young men to the theater. However, “My Tutor” had another underlining plot that probably appealed to what would become the ‘Lifetime’ crowd. The female lead (Caren Kaye) is a sexy, confident, independent woman and the dominant one in the relationship. She is worshipped by her young lover and she holds all the cards.

 

 

 

 

The movie opens with scenes of an aerobics class juxtaposed with a classroom of students taking an examination. The movie's two protagonists are featured in these scenes, with Terry Green (Caren Kaye) participating in the aerobics and Bobby Chrystal (Matt Lattanzi) taking his last high school final, in French. 
 

At first, Bobby's main goal for the summer before college appears to be losing his virginity. Soon, though, the poor results of his French final are in, and Bobby must take a make-up examination and score at least 85% in order to retain his acceptance at his father's alma mater, Yale University. Mr. Chrystal (Kevin McCarthy) hires Terry, a 30 year-old skilled French tutor, to live in the Chrystal home during the summer and work with Bobby on passing his exam. In addition to her normal compensation, Mr. Chrystal offers to give Terry a bonus payment of $10,000 should Bobby pass. 
 

Terry and Bobby begin working together but Bobby's lack of interest in both French and Yale soon become apparent. His real goal, he tells Terry, is to attend UCLA and study his true passion, astronomy. Terry is sympathetic but reminds Bobby that wherever he ends up going to college, he will need to pass his French final. With Terry's help, Bobby begins to make some progress. 
 

At night, after she thinks everyone in the Chrystal home is asleep, Terry uses the family's pool to skinny dip. However, Bobby sees her one night and begins watching her regularly (especially after several unsuccessful attempts by his friends and him to have sex with women in increasingly unusual situations). After one such evening, Bobby follows Terry back to her room, only to have her sneak up behind him and surprise him. Terry gently admonishes Bobby for spying on her but it is clear that they have a mutual attraction. Terry, however, has begun seeing a former boyfriend again, much to Bobby's displeasure. 
 

After yet another evening out with his friends, Bobby returns home to find an upset Terry, who had earlier discovered her boyfriend again cheating on her. They talk briefly and Terry later heads to the pool for her regular swim. Once she completes her lap she sees Bobby waiting for her at the end of the pool. Terry reacts by pulling Bobby into the pool with her and kissing him. Returning to Terry's room together, the two begin a love affair. 
 

The affair between Bobby and Terry progresses until the summer's end approaches and he has to take his French examination. Despite Terry's attempts to keep their relationship casual, Bobby has developed serious feelings for Terry and resists her insistence that the affair end once he takes his exam. Matters worsen when Mr. Chrystal, who himself lusts for Terry, sees his son and Terry kissing one night.  
 

After Bobby successfully passes the test with a score of 91%, Mr. Chrystal reveals to Bobby his promise to pay Terry the $10,000 bonus, implying that Terry's affection for Bobby was driven by greed. Bobby reacts by angrily telling his father that he will be attending UCLA, and not Yale, and storming out to find Terry. Once he finds her, he confronts her with what he has learned, calling her a hooker, leading Terry to slap him and deny his accusation. 
 

Afterward, Bobby seeks out Bonnie, his old crush, and using his new-found confidence with women, is able to persuade her to begin dating him. Terry prepares to leave the Chrystal home and Bobby approaches her to say good-bye. He begins by apologizing to her for his rash accusations and then tells her that he will never forget her. The two share one last kiss, and Terry drives off. Bobby leaps into the air, looking forward to the rest of his life. 
 

Not much of a plot and the film is definitely nowhere on par with “The Graduate”. Yet, the sociological implications when it comes to female domination are apparent throughout the film. First, there is a Dominatrix scene early in the film.  
 

Most people know Crispin Glover as George McFly in the 1985 Blockbuster “Back to the Future”. Crispin is known for portraying eccentric people on screen such as Layne in “River's Edge”, the undertaker in “What's Eating Gilbert Grape”, the ‘Creepy Thin Man’ in the big screen adaptation of “Charlie's Angels” and Willard Stiles in the 2003 version of “Willard”. 
 

In “My Tutor”, Crispin Glover plays Jack, Bobby’s best friend who is also obsessed with shedding his virginity. Bobby and Jack visit a brothel, a place they are destined to score. Bobby ends up with Kitten Natividad and her 44 inch bosom. Kitten was a Mexican American film actress and exotic dancer, noted for her large bosom and appearances in cult films made by her ex-partner, director Russ Meyer. 
 

The sight of Kitten’s large bosom causes Bobby to pass out for a few moments, only to regain consciousness and pass out again indefinitely when he actually touches her breasts (the result of too much liquid courage combined with being overwhelmed with sexual excitement).

 

 

 

Jack ends up with Louisa (Shelley Taylor Morgan), a beautiful blonde woman who wants to make his first time unforgettable. But it turns out that Louisa is the house Dominatrix and she has special plans for Jack. She binds him in an upright position against a device known as the Catherine's Wheel. She changes into something more comfortable but instead of lace lingerie she appears in leather, at which the young Jack proclaims, “Oh my God!”

 

 

After teasing her helpless young victim to the edge of arousal, she spins the wheel, sending him in circles and in a panic as Louisa opens a closet full of whips. The next scene shows the young male running for his life as the Dominatrix chases after him, cracking her whip. So our two young virgins fail to get laid even at a brothel. 
 

Another femdom scene later in the film is when Bobby goes into a lingerie/sex store to look for a gift he can give Terry. The mature saleslady asks the very young Bobby about his girlfriend, and he informs her that she is thirty-years-old. The saleslady’s responds with approval and she proceeds to show Bobby some leather lingerie and a riding crop. The implication here is that it is obvious to the mature saleslady that Bobby is the submissive one in the relationship given the age difference. He turns down the saleslady recommendation and instead buys a book about sexual positions and how to sexually please a woman. His choice is no less femdom, just a lighter and more sensual expression. 
 

And that brings us to the biggest femdom inference made by the film, that being the societal dynamic of an older woman having a sexual fling with a much younger male. “My Tutor” was meant to be a film about every young male’s fantasy, and while I’m sure it succeeded on that front, it also ended up being a movie about every modern woman’s fantasy. 
 

Obviously of Italian extraction, Matt Lattanzi has handsome dark features, a winning smile and a sexy, toned young body. For those of you who may have forgotten about this gentleman, he was a back-up dancer on the set of “Xanadu” who ended up dating and eventually marrying the star of “Xanadu”, the much older Olivia Newton-John. As a matter of fact, it struck me when I watched “My Tutor” how much Caren Kaye looked like Olivia Newton-John. 

 

 

 

I find it rather fascinating that the male star of a movie about a young male having a sexual affair with an older woman actually ended up marrying an older woman, a woman of similar appearance. Anywho, the scenes of “My Tutor” are devised so that Lattanzi has every opportunity to undress: in his fantasy dreams, at the brothel, in the back seat of a car, in the swimming pool. And the camera lingers over the tautness of his smooth body. A scene where he drags himself out of the swimming pool to sit at his Terry’s feet says it all; a sleek, sexy, young male who is inexperienced and unsure of himself so he can be easily dominated by a mature, confident woman. That's what women found to be sexy about this movie; the contrast between his body (hard and tan) and his mind (passive and controllable).
 

 

Because he is shy and inexperienced, he is still a virgin who is desperate to get laid. Terry comes along and teases him, leads him along and eventually she decides she wants to have him. She strips him, thrusts his head between her breasts, and pops his cherry. She does not fall in love with him because although she would never openly admit it, she ultimately just wants to use him for sex. To me, that is the ultimate femdom insinuation of the film.
 

 

"My Tutor" was made on a small budget but still managed to clock up a neat $22.6 million at the U.S. box office. For those of you who are wondering what happened to Matt Lattanzi after this film, well as I mentioned he married superstar Olivia Newton-John, had a daughter, divorced Olivia and went on to star in a handful of small parts in minor films.  
 

“My Tutor” is not a great film like “The Graduate”, in fact it’s not even a good film, but it definitely has various femdom themes, and for that reason I slightly recommend it. Those teen sex movies of the 1980’s were rather horrible, but if you feel the need to relive those days, you would do much better with “My Tutor” than you would with a movie like “Porky’s”.

 

 

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars