Question [SPOILERS]


It was mostly about the scene with the porno. Was it a lesbian porno and was Rachel really not turned on by the porno?

And if so, then does that mean that she only had the hots for Luce and no other woman? Making her bisexual or fluid rather than a straight out lesbian?

reply

It was indeed a "lesbian" porno. But those kind of "movies" are made by men, for men, featuring straight women. My guess is that Rachel wouldn't have been turn on by that cheap stuff. It doesn't mean she's not gay (or bi), but that she's not in that kind of stuff. Anyway, that's my interpretation.

reply

She obviously was turned on. Her extreme reaction was so that it didn't appear to her husband that she was turned on by lesbian porn.

If she wasn't turned on, I assume she wouldn't have looked quite so guilty.

reply

She looked guilty for just having it in the house. Just look at her face when she was watching it! She was disgusted. I agree with the poster who said the vid was made by (and ultimately for) straight males and wasn't genuine.

reply

The movie had a man's voice declaring he was George Bush. I believe it was just a straight porno and she was turned off by how gross it was.

reply

There were only women's voices there... and the cover said "girl-on-girl." It was clearly not straight. Why would she rent it if it was?

reply

I think maybe that was the start of her curiosity... but really, in this day in age of technology you'd think she'd check out the internet instead! ;)

Kind of going OT but about lesbians watching porn... a while back I saw, "The Kids are Alright", there was a scene where the lesbians found gay (male) porn a turn on because it was 'real' and 'authentic' because the lesbian porn is 'fake'. I can't imagine gay men wanting to watch lesbian porn? Idunno...

so... Luce owns a flower shop...

... it's a beetroot!

reply