So, a male writer and a male photographer get together at GQ and ask two professional actresses to dress up in lingerie and simulate a fantasy lesbian scene. What’s the point of this?
A) The actresses are associated with a provocative, boundary-pushing project (e.g. something on Showtime that costs viewers roughly $5 per utterance of the word “fuck” and $10 per appearance of a bare breast).
No, the actresses are from the NBC TV show “Community,” which I have not seen but I presume is not about lipstick lesbians in poses that would make porn stars… well, perhaps not blush but maybe express some degree of confusion. I don’t have any adult film stars on my cell phone favorites, but I’m not sure even they could explain Jacobs’s intent with whatever she’s holding in her left hand (hairbrush? mirror?). Also, is she tugging on Brie’s bra in order to remove it or to prepare to mount her and play naughty jockey?
(This is GQ’s comedy issue. Mila Kunis appears on the cover barely clothed. The men featured in this issue are dressed in attire suitable for a trip to the grocery store without a resulting arrest for solicitation.)
B) The actresses are in fact modeling lingerie (apparently from the Dr. Frank-N-Furter collection).
No, this is not a lingerie ad.
C) There is no point.
There is, however, an accompanying video on the GQ site. The url refers to it as a “lesbian video” but the scene would be at home in conventional straight porn.
I would normally upload a related image with this piece, but instead I will use this photo of two men kissing, which strikes me as more appropriately GQ. The suits are nice.