Libertine: On the Prowl
Vidi, vici, veni -- I saw, I conquered, I came. _______________________________________________________________
Clashing Sexual Desires
In a recent Alternet article, Are Male Fantasies of "Girl-on-Girl" Action Messing with Women's Sexuality? by Simcha, the author explores the dilemma of differing sexual fantasies and fetishes among couples and the difficulties of resolving such differences.My comment follows below
The Author Illustrated One of The Weaknesses of Monogamy
In monogamous relationships, a person's only partner is expected to fulfill all of their sexual needs. This is fine and dandy when both have the same fantasies or lack thereof, the same level of sex drive, and so on.
But, as is frequently the case, couples have mismatched libidos and mismatched fantasies.
And whatever solution any individual couple comes up with will leave one of the partners unsatisfied. Either one partner, usually the woman, will end up doing things she feels uncomfortable with to please her partner, or one partner, usually the man, will have to make do with repressing his fantasies and be satisfied with what he considers a truncated sex life, in order to please his partner. Both solutions suck.
Being non-monogamous, fulfilling my sexual needs isn't completely invested in a single partner, thus I would never expect any one partner to do anything she feels the slightest bit uncomfortable with. Nor do I have to go around frustrated with half a sex life, because I'm free to seek out other partners who are interested in doing things another partner may not, and vice versa. This, in turn, takes the pressure off, and I'm free to enjoy each partner for what she feels comfortable with, and vice versa.
In regards to girl-on-girl stuff, that doesn't do a thing for me. I enjoy engaging in threesomes, both FMF and MFM, but in both instances, I prefer that the two of the same sex concentrate on interacting with the one person of the opposite sex, either alternately or simultaneously, and not with one another, but your mileage may vary.
The Sexual Hell Test
Your result for The Sexual HELL Test...
HELL LEVEL 3
Raw score: 81%
There's a special place in Hell for you: the basement penthouse. You scored the nastiest possible score on the Sexual Hell Test. You have no sexual restraint whatsoever. You'll take pleasure however you can get it, and my guess is you get it a lot. If for some reason you don't right now, you will soon, as people in your category only tend to spiral down ever deeper into the abyss of carnality and delicious sin. Congratulations.
I, personally, think that this category is the best. Paradoxically enough, sexual liberation and indulgence can only bring you closer to purity.
AVOID: all but level 3 hellions like yourself. You wouldn't want to ruin anyone, now would you?
I, personally, think that this category is the best. Paradoxically enough, sexual liberation and indulgence can only bring you closer to purity.
AVOID: all but level 3 hellions like yourself. You wouldn't want to ruin anyone, now would you?
Take The Sexual HELL Test at HelloQuizzy
Sex Survey
This sex survey was lifted from the beautiful Chica-X.1. What is the strangest thing you have ever inserted or seen inserted (in a sexual manner) in person?
It would have to be a PR-24 police baton that I would insert into a lover by the vaguely penis-shaped handle end.
2. Have you ever had sex anyone whose name started with a J?
Too many to count. My current primary lover's first name begins with a J, incidentally.
3. Have you ever been outside completely naked?
Of course. I would advise others wanting to do likewise to make sure not to do it during mosquito season, though.
4. Do you prefer music, TV, or other noise in the background when you have sex?
Music, preferably with a beat that approximates the rhythm of sex; slower for "making love", faster and heavier for good old fashioned fucking. I'm not fond on having a TV on when having sex, unless we're using a porn tape as inspiration for our activities.
5. Have you ever used ice for sexual purposes?
Sometimes -- it's amazing what ice does for nipples!
---
Feel free to provide your answers in the comment box.
Be Careful What You Ask For
Many men who come to a point in their lives where they have trouble getting and maintaining erections have turned to pharmacological solutions, typically in the form of Viagra and other drugs.These drugs come with a warning labels, cautioning users to contact their doctors if they end up with erections lasting more than four hours.
Such prolonged erections are classified as priapism, are not accompanied by sexual arousal and are unaffected by orgasm.
According to Dr, Ira Sharlip, prolonged erections are usually painful. Sharlip warns men that prolonged erections are "a potentially serious condition which can result in permanent erectile dysfunction if it’s not taken care of... If an erection is left in place for more than 12 hours, damage to the tissue in the erection chambers can occur. It can be a cause of serious erectile dysfunction. They may be able to get a partial erection in the future, but not a full erection.”
Fortunately, priapism associated with erectile dysfunction drugs is quite rare. Dr. Sharlip, who maintains a private urology practice, has never encountered a case of it in the ten years he's been prescribing Viagra to patients.
It is more common, however, with an alternative ED therapy, penile injection therapy. in a particularly tragic case, "a medical professional who, after reading about the treatment of erectile dysfunction with penile injections, injected himself with an excessive dose.
Unfortunately, he then developed priapism, but was so embarrassed he went for seven days before seeking medical help. According to Dr. Christopher Steidle, “the resulting erection was unsalvageable, and the patient was left with a penis that was less than an inch long.”
Though many of us would love to have a four hour erection, the above information shows that there can definitely be too much of a good thing.
I'm quite thankful that I not yet in any need of such drugs in my sex life, and I hope this will remain true for many years to come.
Works for Me!
To be honest, every day is casual sex day for me, so this idea works well for me!
Pure Freedom?
As part of my ongoing monitoring of the political and religious right, I listen to Focus on the Family's Weekend Edition on the radio. One of their ongoing themes is sexual abstinence before marriage -- actually sexual abstinence for everyone not currently married: those widowed, divorced, as well as those never-married people.All of their "sexual purity" segments are directed toward girls and women only; boys and men are never urged to maintain their "purity". While the choice to refrain from non-marital sex is surely one that anyone should be free to make, I find the reference to abstinence as "purity" and the sexual double standard of directing this advice to females only to be disturbing and offensive.
First of all, a person's value is not predicated on how and when they express their sexuality. To view sexual inexperience before marriage is "purity" implies that a person who chooses differently is of lesser worth, to be "tainted". A person's character is better judged by how they treat others, not by how strictly they regulate their sexual urges.
Secondly, if fundamentalists are so keen to protect the sexual inexperience of their women, they might want to avoid being hypocrites and direct abstinence messages to boys and men as well. You know, what's good for the goose is good for the gander and all that.
Of course, I don't believe in abstinence for all uinmarried people, but if they're going to preach a philosophy, the first thing they need to do is be consistent about it.
In their latest "purity" propaganda segment, there was an extremely bizarre interview with a woman named Dannah Gresh, who leads a "purity" organization for girls called "Pure Freedom" (Note me rolling my eyes at this oxymoron).
Gresh stated that she'd been a Christian since a young age, but that as a teen, she "gave what I was supposed to give my husband on my wedding night to a man I would never marry", and that this single, never-repeated act caused her ten years of grief and psychological torment.
In other words, she was human and did something normal and natural that millions of teens have done before and since. And because of the repressive fundamentalist environment she grew up in, she wasted a decade beating herself up about it.
In Gresh's own words:
As a young married woman and a new mom, I was driving down the highway listening to the familiar voice of Dr. James Dobson. Suddenly, the host asked his guest, "What is the most common question a young girl will ask her mom about sex?" Without delay the woman responded, "Mom, did you wait?"
I pulled my minivan to the side of the highway and allowed ten years of tremendous denial and grief to engulf me. My heart's desire was, is and always will be to live a lifestyle of purity, but in high school I detoured from that pursuit long enough to get tangled up by lust. Like no other sin, moments of unbridled passion had intertwined my life painfully into another's.
That evening, it took me three hours to tell my husband in the darkness of my bedroom. Satan had me cornered into a prison of blackmail until the very moment that my lips uttered my long-awaited confession. Oh, how I wish I had done that sooner. Christ's forgiveness finally verbalized in the midst of my husband's warm familiar embrace suddenly began to heal the deep tear in my heart.
I pulled my minivan to the side of the highway and allowed ten years of tremendous denial and grief to engulf me. My heart's desire was, is and always will be to live a lifestyle of purity, but in high school I detoured from that pursuit long enough to get tangled up by lust. Like no other sin, moments of unbridled passion had intertwined my life painfully into another's.
That evening, it took me three hours to tell my husband in the darkness of my bedroom. Satan had me cornered into a prison of blackmail until the very moment that my lips uttered my long-awaited confession. Oh, how I wish I had done that sooner. Christ's forgiveness finally verbalized in the midst of my husband's warm familiar embrace suddenly began to heal the deep tear in my heart.
Again, if one chooses to believe that one should be abstinent outside of marriage, that's their choice, but to respond as she did says more about the dangers of sexual repression than it does about "sin". A more healthy response to someone who believe in abstinence would have been to feel regret about not acting according to one's beliefs, then to move on and try not to repeat it. After all, she just got laid -- she didn't kill someone!
Gresh believed she needed to be "forgiven" to be able to let it go of her one, long-ago 'mistake'. I'd say she needed counseling to relieve her of the unhealthy repressive sexual attitudes and guilt she grew up with in order to let go of the obsession and move on. Indeed, if she had, she'd not have had to wait ten years into her marriage to tell her husband she'd not been a virgin on her wedding night, as she'd have known she had nothing whatsoever to be ashamed with.
Her organization "Pure Freedom" is to bring the warped message of judging one's self worth, one's "purity", by remaining virgins until marriage to pre-teen and teen girls. If I had a daughter, I'd not let her anywhere near this neurotic and deeply-conflicted woman's organization, Rather, I'd teach her that her self-worth was inherent and did not hinge on how and when she decided to express her sexuality.
Thoughts?
Baby Boomer Sex Poll
A sex poll taken among a thousand people born between 1946 and 1964 yielded some interesting results. Currently, there are about 85 million baby boomers in North America, which is about 28 percent of the adult population. About 30 percent of those 85 million are unmarried.Forty-six percent said they were enjoying sex more now than they did in their 20s and 30s. Personally, I don't think my sex life is better than it was then, but it's certainly just as good.
34 percent would have sex on a first date compared with 17 percent of singles in "Generation X": those born between 1965 and 1982. I've had more first dates with sex than without.
25 percent were open to engaging in a threesome. I'm not just open to it, I've been there, done that, and gotten the t-shirt.
These results are rather unsurprising because baby boomers grew up and came of age during the midst of the sexual revolution, feminism, and the push for gay rights.
More survey results indicated that 47 percent of single boomers were looking for companionship, while 19 percent were seeking a sex partner.
30 percent were looking for a serious relationship, while 33 percent were looking for casual ones.
Only 10 percent were looking to get married, compared to 60 of those aged 30 to 39.
Baby boomers -- let's hear from you. I'd be curious to read what other generations think as well.
The Attraction of the Forbidden
As my readers all know, I regularly monitor the media for opinions I vehemently disagree with, all for the purpose of having something to rant about on this blog. And, as usual, Focus on the Family provided me with some good rant-worthy blogging fodder.What set me off this time was an interview James Dobson conducted with a woman who'd written a book about mothers who feel as if they are "good enough" mothers. The author mentioned one woman who felt like she was a bad mother for not protecting her teenage son from internet porn, simply because she allowed him to use a computer with an internet connection.
Dobson agreed, mentioning that he had decided not to have internet access in his home because he didn't want to deal with internet porn. One thing to note is that Dobson is of an age where his children are adults and no longer live in his home.
I thought this was a rather extreme measure to go to in order to avoid internet porn, and it smacks of "protesting too much."
A person who really wishes to avoid looking at porn has several options open to them that doesn't require the drastic step of banning the entire internet altogether. One doesn't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
One can simply avoid visiting porn websites. Most email programs have effective spam filters that relegate porn spam to a spam folder. Spam emails that slip through into one's regular email folder can be quickly deleted and the senders blocked. For those with minor children in the home, several types of filtering software, such as Net Nanny, are available that will block such sites, but will allow users to otherwise use the internet.
I'm guessing the reason Dobson has no internet in his home is likely that he's attracted to such sites and knows he won't be able to keep from looking at them if he has a handy internet connection available.
Leaving aside the fact that indulging in internet porn would make him a hypocrite, considering his religious and political opinions, I just don't get his assertion (and that of the aforementioned book's author) that looking at internet porn is a catastrophe on the level of being a crack addict.
One can indulge in internet porn without it ruining one's life. To use myself as an example, though I look at it occasionally, I am in no way a regular consumer of porn. Indeed, I avoid looking at it too much because after awhile it ceases to be arousing and becomes the same ol' thing. Besides, I'd much rather DO it than merely look at it. At best, porn is best used along with real sex as a sex toy would, or as a wanking aid when alone.
For fundamentalists, I'm guessing that the forbidden nature of it for them is precisely what makes it so irresistible for them. Thus, they feel they must take such drastic steps as described above, lest they fall into temptation.
On the other hand, for people like me, for whom it is not forbidden, it's merely another possibility -- and a minor one at that -- in my sexual tool box. Thus I have no particular irrestible compulsion to view it. It's there whenever I want it, so there's no particular urgency for me to do so.
Thoughts?
Some Thoughts on Sex Education
Over at Alternet today, there's an article entitled "Sex Ed in the Bible Belt", which is about the author's experience with abstinence-based sex education.My reply contrasted my own experience with sex education with that of the author and follows below:
My junior high and high school sex-ed classes were in the early to mid 70s in New Jersey. The junior high classes were sex-segregated and dealt mainly with the biological facts of reproduction.
In high school, however, it was in mixed-sex classes conducted by the football coach and the emphasis was pregnancy prevention, not abstinence. It was assumed that we would be having sex before we were married, though some attention was given to encouraging us to wait until we were mature enough to handle it.
I remember one class in particular where the coach couldn't stress strongly enough how useless the "withdrawal" method was, telling us that people who used withdrawal were usually more commonly known as "parents".
Abortion had recently become legal when I was in high school, and this, too, was addressed in the classes, with the emphasis being that consistent use of birth control would make this option unnecessary.
Questions were encouraged, no matter how frank, and were answered in an equally frank manner.
The issue of love and relationships as how it related to sex were covered in a separate family living class.
I'm glad I grew up when and where I did and was fortunate enough to receive a comprehensive sex education.
The only topics not covered in what would be considered in an adequate manner today would have been the topic of STDs, which were still commonly referred to as "VD" back then. But, to be fair, AIDs did not yet exist at the time and what STDs that did exist could be cured with a trip to the doctor, so what education we did receive on STDs was adequate for the time.
What was your experience of school sex education?
There's a Museum for Everything
We're all familiar with large, eclectic museums that are devoted to a wide variety of topics, such as the Smithsonian in Washington, DC. Then there are smaller museums devoted to a single topic or a limited number of related topics. I've been to a couple of those: one devoted to gemstones and my county has one devoted to our county's history.But the one I read about this morning should be filed under "Now I've Heard Everything".
It seems as if Iceland boasts a museum devoted entirely to the penis, the Icelandic Phallological Museum. The museum currently houses 261 preserved members from 90 species and began in 1974 with a bull's penis the size of a riding crop.
The largest, from a sperm whale, is 70 kg (154 lb) and 1.7 meters (5.58 ft) long. The smallest, a hamster penis bone, is just 2 mm and must be viewed through a magnifying glass.
So far there are no human specimens, but four men, a German, an American, an Icelander and a Briton have promised to donate their organs after they die.
The Icelandic donor, a 93-year-old retired libertine thought having his penis in the collection might bring him eternal fame. Recently, however, he's been having second thoughts, as his penis has been shrinking as he's gotten older.
The museum opened in 1997 and has had visitors from all over the world, sixty percent of them being women.
Somehow, I'm not surprised.
One Photo, Several Interpretations
I'm wondering exactly what this is. A fucking competition? A realllly progressive sex education class? An orgy?
At any rate, whatever it is, I think it's hilarious that all these couples are lined up in precise rows like a school classroom or an assembly line.
Your thoughts?
New Study Claims Regular Churchgoers Less Prone to Infidelity
A new study published in the Journal of Marriage and Family indicates that regular attendance at religious services is a predictor of marital fidelity.Led by David C. Atkins and Deborah E. Kessel of the Fuller Theological Seminary, the study covered how various facets of religiosity, including prayer, closeness to God, faith, and religious activities related to infidelity.
The authors found that regular religious service attendance was the only reliable predictor of infidelity. Prayer, importance of religiousness, and strong reported faith were not reliable predictors.
The authors believe that regular attendance likely implies prevention of infidelity because it is a shared activity between spouses. Attending services can create a strong network of relationships within the church, synagogue, or mosque that can provide social support to the spouses. Also, attending services means that an individual is hearing religious teaching on marital fidelity and the general importance of marriage.
For myself personally, this seems valid at face value because I've not stepped foot in a church since my teen years. But, for the most part, this research doesn't ring true to me.
First of all, though monogamy is heavily rooted in religious belief and practice, over the centuries it has woven itself so inextricably into the fabric of western culture that most wholly secular people value it as well and do not regard it as belonging especially to religion.
Secondly, my personal experience tells me that this is a load of horseshit. Some of the biggest philanderers I've known have been regular church goers. I remember one former coworker who "got religion" and ended up becoming the pastor of a small Baptist church in town. I remember being skeptical of his newly found religious fervor at the time, as he was about as big of a libertine as I am. Sure enough, he ended up getting fired from his job as pastor for having an affair with the church secretary.
And if the news media is any indication, my coworker's story isn't at all rare. Can you say Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard, anyone?
Of course, this study was biased as it was conducted by a religious group, so that in and of itself, should warn anyone to take its results with a grain of salt.
The Eyes Have It
A university study suggests that we can judge a person's attitudes towards relationships simply by studying his or her features.Results suggest that men looking for a quick roll in the hay should look for women with big eyes. Women interested in the same should look for men with square jaws, prominent noses and small eyes rather than males with softer features. I'm guessing that if one wants a long term relationship, one should look for mates with the opposite features.
I don't know about you, but this seems like junk science to me. I've found through vast experience that I can't really guess a woman's receptivity to casual sex based solely on her appearance
Some Sex Myths Debunked
While browsing the net to find something to write about, I found a couple of sites that debunked myths about sex, particularly those about infidelity. Following is a list compiled from two sites that squared pretty much with my own experiences.Men want more sex than women do
Of course, the first thing I'd ask is "which man and which woman"? But even in general, this is an erroneous statement that does not take other factors into account. Because the average woman does most of the housework in addition to a paid job, women tend to be too tired for sex more often than men. Hormones also tend to make women want more sex at certain times of the month, where desire for men tends to be spread out more equally.
Sex therapist Ian Kerner also made the interesting statement: The idea that men want sex more than woman is absolutely a myth. As a sex therapist, the main issue I work on is mismatched libido, and believe it or not I meet way more sex-starved wives than husbands. In fact, a recent study in the British publication the "New Scientists" has revealed that married men have lower levels of testosterone than single men of the same age.
Hmm, I knew I stayed single for a reason!
If you're truly a great lover, you should know how to please anyone
Experience is indeed helpful for successful sexual encounters, in that one tends to build up a wider repertoire of sexual techniques, but it's not the only component that goes into pleasure. Perception (level of attraction and/or emotional response), attitude, and communication are also factors.
Happy couples have good sex most of the time
This myth is closely related to my tendency to get bored with too much familiarity; to lose the spark when a partner gets too familiar. It's also true that different people have a different concept of what they consider "good sex"
Ian Kerner said: "In my experience, there are often two sexual types: "thrill-seekers" and "creatures of habit." The former always wants more, more, more, and new and different experiments. The creatures of habit likes things the way they are: in a bed for example, a few reliable moves that lead to mutual satisfaction. The best relationships are when thrill-seekers are paired with thrill seekers and creatures of habit are paired with creatures of habit."
Naturally, I'm the first type, the "thrill-seeker", and I would venture to guess that those in this category tend to me more non-monogamous in nature than those of the second group.
Men sleep around more than women do
This is true to some extent, but it's traditionally been more a matter of opportunity, rather than an inherent difference in desire between the sexes. Because of reliable birth control, which minimizes the risk of unwanted pregnancy, the likelihood for women to engage in casual sex has approached that of men in recent years.
But because women are still judged more harshly for promiscuity than men, women also tend to underreport the number of lovers they've had, while men tend to overreport. iVillage sex expert Tracey Cox pointed out that "a recent study found women only tend to remember significant lovers, who were part of relationships, forgetting (somewhat conveniently) one-night-stands or holiday flings."
You shouldn't have to plan sex - it should be spontaneous or something's wrong
This is a problem common with monogamous couples -- and it's one of the reasons why I avoid monogamy. It's what I call the "in a rut syndrome".
Tracey Cox said, "Anyone who expects to be spontaneously turned on by their partner 10 years and two kids in, really is kidding themselves. The human nervous system is programmed to become desensitized the more of the same stimulation it gets. Considering most of us have sex in exactly the same way and it's with the same person, it's no wonder we have to put a bit of thought into it to keep sex good."
If my partner had an affair, it means he or she doesn't love me/Affairs happen only in unhappy and unloving marriages.
While affairs can happen for this reason, more often this isn't so because extramarital sex usually isn't about love, but rather a desire for variety and for the thrill of "forbidden" sex. It's closely related to the "rut syndrome" mentioned above.
Tracey Cox said: "It doesn't necessarily mean your partner doesn't love you - but it does mean he or she doesn't respect you if you had agreed to be monogamous [emphasis mine]. While some affairs do mean something is missing from your relationship, a lot of affairs are just about sex. A certain kind of sex. Sex on the sly, a bit on the side...If you're the type of person whose moral values mean you don't see extramarital sex as something wrong, you could easily have affairs and still love your partner.[emphasis mine again]
Ian Kerner said: "Sexual attraction isn't always just about love. It's about passion, unpredictability and spontaneity - qualities that are hard to maintain in a long-term relationship, but that can be found quickly through infidelity...We have to understand that love and sexual attraction do not necessarily go together, and sometimes work against each other. In the end, human beings require newness, novelty, intellectual and emotional engagement. That's what fuels the expansion and development of a relationship and when those qualities start to wane people start to think about how to get it elsewhere."
This is strongly correlates with why I personally find monogamy unworkable for myself.
A person having an affair shows less interest in sex at home.
Not necessarily. Sometimes it's actually the reverse that happens as the straying partner will sometimes bring home new techniques and passion is often multiplied by having more than one partner. I know my primary lover and I tend to have better sex during times when I've been seeing a new lover.
The person having an affair isn’t “getting enough” at home.
This myth is sometimes used to "blame" the partner of a straying spouse, but it's often untrue. Again, the "rut syndrome" comes into play here, as well as a simple desire for variety.
In conclusion, it seems to me that a key to avoiding sexual problems is to avoid getting into sexual ruts. It's a built-in flaw of monogamy, that can be responded to in two major ways.
For those like me, one can simply opt out of monogamy altogether and seek variety openly, which ironically tends to delay the onset of the "rut syndrome" longer with a particular partner.
Those committed to monogamy, however, need not despair, but they'll have to work harder to maintain passion over the long term of the relationship in order to avoid ruts and the affairs that can spring from them.
Thoughts?
Couple Arrested For Having Sex in Church
A Florida couple was recently arrested for having sex inside a church. On the night of March 11th, deputies received a call of suspicious activity inside a Baptist church.When they arrived and entered the church to investigate, they found the woman behind the altar. According to church deacon, Lonzie Altman, "Her drawers were in the stands. Her brazier [sic] was over on the outside the stands," Deputies found her male partner partially dressed underneath the church.
When asked why they'd chosen to break into a church to have sex, the woman told deputies that she wanted a “spiritual and sexual experience.”
"I don't know what has become of the people [that] somebody would just do something like that in a church," said Altman. "I was shocked," He added, "Don't think that the lord ain't got something for them."
Rowland and Pearce each face charges of criminal mischief and burglary.
I have to admit that my first reaction to hearing this story was to laugh. I've had sex in all sorts of odd places, both public and private, but I've not had sex in a church. I have to admit I've thought about it a time or two, though.
How about you? Have you ever had sex in an unusual place? Feel free to spill it in the comment box below..
Ten Facts About Sex
I received this list of interesting facts about sex in an email that I thought I'd pass along.1. Sex is a beauty treatment. Scientific tests find that when women make love they produce amounts of the hormone estrogen, which makes hair shine and skin smooth.
2. Gentle, relaxed lovemaking reduces your chances of suffering dermatitis, skin rashes and blemishes. The sweat produced cleanses the pores and makes your skin glow.
3. Lovemaking can burn up those calories you piled on during that romantic dinner.
4. Sex is one of the safest sports you can take up. It stretches and tones up just about every muscle in the body. It's more enjoyable than swimming 20 laps, or jogging 20 blocks and you don't need special sneakers!
5. Sex is an instant cure for mild depression It releases endorphins into the bloodstream, producing a sense of euphoria and leaving you with a feeling of well-being.
6. The more sex you have, the more you will be offered. The sexually active body gives off greater quantities of chemicals called pheromones. These subtle sex perfumes drive the opposite sex crazy!
7 . Sex is the safest tranquilizer in the world. IT IS 10 TIMES MORE EFFECTIVE THAN VALIUM.
8. Kissing each day will keep the dentist away. Kissing encourages saliva to wash food from the teeth and lowers the level of the acid that causes decay, preventing plaque build-up.
9. Sex actually relieves headaches. A lovemaking session can release the tension that restricts blood vessels in the brain.
10. A lot of lovemaking can unblock a stuffy nose. Sex is a natural antihistamine. It can help combat asthma and hay fever.
The Nature of Pleasure: Emotional or Physical?
Not too long ago, I got the first season of the original Star Trek on DVD. As I've re-watched the episodes, it's been almost like reliving some of the best parts of my childhood.In several episodes, I saw Kirk the libertine in action seducing various women and it made me realize that he was probably my first role model in libertinism. I remember as a kid being very impressed with his conquests.
Then there was one episode where Nurse Chapel proclaims her love for Spock, but he cannot reciprocate because Vulcans cannot love as humans do, because it is an emotion contrary to logic. That reminded me of a subsequent episode where it is revealed that Vulcans only have sex every seven years for the purposes of reproduction, but are otherwise celibate. Again, the reason given is that celibacy is more congruent with a life devoted to logic than a sexually active life would be.
The underlying assumption is that sex is inseparable from love, thus is inherently an action of emotion.
I don't buy that. Sex, of course, can and does occur along with love, and it's true that many people prefer it that way. But it's not an inevitable thing.
Sex can be, and often is for me, a mainly physical matter, concentrating simply on the pleasure and release.
So, the question becomes: Is pleasure, sexual or otherwise, an inherently emotional experience, or is it mainly a physical phenomenon, though emotion can sometimes enter the picture?
Medical research has shown that having sex regularly is good for one's health in a number of ways. So, it would seem, that having an active sex life, be it for love or simply for pleasure, is a logical action, as it contributes to good health.
Viewed in this way, there were no logical reasons for Vulcans to abstain from sex for most of their lives nor to confine it strictly to reproduction. It would have not interfered with his devotion to logic, then, if Spock had had a sex life similar to Kirk's. He most certainly could have had a sex life without having a love life.
Thoughts?
Dr Laura is Full of Crap
On a recent appearance on the Today show about the Eliot Spitzer brouhaha, pop-psychologist Dr Laura Schlessinger, made the comment that she believed that wives were largely to blame when a husband engaged in extramarital sex.“When the wife does not focus in on the needs and the feelings, sexually, personally, to make him feel like a man, to make him feel like a success, to make him feel like her hero, he’s very susceptible to the charm of some other woman making him feel what he needs,” she said. "I hold women responsible for tossing out perfectly good men by not treating them with the love and kindness and respect and attention they need.”
“I would challenge the wife to find out what kind of wife she’s being,” Schlessinger elaborated. “Is she being supportive and approving and loving? Is she being sexually intimate and affectionate? Is she making him feel like he’s her man? If she’s not doing that, then she’s contributing to his wrong choice.”
To that I say, Bull-fucking-shit!
There are many reasons why a man has extramarital sex, most of them having little or nothing to do with the wife's/partner's behavior. Most of the time it has nothing whatsoever to do with her, and Schlessinger is playing a cruel game of blaming the victim.
The main reason why men engage in extramarital sex is the "fault" of their essential natures -- neither men nor women, for that matter, are naturally monogamous, and some people, usually men, have a harder time living monogamously than others. Powerful men, in particular, have a stronger tendency to be non-monogamous than those in the general population, as history has clearly shown.
Straying men often have good marriages with perfectly good sex lives with wives they love, yet they stray, nonetheless. As one who doesn't have a monogamous bone in his body, the reason is quite simple to me -- non-monogamous people, men and women, above all, crave VARIETY in their sex lives. And while variety in the type of sex acts engaged in is part of that, variety of partners is the stronger attraction.
Thus, a wife can be a perfectly good lover, willing to please her husband in any way he desires, yet he will still stray, simply for the reason of having someone else for a change. There is nothing the wife can do to change this basic fact -- all the sexy lingerie, hot tubs, sex advice books in the world won't change that need for variety.
Men usually don't do this because of a perceived lack in their wives or because they don't love her any longer. It really doesn't have anything to do with love at all; it's all about sex.
If there is any blame to apportion in such cases, it would lie with our society's belief that the only ethical form of marriage is a monogamous one. As long as those who aspire to public office or other types of high profile occupations must be in monogamous relationships or at least give the appearance of one, regardless of their actual inclinations, these kinds of scandals will continue to occur.
If society would accept the reality that some people are more monogamous than others and that different types of relationships should be recognized to acknowledge this fact, it would be easier for those who truly want monogamy to find a like-minded partner and avoid someone who has to "talk the talk" of monogamy, even if they are unable or unwilling to "walk the walk" and vice versa.
Thoughts?
12 Year Olds Arrested For Having Sex at School
Several days ago, police in my town arrested two 12 year olds for having sex at school. The preteens admitted to having sex there on at least three other occasions.Both students had asked to be excused from class to go to the restroom. After they'd been gone an unusually long time, teachers went to investigate and found them having sex in the boys' bathroom.
Police arrested them for disrupting school and they've both been suspended from school and may also face expulsion.
Oh, please. I can understand the school suspending them; that is an appropriate response for their misbehavior. But expulsion? That goes over the top considering that even horny kids still need an education and that their actions didn't hurt other students in any way.
And to arrest them for "disrupting school"? I fail to see where the disrupting happened if they were able to successfully engage in clandestine sex at least three times with no one being any the wiser and even in the time they got caught, no other students were witnesses or otherwise involved.
Though their actions were inappropriate as to time and place, I don't think they deserve to be saddled with a criminal record simply for being sexually precocious. Back in the day when I was in school, such a matter would have been handled entirely by the school as an internal matter with suspensions and parent-teacher conferences, which I think still would be the most common sense approach.
Your mileage may vary, of course, as I'm sure it will with my more contentious readers.
Women Making Money As Paid "Friends With Benefits"
The other day, I read a mildly interesting article on Alternet about an organization called Sugar Daddy.com, which matched up older, affluent, usually not-so-attractive men with young women, offering the women more money than they could make as college graduates in an average professional job, in exchange for being a "friend with benefits".By the time I got to reading this article, there were already several comments and most of what I would have said had already been expressed, along with the typical comments of rebuttal. Nevertheless, I left what I considered to be a short, throwaway comment:
What's the Big Deal?
It's all out in the open, no one is trying to fool anyone about the true nature of the transaction, and the participants are all consenting adults.
Everyone who gets involved in this knows full well what they're getting themselves into; it doesn't occur under duress, so I see no reason to complain about it.
I'm guessing that the main objection is based on their belief that sex "should" occur only in relation to love and for no other reasons and that these transactions do not even give the illusion of love. That's perfectly well and good to conduct one's own sex life based upon this belief, but as far as I'm concerned, sex for any reason between fully consenting adults need not have to be justified to anyone.
I didn't think too much more about this article until I read a follow-up to it entitled, SugarDaddy.com: Readers Respond. This follow-up article featured what the site owners considered to be the best reponses to the original article.
To my surprise, my throwaway comment was the lead-off comment that set the tone for those that followed.
Again, there were several comments in reponse to this second article. I didn't make a comment of my own here, but responded to one that especially irked me, made by someone with whom I've tangled in the past:
Her comment:
Buyers of Bodies
What does it say about us as humans, when we let men believe it is THEIR right to buy the bodies of women and children. And it is mostly women and children who are victims of prostituters. In reality, it is the world's poor, uneducated women and children who have been deemed, by your brother, your son, your uncle, as sub-human committed to live without any rights of human dignity.
My response to her was:
Women Are NOT the Same as Children.
Every time you refer to women, "and children" always follows.
It is extremely sexist to always group women with children. Your attitude assumes that women are just as helpless as children and are no more competent to be responsible for their own actions, thus must be protected to the same degree as children should be.
I'm sorry, but women are not the intellectual and moral equivalent of children. Adult women can be and should be able to conduct their lives and take responsibility for them, just in the same way that adult men do. Save the protecting for real children.
I don't know about you, but if I were a woman, I'd find the "women and children" attitude to be patronizing and condescending.
Indeed. If this organization matched up young men with affluent, older gay men past their sexual primes, I sincerely doubt that this woman would have been hooting and hollering about victimhood, as most people assume that men can look after themselves and are responsible for their own choices, good and bad. After all, I don't think any of us has ever heard the term "men and children".
Thoughts?
{ Last Page } { Page 1 of 2 } { Next Page }
The Libertine
Bedroom
Dossier
Library
Associates
Voyeur
My Other Blogs
Adventures of a LibertineA Libertine's Thoughts
Confessions of a Libertine
Categories
animalsblog stuff
books
culture/social issues
daily life
family
history
humor
language
libertine
news
people
personal
politics
quotes
rants
religion
reviews
sex
work
writing
Recent Entries
Don't Call Us, We'll Call YouPretty Girls Are a Dime a Dozen
Mysterious Annoying Calls
Self Censoring Readers
Another Mouth to Feed
Associates
kingofankhzarafa
jeremy
Chica
treasa
sexybeast
birdsnest
Eclectablog
elisataufik
elisla
sladewilson
grnidlady
Chandramoon
littleMissConfused
DeeJay
donald113
stefee
indigomoonarts
LauriesAsylum
sortingitout
kinnigurl
Cabinfeveronline
grimfairy
womanoffeathers
TrevaLVF
juancarlos
CertainInsanity
audsmom
jeeps
slayerbarbie
oldmanlincoln
thebigp
texican
Quacksplats
Patty
Vampyre
Rubicon
mandaj
selkie
deadonthesofa
Aielman
Lisa
Zoey
mothman
alittle
jelene
itsmylife
Minda
forinfnity
paledaemon
windy
lisalisabobisa
tony
blogawards
Cam
Snowy
Your Two Cents
Weather
Stats
Good Reads
Blog Catalog
