12.11.2017

5 Movies #DirectedByWomen That You Can Watch With The Young Folks This Winter Break



I started doing this categorized List of 5 movies thing where I showcase movies that were directed by women and that I have actually seen. It all started during the Directed By Women Worldwide Viewing Party in September 2015, and it was pretty fun, so I've continued doing it from time to time.

It's a bit off-topic from my normal fare, ya know, being that it's not specifically about lady-gasms or anything like that, but I think it fits the blog because
1. this blog is also about indie movie-making, and
2. this blog is partially about getting the female perspective of sexuality into our media. So, to me, supporting female voices in our media  means we're creating more room for female voices to speak on all types of things, which sometimes will be sex, orgasms, and sexuality.

You can find all my 5-movie lists HERE.

It's getting near the ol' winter break, which means many of you will have your children lounging around your house all day instead of in school, or you'll be at your parents or siblings houses with a bunch of kids around. You want to choose a great lady-directed movie, but you also need it to be kid friendly. what to do? Well, here's 5 options. If these don't work, there's more in the master list, and if you're looking specifically for holiday related movies - head directly to find 5 of those HERE. This is the list of 5 movies by women directors for the younger crowd this winter break.

1 Angus, Thongs, and Perfect Snogging - This one was directed by Gurinder Chadha. It's from a Young adult novel by the  same name I believe, and I ended up catching this movie on TV while at my in-laws. My youngest sister-in-law at the time was in the age range for this. I believe she had read the book. Anyway, we all got caught up in it. It's a YA novel story for sure, but I thought it was heads above the pack in terms of the story and the morals and the roundness of the characters. It was a good movie, and I'm glad I happen to catch it.





2 Aquamarine - This was directed by Elizabeth Allen Rosenbaum. When I'm at home by myself doing this and that...maybe doing some rote day job work on the laptop or cleaning a bit, I like to watch movies, and teen movies about friendship are high on the list. This is how I came to watch this movie, and although it was a good while back and I can't remember a lot of details about it, I remember thinking it was a good choice and exactly what I'd hoped it would be. 





3 The Prince and Me - This one was directed by Martha Coolidge. This was another one that I chose to watch while cleaning on a Saturday. I believe I had seen pieces of it on TV before that. It has a now classic independent-career-driven-woman-who-has-absolutely-no-interest-in-being-slowed-down-by-a-dude-but-can't-help-falling-in-love character, which I'm pretty much over, but there were sparkles and a classic rom-com teen fantasy. So, it was an overall good watch. (Side note: I always check out what other movies these directors have made as I'm writing these posts, and Martha Coolidge seems to have some badass stuff from the 70's and 80's that I'd love to find, watch, and add to these lists)





4 Shark Tale - This one was directed by Bibo Bergeron, Vicky Jenson, and Rob Letterman. I saw this with some nieces and nephews. It has a lot of stars, a lot of music, and the kids all liked it, so it's a good one if the kids hanging around your house are a bit younger.






5 Beyonce: Lemonade - As you probably already know this was directed by Beyonce and Kahlil Joseph. I saw this a bit after it came out. A friend had it, and I thought it was absolutely lovely. Granted, 'kid's movie' might not be the first thing that comes to your head when you think of Lemonade, but why not? Yes, there are some F-bombs and some sexual-ish stuff, but there's also fab music, engaging visuals, dancing, and a badass woman putting a very personal and in many ways revolutionary piece of art out there. There's lots to talk with them about during and after, and really it's the kind of thing we should expose the tweens and teens (and maybe younger) kids in our lives to...and genius bonus - it's art they'll actually like so it might actually make an impression.


12.07.2017

1977 Hustler Review Series #6: Lady-catching Ad



Why I'm SSL Reviewing a 1977 Hustler
So there is a fab lady named Jill Hamilton. She made it into the Orgasm Equality Allies List a good while ago for her various writings. She's awesome and she's goddamn funny. She writes the blog In Bed With Married Women, which you will not regret reading, and she's revo-fucking-lucionizing the classic Cosmo Sex Positions lists.

Now here's where Hustler comes in. She had a give away on her blog, and we readers had to comment and tell her what we wanted so she could pick randomly and ship shit out to us. I saw she had a vintage Hustler, and so I asked - nay begged - for it. I promised to SSL Review it cover to cover, and here I am doing just that.

An SSL Review is a critique specifically of discussion and/or depiction of female orgasm and/or female masturbation in media (usually I do this for movies or TV not magazines, though). I particularly pay attention to the realism and scientific accuracy of the depiction/discussion and how it fits within the larger cultural conversation about female orgasm and female sexuality.

Feel free to check out the previous SSL Reviews of the Advice Column, the Porn Movie Reviews, a Bondage articleKinky Korner erotic story, and Sex Toy Ads.

Today I'll be SSL Reviewing one simple full page ad on how dudes can teach themselves to get themselves a gal.

A Class in Bedding A Lady
Apparently this dude named Dick Whitsom (which is just a bit too strangely close to Dick Whitman, don't you think?) was shy and shitty in bed in his youth, but read a bunch of self-help books to overcome it. He also got an undergraduate and graduate degree in electronics and computer sciences (at 5 different colleges for some reason), and thought the method 'Programmed Instruction' that he used in his courses would work well for teaching men these lady-bedding techniques because of the useful and self paced, 'try, get-immediate-feedback, check and repeat' style. Anyway, this course being advertised in this 1977 Hustler is the result, and aren't you lucky you can read about it here. Enjoy the opening description below.
You can become more successful with women. This course in seduction and lovemaking techniques uses Programmed Instructions, homework assignments and supplementary readings to teach you how to overcome shyness and pick up girls, how to recognize sexually available and high-orgasm women, how to read female body language, how to be a memorable lover and how to use computer logic to program your way to a successful seduction.


Okay, so I'll get back to the "high-orgasm" woman part, which is the only actually SSL Reviewable (because it depicts/discussedes female orgasm, female masturbation, or the clit) thing in this ad, but I just want to point out a couple other creepy parts first.

Basic Creeper Stuff
So first let me show you the ad's expansion of "How to read female body language"
What subconscious message is she sending when she strokes her hair or crosses her legs? Learn to interpret these nonverbal signals and to know her most intimate feelings, even before she herself is fully aware of them.
Well, she's probably crossing her legs because she wants to shift her body after sitting another way a bit too long, but you know, it could also mean she desperately wants to fuck you, but like doesn't realize it yet...

Ummm, so if this isn't some classic misreading of women to suit your own needs, I don't know what is. It's also got this super awesome element of putting the idea into men's heads that women don't really even know what they really want...that there's a secret code you must crack to get women to do what they don't even realize they want to do...put out. I mean it's a touch of a rapey mentality, but it's pretty common even to this day (I wrote about this recently in relation to some male comedians and inappropriate masturbating).

Secondly, let me also show you the ad's expansion of  "How to recognize the sexually available woman"
Would you like to score more often? Would you like to walk into a singles' bar and know which girls are looking for action? In this lesson you learn to recognize five female signals that shout, "Proposition me, I want some loving."
So we're clearly staying with the rapey-ish vibe. I'm oh so curious as to what these signals are that shout out at men to bother the fuck out of women they think 'want it.' I mean, I'm sure they're fool proof.

Bullshit and Scientific Tomfoolery
Okay, but back to the "high orgasm female" - here's the ad's expansion of  "How to recognize the high-orgasm woman"
Would you like fantastic bedmates, satisfying lovers and a faithful wife? All these can be yours if you search for and find the high-orgasm woman. Modern science has now provided sufficient data to enable an aware man to recognize a high-orgasm woman.
No science has not - mainly because a 'high orgasm' woman is not an actually scientifically defined thing at all. Granted, you will find plenty of science-y people and writing out there that claim some women can orgasm from vaginal stimulation without additional outer clitoral stimulation. It's quite a common claim even in peer reviewed journal articles and there is much speculation about what is different in these women vs. women who either haven't orgasmed or only orgasm through clitoral/vuvla stimulation. I think many would consider these orgasm-from-only-banging women 'high-orgasm" women. Problem is, women who can orgasm from only vaginal stimulation are merely hypothetical from a scientific standpoint. A woman has literally never been physically observed orgasming in that manner. There's no proof that's even possible except that some women say they can - which unfortunately is not the scientific proof one needs to claim it is actually a thing.

My point is, women orgasm from their clit and men orgasm from their penis. It's pretty simple and intact, healthy people all have pretty similar physical capabilities in that area. Contrary to popular belief there's no physical proof there are different kinds of orgasming women, meaning there are not high-orgasming and low-orgasming "types" of women.

What is true, though, is that women get judged on their orgasm capability for completely unscientific and unfair reasons.  A large portion of sexual interaction involves stimulating the penis but focuses on the vagina instead of the clit. Thus lots of women, who are absolutely capable of orgasming with the right type of stimulation, don't even have a chance of coming at all during sex, because the wrong thing is getting touched (well maybe banged is a better word).

So often during a sexual encounter, we ladies have 3 main roadds we could travel. We can either fake and seem like "high-orgasm" women; don't fake and seem like "low-orgasm" women, or take lots of time and energy redirecting partners to do the things we need to orgasm and be deemed any number of things including a bitch, a frigid bitch, a high-maintenance lover, a woman that doesn't 'let go' enough to come vaginally, or on the rare occasion with the rare partner sexy and knowledgeable about her body. 

I'd like to say that last one is a common outcome, but it's not. The redirecting of men away from the most common and familiar ways of having sex towards ways that actually are arousing and orgasmic to women is often met with unrecoverable embarrassment, arrogance/ignored, anger, or half-hearted half-assed attempts to do what we want before going right back to doing what they want/are comfortable with. The whole redirecting process often ends up being unarousing or maddening to us which doesn't lend itself to a good sexual experience. It doesn't have to be bad. It could be chill and reasonable, and hot to talk about our needs and wants, but frankly that is often not the environment that is created. So, we all react in whatever way makes sense to us at the time....and then we get deemed high or low orgasming as a result. It's stupid and this idea of seeking out high-orgasm women is stupid, silly, and not all that great for women's sexual experiences in general.


Vulva Rating
Seriously, this idea of a different type of women that is somehow wired differently and can thus orgasm more easily and in more ways is a sick and twisted fantasy that stems from our ignorance of how females orgasm and leads to a lot of unnecessary stress, sadness, and feelings of inferiority in both women and men.

Also, this is just kinda full of creepy advice.

This gets no vulvas

Zero Vulvas

12.03.2017

Inside Amy Schumer S1 Ep5 - The SSL Review



Inside Amy Schumer Season 1 Episode 5
This show makes me laugh, and here's the best part. Amy Schumer tends to bring it when it comes to realism and female sexuality. She brought it in her movie Trainwreck, in The Joe Rogan Podcast, and largely in the other episodes of this show I've SSL Reviewed so far. She has shown a strong willingness to give the clit the glory it deserves, speak some truths about lady sex experiences, rep for actual lady-gasms - and that is what this blog is all about. (She could use some schooling and humbling when it comes to speaking about race though).



SSL Review
There is plenty to SSL Review in this show. And for those that don't yet know, an SSL Review is a critique specifically of discussions or depictions of female orgasm, female masturbation, or the clit. I'm looking at realism (for instance, was the physical thing happening during the depicted orgasm, actually something that would realistically cause a woman to orgasm?). I'm also stepping back and asking how the depiction/discussion plays in the larger cultural conversation about female orgasm and women's sexuality. The TV show or movie might be fantastic and get a bad SSL Review or vice versa.

Please, my friends, do enjoy more SSL Reviews for MOVIES and TV SHOWS.

The Scenes
THE BACHELORETTE PARTY
This skit involves a bunch of female friends at a bachelorette party/ shower. They are all giving the woman of honor her gifts, and it's really a skit about one-upping each other, but they're doing it with vibrators.
Amy opens the first gift and and it's a rabbit vibrating dildo where the dildo can go in the vagina and the vibrating bunny ears are right at the clit (see below).



Gift Giver 1: I use the same one myself. Let me just say, it really knows what it's doing. (As she said that she touched the clit touching rabbit ears).
She opens the next gift and it's another vibrating dildo that looks a lot like the one below.



Gift Giver 2: This one is called the Herminator, and it's the same one I use. It has an alarm clock and voice control. It is the best. no offense (looking to Gift Giver 1)
She opens the third gift and it's a purple vibrating, beaded Rabit dildo like teh one shown below.



Gift Giver 3: It's the good vibration's sweet sensation, and this thing makes my eyes pop out of my head...and become my vagina.
Gift Giver 1: "um, I just found the battery life on those things to be dog shit."
Gift Giver 3:  Um it's actually also a Boingo hotspot, and I know you travel a lot, so I'm just really considerate.
She opens the 4th gift and it's a sleek looking rabbit-style vibrating dildo like the one below.



Gift giver 4: It has GPS. you can download 5,000 songs on it. 
Then they all start one-upping and saying crazy stuff about what their gift vibrators can do - wifi, etc. Then one of them says the following.
Gift Giver 3: I just want you to know that I care about your vagina more than I care about my own and that's the most you can care. If that make sense?
Gift Giver 2: It does make sense, but I also care about your vagina a ton. You know, sometimes too much, I wonder. I do wonder that. You know I just... for me, I just really want your vagina to be on the brink of exhaustion at all times
Last one gives her a homemade vibrator (they say vibrator not dildo). I's made of like macaroni and it has pictures of their trips together. It's the favorite gift.


ASKING ON THE STREETS
This is just a little segment Amy does where she talks to random people on the streets of NY.
Amy: Would you ever get somebody a vibrator a a gift?
Woman 1: Yes, I think it the best gift ever!
Amy: My birthday's coming up 
Amy: Do you own a vibrator?
Friend 1: Uh, I used to, but it broke in college
Amy: What about you?
Friend 1: Mine didn't break - still in use.
Amy: Still rockin' out!  Praise the lord!

AMY GOES DEEP WITH A DOMINATRIX
This is a segment where Amy sits down with an interesting person and asks them whatever she wants.
Amy: What's something that your clients introduced you to that you've incorporated into your own lif?
Dominatrix: Oh - vibrator hands down.
Amy: Really?
Dominatrix: Oh yes!
Amy: What kind of vibrator?
Dominatrix: It's a Hitachi - it's that...
Amy: Wait, wait wait a minute. Can I have a pen? No one's afraid of an orgasm on this set.
Dominatrix: That's right  (with a little snap)
My Thoughts
vibrators are vibrators, not dildos
I mean, I love a vibrator episode, amiright? First off, they called them vibrators not dildos, even though many of the vibrator gifts were vibrating dildos. I appreciate that. It gives proper reverence for the truly important part of a vibrating dildo...the vibrations. That, my friends, is what jiggles the ol' clit/vulva area into orgasm. Yes, you can also stick it up inside you, and that's fun too, and good for, you know, the feeling of having something inside you. But stimulation of the clitoral glans area is what causes orgasm in women, just like stimulation of the penis causes orgasm in men.

Most of those fancy 'rabit' style vibrating dildos used as gifts in the Bachelorette skit are specifically created to give clit stimulation, though, and I think they were intentionally chosen because of that, which is awesome and much appreciated. In fact, Gift Giver 1 touched on the outer 'rabbit ear' clit stimulator when she said it "hit all the right parts." I can only assume that was an intentional way to point out that it's clit, not inner vagina, focused. I believe that because Amy Schumer (and probably also the writers and actresses around her) seems pretty cognizant of her role in adding realism to media about the clit being the focus of female sexual pleasure.

Also, if you don't know about these 'rabbit' style vibrating dildos, here's a quick lesson. You stick the dildo part in, get all that subtle inner vibes going (sometimes I think they even move around, like in circles or something - I don't know what that's gonna do, but it sounds fun enough to try out), and then you have a little outer part (could be rabbit ears, could be just a small appendage) that vibrates and hits right on the clit area while the rest is inside. Nice, right?

On an aside...having a dildo vibrate inside, instead of outside, is really quite nice too. I'd say it allows this nice subtle vibration to make its way out to your lips/clit area, and it's like a smooth arousal groove. It's nice. I didn't know about that fun until years into my vibrating life, but it's also a desperate tease. I find it gets me real aroused down there, but it just can't seal the deal. The vibrations are just too subtle, and too not focused where I need them. Maybe there are other women out there who have figured out how to get the vibrations happening inside to make enough waves hit the clit to get over the hump, but I haven't. And that's why I say you might as well have 2 vibrators, so if you want one inside, you can set the other one on top, near the clit to actually get you over the orgasm hill.

Why say 'vagina' when you could say 'clit' and be accurate and more interesting
And that brings us to the next point. All the women were talking about how the vibrator affected their 'vagina.' I don't think the word clit was ever even used. I feel pretty confident that they meant the whole 'down there,' when they said vagina. Honestly, that's a very common use of the word vagina, but in reality the vagina is literally the tunnel, not the outer parts. I tend not to be too much of a critic about people, especially in comedy, using 'vagina' incorrectly because it's the most common word for lady-junk. However, I think in this case, I'm a touch more critical because the vibrators are so dildo-ish and many people might assume they are intended more for vaginal stimulation than stimualtion of the clit/vulv area.

Plus, given that so many people don't even know where the clit is, the overall impression of this scene for a lot of people could just be a confirmation of the very common but incorrect feeling that vibrating dildos are great because they vibrate the actual vaginal canal, leading them to further incorrectly assume that the vagina is what needs stimulated to get great orgasms. I don't think that's the intended message from the Schumer writers, but it is what may have happened none the less. Honestly, (unless maybe the show allows vagina, but not clit said, which may actually be the case) saying clit in place of vagina up there would have made as much sense, and probably been funnier in some cases.

Love the Vibrator/Lady-bation Love
As for the women on the street and the badass dominatrix. Hells to the yeah. I love that they enthusiastically endorsed a vibrator, and that the show added to that enthusiasm. This is how we normalize female masturbation. (Even the one whose vibrator broke in college still admitted to having used one at least once...And bitch please, I know she she either still has one or she wishes she did but her partner's scared by them. It's a rare woman who uses a vibrator so much she breaks it and then just settle for her new non-vibrator life. It's insane. She knows how things can be with one. How could she go back?).

And, can I say that I love imagining this Dominatrix, who very likely quite enjoys her job, doing her job. I imagine she's saying and doing shit to dudes (and maybe some women, but I like thinking about doing this shit to dudes) that could be super wierd and fun as shit to do. She's using some improv and acting. She's getting to see intimate elements of strangers one rarely is privy to. She's able to care and heal maybe. She gets to dress in fun outfits, but it's probably not that sexy in the end. Then, one day, wham!, a client brings a vibrator for her to use. She's never tried one before, and as she's trying it, the heavens open and her life, both outside this job and inside, gets a little better, and that's truly a lovely thing.

My Vulva Rating
This is not a perfect SSL Review because I really do think the use of the word 'vagina' instead of 'clit' or even 'vulva' in the gift scene gave an overall wrong impression about how female orgasm works and how vibrating dildos are realistically used for getting a lady-gasm. (However, if an Inside Amy Schumer insider contacts me and lets me know that the word clit was preferred, but could not be used, well, then I might up the vulva rating).

Over all though it was very good, and I feel intentionally so. Like, there was thought put into giving praise for women getting their own in the orgasm department with vibrators. It was not only normalizing of female masturbation and the use of vibrators (because honestly people are still afraid of them and show that in their media - See SSL Review for Love S1), it was also downright enthusiastic about it. This gets a solid 4 out of 5 vulvas

(!)(!)(!)(!)


11.29.2017

Broad City S2 Ep9 - The SSL Review



Broad City Season2 Episode 9
You all know I love Broad City. It's funny as shit. Also (and of much importance) of the 8 episodes I've SSL Reviewed so far in the first 3 seasons, all of them have a 5 out of 5 vulva rating except 1 (it has a 4 1/2 out of 5 vulva rating). This show is clearly, in my opinion, written by women who are willing to unabashedly speak the truths of their sexual experience. It's an Orgasm Equality approved show.

This episode is the first from Broad City, though, that I feel a bit conflicted about. It's really just 2 statements in this episode; one that speaks about orgasm and another that speaks about the g-spot (which is not technically eligible for SSL Review, but the overall scene, I believe is qualified).



SSL Review
First, though, a quick reminder about an SSL Review. It is a critique specifically of the depiction or discussion of female orgasm, female masturbation, or the clit. I'm particularly looking for the level of physical realism and for how the depiction/discussion fits into the larger cultural conversation about female sexuality and orgasm. Sometimes I comment on other aspects of the movie/TV show. Sometimes I don't.

Please feel free to check out all the SSL Reviewed movies HERE and the SSL reviews TV shows HERE.

The Scenes 
Simultaneous Orgasm
Ilana has met a woman named Adele and they are incredibly and immediately attracted to each other. She's walking down the street talking with Abbi about it, and she's telling her how amazing it all is. She says, "I had my first simultaneous orgasm last night, and ....and Adele and I only kissed. I think this is what love might feel like." After that they go on to discuss something else and the scene moves on.

G-spot Located
Later, we're in Ilana's room, on her bed, and Adele is going down on Ilana. She's almost to the point of orgasm. Her 'almost there' qualitites seem sensible enough. There's nothing over the top. She's focused, and clearly getting a lot of pleasure. And then her focus starts to go because she starts getting creeped out that Adele looks so much like her.

She looks down between her legs and sees herself instead of Adele. She freaks out and stops it. She tells Adele that they are super alike and it freaks her out, and Adele's all like, yeah - obviously, assuming that's why Ilana approached her in the first place. However, Ilana disagrees saying it's other things, but then realizes the truth, "Of course I'm attracted to myself. I masturbate in the mirror."
To which Adele says, "Me too! That's what's so hot about it. It's like hooking up with yourself."

Ilana is all like, I know, but...and she starts saying how she likes to be with a variety of people who are different than her, but Adele points out an upside to their sameness.
Adele tells her, "Nobody knows our bodies the way we do. Look. Your G-spot is riiiight Here."

We only see the two from their chest up, so we can't really see what is happening with Adele's hands, but it seems clear Adele reaches somewhere mysterious in her nether regions and touches her 'G-spot.'

Ilana immediately makes an intentionally overly goofy sputtering face like she instantly orgasmsed in the most silly of ways, and then Ilana stops her by saying, "Too intense. Too intense. Oh my god. I lost my vision...for a second."

They move on to finally break up for good just seconds later when Ilana realizes Adele doesn't smoke weed.

My Thoughts
So, I'm of two minds about this.

The Negative
Kissing is not a realistic way to get an orgasm. That's obvious...so obvious you might even call it a joke. The overly silly and way too immediate O-face Ilana makes when Adele touches her G-spot might also be considered merely a joke. I'm gonna critique anyway, so please hang with me.

I think even with the idea that these are jokes, it's important to remember that women are said to orgasm from some crazy, unrealistic shit (have you ever read 50 Shades of Grey). Women need clitoral stimulation to orgasm just like men need penile stimulation to orgasm. That's just true, but that truth has never stopped anybody from also claiming anything and everything has made a woman come and has never stopped anybody from believing it either. Women can think themselves to orgasm? Okay. A woman can get ass-fucked to orgasm? Cool. A woman can have an orgasm from making art (this was actually claimed in the really popular non-fiction book Vagina by Naomi Wolf)? Why not. Women can get slapped, spanked, banged, tickled, kissed on the neck, or meditate her way to orgasm? Sure, I guess.

The truth is people claim and believe that kind of stuff about female orgasm all. the. time. It's easy to do because we as a people don't really understand what actually makes women orgasm (seriously, it's not that confusing though), so it's hard to be certain when claims about it are really, really off base (here's a clue, if the clitoral glans area isn't getting consistent stimulation, it's probably not a likely way to orgasm). That's where I'm at with these scenes.

Yeah, I'm pretty certain they're jokes, but they are also so close to the reality of common but ignorant talk about female orgasm, that they might not be jokes for the right reasons. Like, maybe the joke isn't that kissing is such an impossible way for someone to orgasm that claiming it is is funny because of how over-the-top ridiculoso it is. Maybe people see the very sexual Ilana as one of those 'special' women who is 'wired' differently and can come any ol' way, and the joke is really just about  how silly it is that her likeness to this woman makes their sexual connection so over the top.

Maybe when Adele found Ilana's G-spot, and the audience saw Ilana's crazy, silly expressions of ecstasy, the audience didn't see the humor in portraying the ridiculousness of the idea that there's this magic uber-orgasm spot somewhere secret in the vagina that only very special circumstances unlock. No, it wasn't the insanity of thinking of the female orgasm in such magical terms that was funny in that scene - the humor could have just come from Ilana's slap-stick facial expressions and the nature of how sexually connected Ilana and Adele are just because they look similar.

So, my negative side looks at these scenes and says that maybe for a lot of people these jokes reinforced kinda shitty assumptions people already have. Maybe after watching this, some woman out there, is thinking, 'man, I knew I was missing out on the BEST orgasms because my boyfriend can't find my G-spot! Even the Broad City gals know you should be working the g-spot to get your mind blown!' Maybe another woman out there is thinking, 'I wish I could come from a kiss like Ilana and all those other super sexual women. Orgasming is just so hard for me.'

The Positive Side
The other part of me has context for how the writers of this show think. They generally are not willy nilly about female sexuality. They put thought into it. So, I also totally see the intention for having Ilana talk about orgasms from kissing and the G-spot as comedy of the surreal. They chose things that are not real but also much loved and sought after, like a unicorn. The joke was proably that Ilana and Adele, because of their strange attraction of being so alike, have moved into a magical, almost delusional situation that includes such hallucinogenic delights as "The Orgasm From Kissing' and 'The G-Spot.'
(btw, the G-spot as an area in the vagina where the prostate area can be stimulated and maybe induce ejaculation in some women is a sensible thing. The G-spot as an area in the vagina that can be stimulated to orgasm, is not a thing. There is no spot in the vagina, in all of scientific literature, that has been observed to create orgasm when stimulated)

The Vulva Rating
So, I'd like to think the intention of this scene was what I described in my positive side. However, I think in reality these scenes, no matter the intention behind them, in some ways reinforce incorrect and confused ideas about how women orgasm. It highlights the already popular, yet incorrect idea of G-spot-as-uber-amazing-orgasm-button that probably brings to mind the idea that 'special women' have vaginal orgasms from it. I'm thinking about this way too hard. I know that, but I also know that people are too confused about lady-gasms and g-spots to weed out the silly from the insanely ridiculous from the realistic, so anytime the silly and the ridiculous are depicted, it might just further embed silly or ridiculous ideas instead of making fun of them. I'm not giving this a bad SSL Review, but I'm not giving it a particularly good one either, because I think there could be some damage done, even without intention.

I give this 3 1/2 vulvas
(!)(!)(!)(!

11.25.2017

1977 Hustler Review Series #5: Sex Toy Ads




Why I'm SSL Reviewing a 1977 Hustler
So there is a fab lady named Jill Hamilton. She made it into the Orgasm Equality Allies List a good while ago for her various writings. She's awesome and she's goddamn funny. She writes the blog In Bed With Married Women, which you will not regret reading, and she's revo-fucking-lucionizing the classic Cosmo Sex Positions lists.

Now here's where Hustler comes in. She had a give away on her blog, and we readers had to comment and tell her what we wanted so she could pick randomly and ship shit out to us. I saw she had a vintage Hustler, and so I asked - nay begged - for it. I promised to SSL Review it cover to cover, and here I am doing just that.

An SSL Review is a critique specifically of discussion and/or depiction of female orgasm and/or female masturbation in media (usually I do this for movies or TV not magazines, though). I particularly pay attention to the realism and scientific accuracy of the depiction/discussion and how it fits within the larger cultural conversation about female orgasm and female sexuality.

Feel free to check out the previous SSL Reviews of the Advice Column, the Porn Movie Reviews, a Bondage article, and the Kinky Korner erotic story.

Sex Toy Ads
So at the back of the magazine, there's a variety of ads. This was before the internet, so there's tons of ads for mail order movies and pictures, plenty for a 'Spanish Fly' type drug that you sprinke into women's food to make them crazy horny (I'm assuming this was just BS and not some some type of sedative), and I also found 3 that were for vibrators...and although none of them said the word 'orgasm' in the ad, they all alluded to it.

Problem is that they all insinuated that vaginal stimulation, or I guess vaginal vibration to be specific, was why a woman would be wanting to use it, if ya know what I mean. The clit or the outer part of the female genitals were never mentioned or alluded to. If you've read this blog before, you won't be surprised to hear me say that orgasm from stimulation inside the vagina is not a realistic expectation given that there is no physical observations of orgasms caused by stimulation inside the vagina with no additional outer clitoral stimulation in all of scientific literature. That's the god's honest truth.

What that means is unsurprisingly, these ads pretty much all have it wrong about what makes women orgasm. They focus discussions about getting women off in terms of intercourse. It's not surprising that they do this, and it's not just because these are almost 40 year old ads. It's just that our culture is doggedly stuck on the idea that hetero PinV intercourse should be as orgasmic for women as it is for men. It's absolutely not, but we just can't seem to shake the habit of depicting and discussing sex as if it were.

Anyway, I wanted to give my big spiel about how silly these ads were based only on the fact that they aim to stimulate the vagina instead of the clit, the lady-part that actually can induce orgasm from stimulation. So keep that in mind as I introduce these fad ads.

SUPER STUD - THE ULTIMATE VIBRATOR




Super Stud is the ultimate new vibrator that brings sexual enjoyment never before possible. Like the real thing in every way you can imagine! Because it's the same shape...the same texture...provides the same pulsating surge of power...the same sensual inner massage...the same driving, pounding, passionate explosion of ecstasy! It expands, it contracts, it moves slowly or rapidly, up and down and round and round. The perfect way to bring your lover to a fever pitch of excitement - she'll be ready, eager, panting for lovemaking - expends to a full 8". So unlike anything ever offered before, you'll never use any other vibrator again. You'll swear by Super Stud.
First off, they're really missing the point of a vibrator here. It's actually great because it's not like the 'real thing' - which I assume means a dude pumping his penis in you. We ladies don't need a toy for that. We know where to get that if we want it, which we don't right now because what we want is an orgasm. This vibrator is great for that, but it's because it vibrates and we rub it against our clits - which dicks are terrible at.

Also, I'm reeeeaaal skeptical of the moving capabilities this ad insinuates of this dildo vibrator. It looks like it's just an floppy accordion-ed dildo and if you want it to move rapidly, slowly, in and out and round and round, you best use your hand to do it because it's just a cheap weird vibrating dildo, not a sex robot.

GERMAN TICKLERS




Finding the right tickler is no laughing matter.  That's why LEISURE TIME offers a German Tickler that can turn the blandest penis into a well garnished bratwurst. Our German Ticklers are made of soft-textured latex that is specially designed to stimulate the most hard to please fraulein. Each German Tickler comes equipped with a special feature - if washed with soap and water, and properly cared for, it is reusable. In fact, you should get as many miles out of your German Tickler as you would from a Volkswagon.
I'll be real honest, I don't exactly know what a tickler is, but from the picture, I'm assuming it's a semi-sturdy sheath that goes over the dick, and adds a touch of length, girth, texture, and for some, what I can only really describe as torture devices to the end of your dick. Seriously, ain't no woman want those spikes scraping across her cervix. We can go get a pap smear if we want that kind of treatment.

I mean, if you want some extra on the dick for fun, why not try it, but vaginal walls don't get stimulated into orgasm. Hell, those those walls are probably not even going to notice the dumb bumps on your tickler at all. If you want to get your girl off just tickle her clit (well, not tickle, really, but give it consistent appropriate stimulation), and save your money...Plus, let's be honest. You don't want to reuse that thing. Soap and water will not do the trick.

BUTT/PUSSY TICKLER (Vibrate your way to Orgasm)


Now motorized for that tingling, fullfilling sensation that you desire. Rectal/Vaginal stimulation is created for the ultimate pleasure! Also good for enema retention.
Rectal/Vaginal stimulation can be pleasurable, sure, but if they are insinuating an orgasm from that they're way off-base. We've already gone over that. Let's get to what's really important here. What the fuck is happening and what are they selling? What is this 'enema retention' they speak of? Why?

I really don't know. Is this a vibrating butt plug that you can stick in just after an enema to block the floodgates? If so, why? I'm leaving it at that. I'm not sure what else to say, but if you were looking for an enema retention product, and you thought you struck gold here, you're wrong. This is a 40 year old add. Keep trying the interwebs.

Vulva Rating
These all together get a terrible vulva rating because the overwhelming sense from these ads was that women orgasm from stimulation inside the vagina, and there simply is no physical evidence that has ever happened. 0 vulvas for these sex toys.

Zero Vulvas

11.21.2017

Inside Amy Schumer S2 Ep5: The SSL Review



Inside Amy Schumer Season 2 Episode 5
This show makes me laugh, and here's the best part - Amy Schumer tends to bring it when it comes to realism and female sexuality. She brought it in her movie Trainwreck, in The Joe Rogan Podcast, and largely in the other episodes of this show I've SSL Reviewed so far. She has shown a strong willingness to give the clit the glory it deserves, speak some truths about lady sex experiences, rep for actual lady-gasms - and those things are incredibly important to Orgasm Equality. (She could use some schooling and humbling when it comes to speaking about race though....but honestly, a lot of comedians could).



The SSL Reviewable
For those that don't yet know, an SSL Review is a critique specifically of discussions or depictions of female orgasm, female masturbation, or the clit. I focus on those things and really only those (unless I want to talk about something else). I'm looking mainly at physical realism and at how the depiction/discussion plays inside the larger cultural conversation about female orgasm and women's sexuality.

Please, my friends, do enjoy more SSL Reviews for MOVIES and TV SHOWS.

I actually talked in great detail about the "Amy Goes Deep" segment of this episode in a previous post. It's not specifically an SSL review in and of itself, so connected to this post it will serve as the SSL Review for that part of the show, so go check it out.  It's about male comics using masturbation in ways they should not. Fun!

The other 2 SSL Reviewable moments in this episode are much easier to discuss than that masturbating comic situation I had to devote a whole post to. Actually one of these can't even be technically categorized as an SSL Revieable moment, but I think it's worth talking about, so here it is anyway. I'll start with that one.

Setting off Dynomite
This part comes during one of the interludes of Amy actually on stage in front of an audience doing stand-up. She says the following.
I'm trying to date guys that are not comedians, which is so hard. I was hooking up with this guy the other day, well, is it hooking up if you're just pushing their head down like you're trying to set off dynamite? But....(she pantomimes pushing down dynamite again) Get! (said like an old timey mountain coal miner)
I don't know what was said after that, but the reason I clearly love this is because it does the thing that Amy Schumer does best. It flips the script on male-female sex things, but not in the classic-but-still-male-centric way we usually see 'flipping the script' where women just play the sexual part we already play except that it's played more aggressive and careless and there's more fake lady-gasms while doing stuff that physically would not actually make a woman come, but would absolutely make a man come.  I mean, that's how I usually see 'flipping the script' sex playing out in TV and movies.

Anyway, Amy takes a distinctly female perspective on sexual things. You know how there's this classic thing about men trying to get head from a woman by kinda pushing her head down? You know how there's this sorta it's-wrong-but-still-funny-and-actually-kinda-true thing about men doing that? You know how a lot of comedians kinda love doing that type of using-a-girl-sexually humor that's funny because it's wrong and also a little real?  Well, Amy's joke, I think, is truly a female answer to that. The joke is she selfishly and aggressively uses her 'hook-up' in an unexpected way - to get her orgasm with (we assume) an unlikely possibility of returning the favor to him. It's funny because it's wrong to push someone's head down to your genitals without their consent, but it's kinda true because we ladies really would just like to push a dude's head down there and get his mouth on it...and then go to sleep or something. Like...many a woman would truly love a hook-up to be just us successfully convincing a dude to go down on us.

So, her joke is great because it is a woman putting female orgasm central in her sex jokes, the way men almost instinctively do for themselves...but the really unique and important aspect to her orgas-centric sex jokes is that it keeps the orgasm associated to things (like oral sex) that actually would cause orgasm. That doesn't always happen given our mass cultural obsession with thinking that banging alone causes lady-gasms. It doesn't, and given how Amy jokes about orgasm, she definitely gets that to some degree.


Cartoon Clit
In this skit, Amy is asked to do a Charlie's Angel's like cartoon, but when she gets there to do the voice over work, she sees that the other two women are sexy cartoons, and she's this fat meerkat with no pants. She's wearing no pants (because it was made in Japan and the illustrators couldn't even fathom pants that big. They didn't see the point of drawing pants). Her vulva is showing, like big time.

And guess what? Her vulva had a prominent clit. There's no discussion of it, but I appreciate that whoever created this was sure to visually include the most important part.


Vulva Rating
I'm giving this a 4 out of 5 vulva rating. The visual inclusion of the clit was great. The flip the script, lady-gasm-centric joke was great. I'm taking it down to a solid, but not perfect 4 because of the whole other part of the episode that you can read about HERE. In that, Amy did 1 truly great things. She took a question about sexual interactions giving her 3 non-lady-gasm-likely options, and answered by creating a 4th absolutely-lady-gasm-likley option. She and Rachel Feinstein also did pretty good work putting some realistic female perspective into the male comedians very male-centric insinuations and assumptions. It was good, and I liked that, but it was on the spot comebacks, and it didn't always take it as far as they could have. So, it's not perfection. It's just good.

(!)(!)(!)(!)


11.17.2017

Jim Florentine and Louis C.K, or how assumptions about women batter female desire and create creeper men



Comedian dudes are gross
In case you missed it, there was a New York Times article exposing what seems to have been an open secret about Louis C.K. masturbating in front of women in inappropriate ways. Five women went on record for the article. He then admitted it was all true and wrote a pretty good apology - as apologies for being an asshole go. Anyway when this hit the news about a week ago, I immediately thought of a story I had heard not a week earlier from comedian Jim Florentine on a season 2 Inside Amy Schumer segment called Amy Goes Deep.



He said he had a line that almost always works, but let me let him explain it:
I would play some crummy gig in the middle of Pennsylvania, white trash girl. I'd go, "Hey come out to my car." We'd sit in the car.  I would just go, "Look, do you mind if I masturbate while we kiss." I'd go, "I got a long ride home. You don't have to touch it." Nine out of ten times, within one minute, they had their hand or their mouth on it.
I'm gonna let that marinate for a sec.

So, Amy Goes Deep is a short segment where Amy talks to some person(s) about something. It's comedic like all her segments, and this one happened to be her talking to 4 of her male comedian friends (Jim Florentine, Bobby Kelly, Jim Norton, Keith Robinson) and 1 of her female comedian friends (Rachel Feinstein). She describes the men as her good friends as well as the most morally bankrupt human beings on the planet. They don't disagree. From the beginning they are all gross in their own way. Granted, these are all friend comics, shooting the shit. They're playing it up to be funny, and so there is that they're-just-being-comics element to consider, but I think this dialogue is still telling and worth consideration outside of that.

So, Amy asks them if they get a lot of pussy as comedians, and they are all super admit like, 'bitch please, of course we do. There's not other reason to do comedy.' Keith Robinson is called out by Rachel for always talking about sex by saying 'I've got 3 pumps for ya.' She rightly says it's stupid, but Robinson says he can make a woman  "do what she needs to do in three pumps." I don't know what it is he thinks she needs to do, but it's clearly not orgasm. Bobby Kelly asks Amy, "What would you rather do - kiss, have sex or blow with Keith?" Amy quickly returns with the only appropriate answer, "How about 'D,' sit on his face and read my tweets?"



Florentine's masturbation story comes toward the end when Keith prompts him to talk about his line that he says always works. After he tells it, Amy and Rachel look absolutely disgusted and then, the comedians they are, they start joking about it.
Rachel: What woman gets jealous when they see a guy masturbating?! It's not like, it's not like, 'Wait, there can be dick?' That's not like an exciting prospect. We're pretty...we all know the dick is availible.
Amy:We know there will be dick.
But luckily, Bobby Kelly is there to defend his friend and explain how sensible this is.
Bobby: The psychology behind it is that you - like we like vagina. If you took your boob out or your vagina, we'd be like "Oh my god, we love that."
Amy: (sincerely) oh, thank you. Thank you
Bobby: You're welcome. If you see a penis, you like that too.
Amy and Rachel, however, mention he might be a little offbase.
Amy: You're wrong. You're. wrong.
One of the 4 male comedians off camera: You see it and you feel obligated.
Bobby: When you see a penis, you don't go, "Wow, I wanna put it in my pussy?"
Amy:: Nooooo. No. (Rachel is shaking her head no as well).
Bobby: Really? (looks genuinely surprised)
Rachel: That's why a dick pic is not exciting
Amy: yeah
Rachel: to a woman
Amy: No one wants a dick pic.
Most of the guys: That's wrong.
Th strong male reaction against that had Amy and Rachel putting out their hands like, chill dudes.
Amy: No, they're lying to you.
One of the 4 male comedians off camera: noooo. no. (like 'you're wrong') 
After this the segment pretty much ends. What didn't end was my general sadness about how often men's need to get off takes precedent over women's feelings or desires or comfort.

There is an assumed fundamental sexual difference between women and men that's a bunch of B.S 
Florentine's story is not exactly the same, but it fits in the general realm of Louis C.K.'s and others. I think the spirit of both these men's actions are the same, and I'd like to take a bunch of steps way back and look at all this through the lens of our cultural misunderstanding of female orgasm and thus our misunderstanding of female sexuality in general. It's the lens with which I look at pretty much everything for this blog because frankly I think basic misunderstandings about female orgasm are at the root of a lot of nefarious cultural problems falling on women's shoulders, including this kind of wierd gray area of male sexual advances on women that are rude, bully-ish, bad mannered, and abusing of one's power...but maybe not technically illegal.

So to be honest, I'm still kinda playing with all this in my head so this whole post might be a little screwball, but I want to get it out, so this is what you get. I'll start with a super quick version of the connections I want to make:

I think that the actually quite sensible way women react to our experiences in this pretty fucked up sexual culture nevertheless make our sexuality and our reactions to sex seem very foreign to men because they (and we ourselves, actually) are judging us from a perspective that assumes things for women in sex are like they are for men. They are not, but since we don't actively as a culture understand that they are not, and because we as a culture don't like to inconvenience men regarding sex any more than we absolutely have to, we have created stories about women's sexuality that explain the weirdness, but that don't rock the boat of our male-centric sexual culture too much.

That was a lot, and it needs a lot more explaining. I know, but stay with me for a minute.  I think men view women (and women sometimes view ourselves) as fundamentally different from men when it comes to sex. People express the nature of the difference they perceive in a number of ways. Maybe it's that women have a natural ability to control their sexual desire that men don't, or that women are just plain biologically not as much of a sexual being as men are. Maybe it's that women are less in tune with or less sophisticated about their sexuality due to either culture or evolution. Maybe women, through evolution, are drawn to protect and use their sexuality as a bargaining chip with men. However you slice it, whether it's hardcore alt-righters assuming women are out to fuck them over with their feminine wiles or a normal and generally respectful dude considering how to engage his wife or girlfriend more in sex, there is this idea that when it comes to sex women are different, specifically different in that we ladies have a sort of veneer that must peeled, a code that must be cracked before she will give it up.

Different men and the same men in different situations can be more or less menacing in their thoughts and approaches in how to crack that code. A lot of the 'code-cracking' can be pursued out of love or with the best of intentions, but I think almost always there is a real feeling that one has to overcome some obstacle to get to the sexual part of a woman. Men, however, are not assumed to have this same veneer. Men are assumed to be more transparent and open (and many would say more noble, if not also more animalistic) in regard to their sexuality. Men and women are viewed as fundamentally different in this way. I'd argue it's one of the very strongest perceived gender difference people cling to.

Men assume they must perform the correct code for unlocking women's sex 
When one says 'breaking women's code' for sex, it seems particularly malicious, and it's true, that type of direct language tends to exist mostly in more crude circles (like pick up artist theory), but in gentler, more subtle words, that basic idea is a huge part of how we discuss women's sexuality in almost all circles.

There's lots of ways that have been said to 'unlock' a woman's sexuality.
  • Pay her directly for it (this is the cut-to-the-chase unlocking method)
  • Pay her indirectly through a date or through your time and energy (classic, right?)
  • Romance her with flowers and sweet talk and candle-lit dinner
  • Marry her (super old school access to lady sex)
  • Do some of the fucking housework for once (for unlocking the tired wife)
  • Loosen up the situation by going to a place where she will be doing drugs or alcohol 
  • Hell, give her the drugs or alcohol yourself (lock hacking for the rapey type)
  • Be the kind of Alpha male that all women really desire (the unlocking method for dudes who are definitely not cucks - but seriously, this is pretty much the core for all pick-up artist theory)
  • Be rich or famous or powerful (like the dude comics up there saying they really only do it for the pussy...I mean even a tiny bit of vague fame will unlock a lot!)
  • Massage her back (unlocking for the tired girlfriend or creeped out co-worker)
  • Try to control her environment, ultimately to get her alone (could be for the rapey type, but also a classic unlock disguised as creating the right environment. Getting her in a situation where it's hard to leave is particularly effective because it gives you time to break down her shell too!)
  • Let her know you're good at sex (a bold and tricky unlocking method)
  • Make a bold, unorthodox sexual move on a woman (like, I don't know, pulling your dick out in a weird place and masturbating). It will surprise her. She won't know how to react because she's never encountered it before, and it'll throw her off her game - a great way to help break through her veneer. 
  • Hack the code and go straight to brute force (we're getting into Alt Right women-hating, hack-the lock theory here)
  • Or maybe the nicest of these - foreplay her (hopefully to  orgasmic completion) before you get to stick your dick in 
Granted, some of these things are just things that could naturally happen when people are together, but they are also all things that someone, somewhere thinks, when intentionally pursued, will unlock the sex code in a woman, and I'm calling it a code because these things are more than just unassuming niceties or tricks. These are things that get directly related to whether a woman will or should put out. Whether she freely and openly desires to engage in sex isn't really even a consideration. It's more like sex is a thing all women would want to do IF you assemble the correct logistics to unlock her sex....like an actual lock.

Common approaches men have for getting a woman into bed really are just attempts at hitting all the right buttons so that it happens. Sometimes it's heavily calculated. Sometimes a single attempt to crack the code is expected to yield results and sometimes guys just try anything until it either unlocks or they strike out. Here's some examples:
  • (This one's a little oldschool but actually not too far off from a lot of men's modern sentiment). If you buy a woman lobster, that is the key to her lock and you get to fuck her.
  • If you have power or money or fame, those things in and of themselves, are keys to lady sex. Men with these things have necessarily broken at least the first part of any lady-sex-code just because the men put the time and energy into getting that status. Some expect it should always unlock in and of itself. (We'll come back to that because it clearly has relevance to comedians and men in the entertainment industry).
  • Go to a bar, find a woman who's drinking (lower her inhibitions, check), make out with her (create an understanding that it's a sexual relationship, check), find a way to get her kind of alone (create an environment for the possibility of sex, check), pull your dick out (be bold, check) and when she says she should go, whine and nag and make her feel sorry for you until she jerks you off (appeal to her niceness, check and orgasm success!)
  • Okay here's maybe a more familiar and less nefarious example: I'll call this the pre-work unlocking. A husband does the dishes, sends his wife love notes and texts during the day all week. He makes sure the kids get to bed early, brushes his teeth real good and uses mouthwash, and then when he starts poking his erect dick at her pajama'd butt in bed Friday, he expects that he did all the things right to unlock sex that night.
Most of those are gross, entitled, and particularly shitty, but I see very little difference in the spirit of the last one - which could easily be a piece of advice he got from a respected sex adviser.  Granted all the things he did were done to 'get her in the mood,' so on the surface it might seem very unselfish. But although he as a person is well meaning and gentle about this, the cultural structure from which he operates is male centered and toxic because she and her desire isn't as central to when she has sex as obligation is. It's more about the time and energy a man puts in to unlock her.

Women don't need unlocked, but we would like good, orgasm-ful sex that nurtures our desire
So, I'm going to pull back further and investigate what's up with women that we must be obligated into sex, because it's worth asking: Why aren't women, in general, more open and transparent about our need for sex like men are? It actually does sound like women are fundamentally different. I mean, why wouldn't any person want sex (as long as contraception is used, of course)? It's fucking great. Maybe one of the greatest parts of life.

And that's where you're wrong. We're all wrong, really - the whole culture. We assume that women physically enjoy "sex" as much as men but the truth is women as a group just don't. And it's nothing biological. There's no reason to believe women don't have every capability for strong sexual desire just like men, and women can orgasm as quickly, easily, and reliably as men do. The problem is not due to a fundamental difference between men in women but to our sexual culture . Literally the way we have sex stifles both desire and orgasm for women in a way it does not for men.  Let me explain that further because in our world this is not a concept that aligns to our normal conversation and depictions of sex, so it's not obvious.

I'll say the big thing straight away. The most common and accepted sex act of them all (we just call it "sex" most of the time) - Penis in Vagina (PinV) intercourse - is terrible for female orgasm yet absolutely fabulous for male orgasm. In all of scientific literature, there has never been physically observed an orgasm caused only from stimulation inside the vagina. Seriously. And the research community has had decades to get these observations, to observe the elicit 'vaginal orgasm' and they just have not been able to (probably because it is not a thing).

So, since rubbing the vaginal canal with a penis doesn't cause orgasm, AND outer clitoral stimulation (the thing that absolutely is known to cause orgasm) rarely happens as a natural side effect of ramming, intercourse leaves women with zilch and men with an orgasm. Direct clitoral stimulation to orgasm through hands, vibes or oral sex does happen from time to time in some hetero sexual encounters, but let's all be honest. It doesn't happen as often as direct penile stimulation to orgasm. I mean have you seen all the women writing beautifully about the oral sex gap? We come up short with all the intercourse people are having, and we don't even get as much of the reach-arounds and tongue action either. It's a sad state of affairs.

You can believe me or not about the lack of female orgasm in intercourse and in hetero sexual encounters in general, but if you don't believe, I'll ask you keep considering it. It's too long and complicated a discussion to address all the questions you probably have about this here, but if you need more convincing about how deeply the incorrect cultural belief of vaginal-penetration-causes-female-orgasm fucks up our sexual culture, our expectations, and our experiences and leaves women with so little orgasms compared to men, then I have plenty more for you to check out.  Please watch the movie we made about it. Read my long explanation for why intercourse doesn't lady-gasms make, or explore the hundreds and hundreds of posts in this blog that document how this problem is reflected and exacerbated in our movies, TV, Books/magazines, Peer Reviewed scientific literature, and also feel free to read about the many ways people are fighting and exposing the problem. I'll leave it at that.

Point being: Women's bodies are as capable of fast, reliable orgasms through clitoral glans stimulation as men's are through penile stimulation...but the way we have sex as a culture caters so heavily to male orgasm and specifically PinV intercourse, that women just plain get a shitty often orgasm-less deal in the sexual culture.

Seriously, this unlocking game and disinterest in our orgasm is really fucking with our desire
So, given the situation in this world of ours. Why would it seem sensible that women so often seem reluctant about sex? Why have we created so many games to 'unlock' women's sex, games that in the end are often just ways to make women feel obligated to fuck?

Hmmm- maybe it's because if these games didn't exist, and if women were really left to make sexual decisions based solely on what our bodies were telling us, we would find women just straight up wouldn't fuck around much with fucking: that we just don't often desire it...don't want it.

Before you get all pissy with me for saying women don't have sexual desire, chill. Women have capacity for TONS of sexual desire. We have to. Otherwise even obligation wouldn't make us put up with the all the shit sex we end up having. We just don't have desire for shit, orgasm-less sex, because shit sex is shitty. A sandwich is better. TV is better. The feeling of accomplishment from folding the laundry is better. If the kind of effortless and orgasm-ful sex men had on the table was available to us every time, we'd be desire-mad.  That means that women would need the natural, don't-even-have-to-speak-about-it flow of basic "sex" to be as full-proof orgasmic to us as intercourse is for men. It definetly is not, but it could be. Nothing biological is stopping this from happening. Our clits all work. We as a culture just need to acknowledge and fully incorporate consistent, appropriate clit stimulation as a normal part of sex and also give a shit about female orgasm. We don't though. Maybe you and your specific partner do...most of the time...but as a whole WE DO NOT GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WOMEN'S ORGASMS.

You know what happens when you have bad, orgasmless sex? It really lowers your expectation of the next time. Any hetero woman you know have an orgasm her first time? Yeeeeah. That's not the only time she didn't orgasm with a man. Every orgasm a man has during sex reminds him how much fun sex is. Every orgasm a woman doesn't have reminds her how boring or frustrating it is. With exception of the general atmosphere of sexism, body-shaming, and masturbation-shaming that affect girls way more harshly than boys, I'd say theoretically men and women start off with equally high excitement and expectations of their future sexual life. However, from the first time on, the average man and the average women diverge sharply in their desire and expectations. I mean if a woman only orgasmed 75% of the time (faking doesn't count...and there's a lot of faking out there) in the last 10 years (and that is really being generous. I imagine for most women over their lifetime it's much lower), then when she looked at a sexual prospect, she's seeing a 25% chance it will suck - and that's best case scenario where past rape, sexual coercion, or sexual assault aren't there to flood the prospects of a sexual encounter with an extra set of frightening and terrible feelings.

Now we ladies don't look at the oncoming possibility of a sexual encounter Excel spreadsheeting the orgasm odds and listing the sexual wrongs against us, but our bodies know it in our bones and reflect it in how or if we desire.

Lack-of-orgasm connects to different experiences connects to different reactions connects to all kinds of rationalizing 
So, guys want orgasms, like we all do, and lucky them, the norm of sexual interactions is bent towards their needs. They don't realize it's bent sharply away from women's needs, and also lucky them, the whole of our culture, including women themselves don't actively realize it most of the time either, so men don't have much pressure at all to change their norms and bend the norms of sexual interaction to fully include lady-gasm stuff. But, not lucky them, this all makes women way less interested in engaging in sexual interaction than they would like. But...men still really want women to engage in sex with them, and given the cultural blind eye to the sad state of sex for women, everyone, including women themselves logically assumes women should also want sex as much of men....yet they don't. WHY!!???

Well, like I said above, we all kind of rationalize this by assuming women are fundamentally different about sex and imagining that there are tricks, codes, and hacks that need to be mastered to get the sex out of women that men want. This way of viewing women 1. forces no change in the male-gasm centered nature of sexual interaction, lucky men 2. provides a good-enough explanation for why so many women don't show open, transparent desire for sex the way most men do 3. maintains male access to lady sex despite there being a large amount of female resistance. It does this by still assuming that under their veneer, women actually do want and/or will allow sex, and 4. (bonus!) Allows men to rationalize coercive, manipulative, bullying, entitled, actions towards women by placing them in the category of the necessary steps to breaking through the female veneer.

The thing is that the tricks, code combos, and hacks often do end in sexual interaction from women but often not for the reasons men tell themselves. The nice way to think of this, and what I assume men would like to think, is that when the code is cracked, women's inner sex-goddess is allowed to shine, almost like men are doing women a favor by facilitating women's blossoming. Like Bobby Kelly up there assuming that when a guy pulls out his dick, he is facilitating an arousing opportunity for the woman he's with. There is a sense (at least in the less nefarious situations) that if a man can just crack a woman's code, she's gonna enjoy herself. We know that's actually not often true, and furthermore, obligation (as one unidentified comic above correctly pointed out), guilt, and 'getting it over with so I can go on with my life and you stop bothering me' are much more common reasons men's 'breaking of the code' ends in sex than men are willing to admit to themselves.

Comics are dudes with fame and dudes with fame think they have a magic key to do sex stuff at women
So I took a long diversion there, but here's my connection back to Louis C.K. and Jim Florentine. They got some fame (a lot of it plus power and money for C.K.) and saw that as an ever present key to at least one lock for any woman around them. Their time and energy expended to get them where they are entitles them to this. Everyone knows this. It is a standard male fairy tale. Get the money, the win, the access, or the fame and you get the girl.

Now, every rich, famous, or powerful dude is different. with different moral grounding, sexual interests, and levels of boldness so they all approach their use of this anointed key differently, but I bet ya they almost all wield it to some degree. And why wouldn't they? This idea of unlocking her sex is how men approach sex with women. These rich famous dudes just have better resources than everyone else for code breaking. They'd be crazy not to partake, amIright?

Now, just because I describe this unlocking mentality as something that's a somewhat organic result of our larger cultural misunderstandings about women, don't think I'm giving men a pass on rude, bullying, bad mannered, and abusive interactions with women and sex. I am absolutely not because despite how common this is, we all know it's shady as fuck. It's steeped in arrogance and desperation for something men think they deserve, and rationalized with ignorance about the female experience. The truth is, a person can tell you are doing something that is uncomfortable for someone or if you are making someone feel obligated to do something. If you care to notice and care to not do that, you can stop. You can avoid doing it next time. It's not that hard. The problem is they don't care, and it's easy to not care because the whole mentality of 'unlocking' women's sex focuses the process of sexually interacting with women on making them do it - even if it is in gentle nudges. If they seem to feel obligated to do it, well, that's not unexpected.

And that I think is why Florentine doesn't mind talking about it, and his male comedian friends don't mind throwing out excuses for it. In Louis C.K.'s apology he explained that he rationalized what he was doing as okay because he always asked first before he masturbated in front of a woman, but that he now realizes that the power dynamic involved didn't always give the women much of a choice. His point about the power dynamic is true, but I think he probably did know that when he was doing it, he just thought it was okay because power is a legit way to unlock what you want in women.

Florentine also describes himself asking first, but dude, come on, that's skeezy as fuck and you know it. Amy and Rachel's faces alone could have given him a clue. He used his fame and a bold move to unlock handies, blowjobs, and probably some intercourse from time to time. It worked sometimes, but just because you get the result you want from something you did does not justify it. It doesn't make it less manipulative or less mean.

Also, wouldn't it be nice if women could just admire a man without him seeing that as an opening to coerce her sexually. Like, wouldn't that be cool?
Let's step back one last time and remind everyone that when a dude admires a straight dude and approaches him about that admiration, the admirer doesn't have to deal with the assumption that the admiration equals willingness to fuck him. Like a dude could go up to some famous straight dude and if they had a common interest could talk or have a beer or something and when they part the dude would be happy to know that someone he admired thought something well of him too. It's a nice feeling.

You know what is a shitty feeling? When you're excited that a dude you admire takes an interest in you or what you're saying, and then the shoe drops and you realize that he really just wants to fuck you and that's really all he's been aiming towards with you. It's even worse when you are hoping to network with this man in your line of business as a way to make connections and further your career or development in the business. You were all on cloud nine thinking someone you admirer thought well of you and was interested in you, and then the drop to feeling like you as a person were of no interest to this dude or that you will never have a non-sexual chance with this dude is a sickening drop that I have had a couple times in my life and most women have had at least that. Maybe if we stopped viewing all women as sexpots wrapped in a locked veneer that can only be opened by doing the right things, then maybe men would start focusing on what the particular woman in front of him seems to desire and be interested in instead of figuring out what combination of keys he needs to unlock her.

I don't know, that would be nice.

This is fucked up and it needs to change. Like for real.
Let me end by saying this. I've already talked about how battered women's desire already is from all the crappy orgasmless sex and all the coercion, nagging, and obligation that leads us into sex we never desired to have. It weighs on women and it affects our capacity for desire. Even if sex gets better over the years, our bodies remember the history and desire, and arousal can remain affected. So, congrats to all you men out there with some level of fame, using it to get orgasms near or on women in selfish, thoughtless ways. You should be happy to know that you have done your part to lower those women's desire for future sexual interactions. You helped make the sight of a penis less than arousing for so many a hetero women. In general, by ignoring women's desires and adding to her shitty sexual interaction list, you've lowered the chance for the good, healthy mutually orgasmic sexual interactions for her and all future partners. You were one of our past experiences that our body cannot seem to forget. Congratulations on hacking the lock to all the pussy. You must be proud of yourself.

As for all you non-famous men out there too. You run this 'unlocking' game too. You scheme. I'll be honest, we all play into this game because it is so deep a part of our sexual culture. It's fucking complicated, and I won't pretend to give you specific answers for being better or for how to navigate women without thinking about them as a lock. To be honest, women are as confused as you are most of the time, and we all need to be part of change. I will say this though. Pay attention to women. Listen to them, notice small cues. Ask them questions about their experience and desires and be patient. Remember that all women are not available to you sexually as long as you crack their code. Remember that obligatory sex is shit sex. Remember that women's sexual histories are different than yours and that you can't interpret their actions from your experiences. Remember that the clit is where orgasms come from - not from their vagina-  and your ramming dick is not exactly a prize. Remember that you can be a friend to a woman or enjoy a woman's company and not be scheming to have sex with her - seriously, if you can't do that you're an ass. Also, if you just learned that clits cause orgasm, please don't use that as your new unlocking method. Don't go around grabbing women by the pussy. It's not a good look on Trump and it won't be a good look on you.