I wrote a SSL review (honorary SSL Review - that is) for Magic Mike HERE, and then soon after I came across another review of Magic Mike. It's on the SPARK blog. (SPARK's a pretty cool organization that, among other things, uses girls themselves to work towards a culture where girls feel empowered to create their own personal, unique, and positive sexuality - and fights media that works against that goal.) I actually did an interview with the director of SPARK a Movement a while back. Check it HERE.
Anyway, I thought the blog had some interesting stuff to say; stuff that wasn't fully addressed in the blog I wrote. I recommend you check it out HERE. The blogger is Jamie Martina, who is working on a documentary about the life and opinions of exotic dancers in the Pittsburgh area, which sounds pretty cool.
On another note, here's just a fun little thing for your viewing pleasure. I figured it's Channing Tatum doing a SNL bit relating to Magic Mike, so it relates, right? Enjoy.
Wilfred on Netflix. I guess I just couldn't resist a show that revolves around a relationship between a man and a man dressed up in a crappy dog suit that is actually a dog to everyone but that man. Funny enough, there happen to be 2 instances of depictions or discussions of female sexual response within the first 8 episodes, and you know that means I have to do an SSL review. So here goes.
Firstly, I like the show. It's pretty funny, acted well (but only really by the 2 main characters), and strangely kind of like Fight Club. What it has insinuated so far about female sexual response is a little more complicated.
I'll start with the more direct statement. Ryan, the main character played by Elijah Wood, was in a situation in which he had to have sex with a woman in order to get out of paying for the big ol' dent he put in her car. That woman was Jane Zaczmarek, or you might know her as the mother from Malcom in the Middle. She was depicted as a successful, yet super bitchy business woman, but softens up to a sickening degree when she thinks Ryan might be interested in getting it on with her. It's sickening because she starts talking in a baby voice and calls herself a "wittle wabbit." It's pretty annoying, not just because of the baby voice, but also how hard the writers tried to play the undesirable-ness of the pushy, successful, middle-aged woman stereotype. So, Ryan is a squeamish dude anyway about sex, and he keeps telling Wilfred he doesn't want to have sex with someone he doesn't have feelings for. But he's eventually reluctantly in bed, about to get things going - still kinda trying to avoid it, and she starts forcefully pushing his head down and telling him what "wittle wabbit" wants. He is pushing against, refusing to go down, when she says more aggressively, that she must not be making herself clear; she tells him Wittle Wabbit can't have an orgasm unless he goes down. He actually gets out of any sexual interactions with her at this point, but you'll just have to watch to see why.
In one way, I like that someone, somewhere, on some show said that cunnilingus is the only way that she can come, cause that's true for a whole hell of a lot of women in partnered sex activities. So, kinda this was a fresh take on the intercourse is king style of most other media. However, I don't love that the person who said it was written as a pushy, sexually unattractive, bitch.
And on that note, let me compare that scenario to one in another episode. Ryan's neighbor and Wilfred's owner is a cute young woman that Ryan kinda likes. She has an annoying and uber-masculine boyfriend that Wilfred hates and Ryan is intimidated by. Wilfred calls Ryan up and says that Ryan needs to break them up because he can't stand the all night sex with back to back to back to back orgasms from his owner. That's right, uberboyfriend is also ubersex god. We see a little glimpse of the couple. The boyfriend is on top in classic intercourse pounding style, and she is coming like a porn star. Ryan can even hear it from next door.
This is so often the case (the 40 Year Old Virgin also sins in this way also) that the "crazy" girl seems to ask for other methods, besides intercourse, to be included in the sex act (I know! Crazy, right?), but when the normal, desirable gal gets on screen, she can come from some good ol' poundin' - you know, like a normal girl should. So, although cunnilingus was mentioned as a primary way for women to get off, it was also sort of trivialized as what pushy, crazy, bitchy, or high maintenance, gals need. Regular gals just need a masculine man doing them in a classic way! Yay for normal girls!
As a whole, this show reinforced that it's weird or unlady-like to expect (and certainly to outright ask for) other types of activities besides intercourse within the sex act. It also reinforces the sense that the more uber masculine a man, the more he can use his uber masculine dick to screw a woman into an all night orgasm diva. All of this is absolute bullshit, so I give this show 0 vulvas out of 5 (but I'd still recommend it to watch. What can I say, I like the show.)
It's definitely been a fun and interesting process so far trying to hear/critique/think about music and sound effects on Science, Sex and the Ladies. For years, we have all been obsessed with thinking about how the movie will "look" (as in style-wise during the writing process, during the actual shooting process, and over the years as it's been edited and as effects were added), and now we're finally really focusing on sound.
Granted, we were pretty obsessed with sound in one way - getting good clean voices recorded, but thinking about sound creatively is a different story.
All in all I'm having a blast. Nathan is our composer, now living out in LA...so our meetings are Skype style. He, like us, is doing all this crazy work simply for the love of doing it, and it's fantastic because we've all wanted to collaborate on something for years. He has been sending us scenes with his compositions (created with MIDI; not actually recorded with real instruments yet). Then Charlie, Barnaby, and I all try to get our thoughts together before we put our heads once again with Nathan's - for an old fashioned critique. It's a big ol'' ball of sweet, sweet collaborative. I ain't no music person, so just trying to put into words what I like and don't and why is kind of foreign, but Nathan is a patient dude, so it's been productive and fun.
It's crazy, though, because I have to watch/listen to it a couple times before I can really see how the music is fitting in. Charlie and I were talking, and we think it's because we're so used to our own sort of rhythm we had while cutting and effecting. The rhythm with which Nathan sees the movie and with which he's working from is naturally different and actually doesn't register with me at first. It's like it reveals itself to me later, so I think it's really cool having that newer, fresh perspective.
As for sound effects, Barnaby has been working hard on that. I've been watching it without sound effects for so long that it feels really weird at first. I have to kinda sit and digest it before I can wrap my head around what I like. This music and sound effect stuff is a challenge, and not just because it's stuff we've had the least amount of experience with. It's also because this movie is strange. It doesn't fit a genre, and there's not really precedent for this style, so we're kinda making it up; which is bad because it's hard, but super cool too because we have a lot of freedom.. The other awesome thing is simply that we are at this point in the movie making process, which means we are so, so, close, and I'm truly lovin' that.
Hello, I thought I'd put something fun up for a Friday morning. You might like this a little more if you are a fellow Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! fan (it also might make the dude's weird, creepy expression towards the end make more sense), but I think you will enjoy this simple little music video none the less. It's called "In Lust," and frankly, it's the kind of lust I can get behind.
IN LUST from Eric Wareheim on Vimeo.
I was searching around on the web and found an article (from which this quote is taken) I hadn't seen before by the one and only Shere Hite. Now, those who read my blog will know that I am a little obsessed with contacting this illusive woman, so let me know if she's your neighbor or something. Anyway, from my internet stalking it seems like she was kind of active as far as interviews and articles around 2008ish, and that's when this one was written. I tried to comment on it, but I guess it's too old cause it gave me an error that said comments were closed for that article.
How should sex change? At a minimum, both women and men should get the stimulation they need for orgasm. Since women can easily orgasm via their own clitoral-area stimulation during masturbation, the same stimulation (usually by the hand or mouth of the partner) should become an equally important high point to intercourse and penetration in a new version of sex. -Shere Hite 2008
Oh Ms. Hite, I will talk with you one day. Yes I will. I will ask you dumb questions that I'll immediately regret right like "What have you been up to the last 4 years?" or "What would you most like to be remembered for?" but I'll also ask things I'm seriously curious about like "describe in detail how you personally believe the g-spot plays into female sexual functioning?" and "what came together for you to decide that the original
Hite survey needed to happen, and when did the points you made in that book become clear to you?" I'll likely say the questions in a weird way, so you'll take them just a little wrong, and I'll become really awkward and even harder to understand when I try to correct myself. It'll be worth it though, cause I'm so happy you threw yourself so strongly into the birth of the Orgasm Equality Movement (which is what I've decided to call this thing I'm trying to carry on in this ol' crazy modern world).
Et Tu Wikipedia? Does everything relating to female orgasm have to somewhere, somehow insinuate that women need to stick things up their vaginas in order to come? There are 2 photographs in the Wikipedia entry for "masturbation" showing females masturbating. One is a vulva with a realistically shaped dildo pressing against the vulva/clitoral area, labeled "masturbating with dildo." The other is a woman with 2 fingers stuck inside her vagina, labeled "Masturbating with fingers."
Neither depict the most common ways women masturbate (over 90% according to the 1976 Hite Report, and you can also check what The-Clitoris.com has to say about how women masturbate), which is by rubbing their vulva/clitoral area against hands/fingers. The picture with the dildo shows the dildo rubbing against the clit/vulva area instead of showing it inside the vagina, which I appreciate, but it's still a dildo, and dildos have a way of bringing to mind some ol' in and out action like a penis would do. If Wikipedia wanted to picture a common way women masturbate with toys, I would prefer that they showed a vibrator pressed against against the vulva - and specifically labelled it as a vibrator not a dildo. The other picture, labeled "Masturbating with fingers" is most annoying, because for the vast majority of women, masturbating with fingers means the fingers are pressed against the clit/vulva not stuck in the vagina.
I am worked up about this not because I think there is only one right way to masturbate, or because women never stick things in their vaginas during masturbation. I am worked up because females masturbation is already overwhelmingly depicted unrealistically in our culture. Women should be able to at least go to an informative place like Wikipedia and get information that reflects the reality of the vast majority of female masturbation.
Yes, there probably are some women out there who just stick their fingers up their vag to masturbate. I don't know any of them, and the Hite report showed it's only about 1% of masturbaters. Plus, according to the Hite Report, most women who do insert things into the vagina during masturbation, also stimulate their clit at the same time.
This is what I'm saying - Since women mostly orgasm from touching/stimulation their vulva/clit area, female masturbation should mostly be depicted and discussed in that way. Some men might masturbate by moving dildos or fingers in and out of their anus to stimulate their prostate, but masturbation for men is mostly depicted and discussed realistically with men rubbing their penises. Female orgasm and masturbation should get the same treatment. It might help end some of the confusion, fear, and outright ignorance that stops women from exploring their own orgasms.
p.s. I do love Wikipedia, and actually there was some good written information in the "masturbation article," but a picture is worth a thousand words. It might be the only thing people take from that page when they visit it, so I believe it's worth critiquing harshly...plus I love a good harsh criticism.
Yes, we have had a Twitter account for a while, but we haven't been doing much. Well, I'm getting on the Twitter-wagon, and it's on. I mean it's kinda on. I'm gonna get something up there once or twice a week, ya know. I'll try my best to say utterly witty things that will make you chuckle under your breath and such. Or not. I don't know. I'll try to make it a little different than stuff on here, though. I'm just saying I'll do my best. It will certainly be more brief - not long-winded as hell like I am on here.
I’ve deemed myself a Mutual Masturbation advocate in a previous post, so now I’m gonna lay out my reasons why it’s awesome. (p.s. I'm still looking for sexy words or phrases to use for mutual masturbation besides MM - cause that's not really sexy)
1. My number 1 reason, of course, is that it’s good for the lady-gasms. We’ve established numerous times here that intercourse is not likely to induce orgasm in a woman. Yet, intercourse is the most obvious, common, not-weird-at-all way to engage in sexual activities with another person. So, basically, the most obvious, common, not-weird-at-all way to engage in sexual activity with another person rarely includes a female orgasm. Ridiculous.
The very nature of MM, however, dictates that both partners actively seek their own orgasm. As long as a lady has masturbated before, and thus knows how to make it happen, there’s no reason that both parties can’t end up coming. This is particularly useful, in my humble opinion, for first times with a partner or for one-night stands. A lot of dudes have no idea how to allow a woman the space to pursue or discuss her own pleasure during a sexual interaction – and even more problematic, they don’t even know that this is something they should think about.
So, try MM in a one-night stand, then at least you'll get your rocks (cause let's be real - we women rarely have that luxury during one night stands) and avoid common bad sex issues – stuff like overzealous dudes banging you till your head (and cervix) hurt, bad oral, or his inability to keep an erection while navigating condom use (the problem being not in his erection loss, but his utter inability to move past it and continue enjoying the situation). Plus, it might allow the couple to learn about each other’s style, so the next sexual encounter (no matter what it happens to be) can be even better.
2. It's crazy hot to not touch someone. The situation in MM is that you are getting each other really aroused by touching, kissing, looking, but you’re not touching each other’s junk, but I assure you, that’s all you'll think about while you’re touching your own. That you cannot/are not able to do something make is 100x hotter and super binner-ific (binner – the inner boner or lady boner – you might say. See HERE for further explanation).
3. Another awesome thing is that it can bring back all that intense wantonness of the teenage years. Since MM sorta flips the script, you won’t be going down the well-worn “kiss – then undress - then fuck” road. That means there can be more creativity, which can bring dirty, sexy little surprises. Also, chances are there will be a bit more sensual leisureliness, which could elicit a slow, super hot build-up (and eventually a fantastic release.)
4. Frankly, my masturbating friends, you know your own junk. You know what you like and how to get there, and orgasms from masturbation can be some of the most intense. In fact, Masters and Johnson, in the foundational studies for Human Sexual Response found that the most intense orgasms recorded for women were the ones from masturbation.
5. MM is just a plain good scene, people. Watching a person get increasingly aroused and then seeing them come is hot. It’s messy and uninhibited, and I’m way into it.
6. If you’re into talking dirty, this is your thing. If I’m already aroused, hearing or saying nasty things pretty much drives me loopy, and I doubt I’m the only one. With MM, you’re not doing the same-ol’ same-ol’ so it forces you to be…creative. You just have to arouse each other with your intensity, your words, your touches (as long as it’s not on the junk), and anything else you can create.
7. It’s a good addition to an old couple’s rep. It works when you are pregnant, have certain sicknesses or disabilities. It’s a good choice when you are all stinky sweating with stank breath, but you’re still horny. And, for the singles, it’s a good way to weed out incompatible partners pretty quick, if you ask me.