Vag-gasms are the Underdog of Orgasms Like Christians are the Underdogs of America

Share

Tweet

I have something I'd like to say. The vaginal/uterine/g-spot orgasm (whatever you want to call it) is not the underdog of female orgasms. You probably have more pressing things to think about in your life, but this stuff  is my obsession, so I don't, and I'm gonna go ahead and talk about it real quick, 'cause I'm kinda sick of hearing it described that way.

I just got done reading Vagina: A New Biography, by Naomi Wolf. I'll be talking about that in a later post after I re-read a few things, but more than a few times, she approached vaginal orgasms in that way. Beverly Whipple and her cohorts approached vag-gasms that way in The G-Spot and Other Recent Discoveries About Human Sexuality. I also often get comments on Sex-Positive or feminist parts of Reddit with someone saying something to the effect that they are just sick of hearing about clitoral orgasms because their vaginal orgasms are just fine too.

I know I don't have any actual examples of these oh-so-terrible, horrible, no good incidents when someone acts as though the vaginal orgasm doesn't get enough love. I don't have the time or energy at the moment to go find quotes, so just consider this a quick bitch fest and not a thoughtful discussion. So here goes.

If the vaginal/uterine/g-spot orgasm is so put upon in our culture, if it is such a low status thing to have an orgasm simply from the stimulation of a ding-a-ling rubbing against your vaginal walls, then why does almost every media image we see of lady-gasms consist of a woman getting a fantastic, hands free orgasm from straight up P-in-V banging...seriously, porn, movies, TV? Why all the clit-less orgasms in romance novels where the heroine shatters into a million pieces and becomes one with both her lover and the universe? Why is this "vaginal orgasm" that has never actually been recorded, so often described by sexperts with gushy words like "whole-bodied," "deeper," and "more fulfilling," while the clitoral orgasms are often poo-pooed as "surface," "genital," and "quick" (I'm talking to you Beverly Whipple and Naomi Wolf)? Why does every teenage girl in America get to read about "Best Positions to Hit Your G-Spot" or some bullshit like that in Cosmo and Glamour, but ask anyone who wasn't around when it came out about the Hite Report or the "Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm" article, and I bet they've never even heard of them.

The idea of being penetrated by a man and orgasming as a result of that simple act, is so a part of our cultural understanding of sex, that it permeates everything. That is the default, and if anyone is an underdog of female orgasm it's the clit and the clitoral orgasm - the silent majority gal. Oh, and Artist Sophia Wallace agrees that the clit is disrespected, misunderstood, and needs our love. Yeah, that's right - her goal to make the clit part of common sexual knowledge is so radical it's fine art..fine art.

That's my rant. I'm done.

You see what I'm talking about, here? Vag-gasms (whatever they are - cause frankly they've never been recorded or specifically described in science) are supposed to be all way-better-than-boring-ol'-clit-gasms or something . buncha BS.

Friday Report from a Cunning Linguist (In the Form of a Comic)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

House of Cards Episode 1 - The SSL Review

Share

Tweet

As I've said before, I'm kind of a TV follower. Plus I just like TV, so despite my somewhat irrational dislike of Kevin Spacey, I finally started watching House of Cards.

So..quite early in the episode we hear a woman making the sounds, I do say the sounds!, of sexual release. That, as luck would have it, is an SSL review-able moment, so here I am, SSL reviewing it.

The camera pans into the bedroom and a dude is on top of a woman jackhammering (it was definitely jackhammering) with her legs up in the air. She is coming with the sounds of a porn star and then they finish up and get some wine, I think.

Anyway, it was a classic media representation where we, the audience, see a quick scene of sex...sex that involves a woman orgasming as a man pounds into her. There is no noticeable sense that the clitoris is being stimulated, certainly not with anyone's hands, nor a vibrator, and normally (as in the case with this scene) the clear in-out movements don't leave one with the sense that she's cumming due to some hard-core self-directed clit grinding. No, the sense is that she's getting fucked into that screaming, moaning 'gasm.

Despite the fact that no less than 70% (and I'd argue even more) of women readily admit on surveys to never having orgasmed from intercourse, it absolutely boggles my mind that these images of women getting banged into ecstasy are so pervasive. These images are so simple, so a part of our mind's visualization of sex, yet so incredibly unrealistic for the vast majority of women. If that ain't bullshit, I don't know what is.

I think this scene was created not out of meanness or anti-orgasm equality sentiments (that's a thing - I call it) but simply out of laziness and general widespread ignorance about the terrible state of our media's representations of female orgasm. The creators just didn't think much about it and probably just did it that way because it was the way they imagined how that sex might go. Media images feed more media images...

Despite this terrible sex scene and Kevin Spacey's smug permacharacter, the show is growing on me, and I have to give thanks to SSL's composer, Nathaniel Blume for urging us to watch. It gets a no vulva rating from me though.

Wanna Watch Science, Sex and the Ladies?!

Share

Tweet

Hello all of you out there who may or may not read this blog somewhat regularly! I need some help. Well, I hope you will benefit too, but here's the deal. I have spent the last 10 years working on a movie about the female orgasm. It is finally finished, and frankly I'm damn proud of the thing. It says things that I think people need to hear, and it's a pretty fun ride too. Anyway, this whole getting people to hear/see the movie thing isn't just going to happen on it's own. That's where you come in.


We are doing all the normal entering festivals kinds of things, but we also have a different strategy. We have a crazy idea that if we send it out into the world for small groups of people to see, then it will spark conversation ,which will convince another group of people to see it, which will spark more conversation and so on. Point is, I'm hoping to create a little buzz about the movie, get some honest reviews, and ultimately get eyes on it, so below is what we're proposing. If anything sounds interesting, please, please, please make my day and email me at anc at ancmovies dott com. Seriously, you would make my day, week - month even. For real.

1 Host a get together to watch Science, Sex and the Ladies. Here's the things you need to know.

• It doesn't need to be fancy; just you, a few friends, some fun, and the movie
• We will provide you with the movie. We can send a DVD or you can access our online streaming version - your choice.
• You gotta take a picture of the group-movie-watching-festivities and send it back to us so that we can post it on the movie's site and show all those other folks out there what they're missing out on (if there is a problem with your party's comfort level in taking pictures, we can figure something more creative out to document it)
• If anyone at your party wants to use the movie and host another get together with some different people, we'd love it - just let us know and send a pic

2 Review this movie

• Good, bad, or ugly. We don't care what you say as long as you say something
• We don't care where you write about it as long as other people can see it...your blog, your college newspaper, a big huge famous magazine. It's all good by us.
• We'll provide you with an online screener and a press kit

3 Come at me with some other awesome creative idea, bro!

• Know someone else who'd be interested in 1 or 2 up there? By all means, send this post off to them.
• Wanna tweet this shit or post it on FB? Do it! (Those are the only social media sites I really know)
• Have a larger venue or larger group in some far away city (that means somewhere other than Indianapolis) that would like to screen this movie? We're all in - as long as no one has to pay to see it. We'll help, support, whatever is needed of us. 
• Anything else. Seriously. We're all ears. 

Well, that's that. Thanks for listening. Also, if you are new to the blog and don't know anything about this movie I speak of, check out one or both trailers on the right of this page. If you have been reading this blog, then you definitely have an idea about the tone of this movie. SSL Blog is very much related to and expanding on subjects in SSL the movie, so if you like the blog, I think you'll enjoy the movie.

Thanks all. (* update - I just want to put a reminder at the end of this blog too that you can just email me - my name is Trisha, BTW - at anc at ancmovies dott com if you're interested in any of this. I would be so excited to hear from you. Truly.)

A talking year book pic? Yeah, that's in SSL.

A nice 40's family...just at the start of the post WWII Sexual Revolution

Of course the movie talks a little about Romance Novels

SSL's got all kinds of surprises - including people holding cardboard ice cream cones!

A cave women might masturbate with rocks in this movie. I promise it makes sense in context.

Just a little scene about adolescent female desire

The Lesbian Addendum

Share

Tweet

During some drinks with a lovely friend and fabulous supporter of Science, Sex and the Ladies (both blog and movie), we decided that I must write a blog called the Lesbian Addendum. You see, SSL largely focuses on heterosexual activity. (If you are wondering why, see an answer below from our press kit or check out a more in depth post I made about it.)

We figured there were some things that needed to be said for the lesbian experience on the subject, and these things were...well, just some dirty little sayings/advice that we came up with at the table. It came about because there's one of these little sayings in the movie, but sitting there with some beer and potato tacos (they were pretty good) we knew there needed to be more...the Lesbian Addendum. So, here they are. Enjoy.

Get her off before you strap on!
Before a finger bang, give the clit a rang!
Tongue on the clit? You'll love it!
Gettin' off ain't no riddle - just give your own pearl a diddle!
Woman on woman? Yeah - more clit for lov-an!

Pretty genius stuff, I know. Oh, and as promised above - press kit answer for why so much focus on heterosexual acts...

The hetero focus of Science, Sex and the Ladies was a conscious decision, and there are a few reasons. Firstly, the cultural obsession with male-focused, hetero, vaginal intercourse as the end all be all of human sexuality is at the root of our society’s deep misunderstanding of female orgasm and ultimately female sexuality. A focused dismantling of that sexual worldview is essential in creating any real change. Thus, keeping that focus was a priority, and there simply was not time to discuss every aspect of every related subject. Frankly there could have been a whole other documentary made from the subjects that had to be cut, including LGBT issues.

Secondly, as a piece of activism, it was important that this movie appeal to and change the perspective for non-feminists, non-sex activists, people who don't think deeply about LGBT activism, people who don't think of themselves as sex-positive or particularly progressive. These are the majority of Americans. These are the lives the movie needed to focus on, and ultimately these are the people that have to change in order to shift our culture.

Thirdly, no matter where one falls on the spectrum or how one defines him/herself, we were all raised within the same basic hetero, male-centric, intercourse focused media, education and popular lore. Although LGBT issues are not specifically discussed, the filmmakers believe that any amount of widening or challenging of that narrow sexually worldview is beneficial to us all.

True Detective - The SSL Review

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Cockle Bread!

Share

Tweet

Well, I was chillin' with some friends tonight watching the new Cosmos - cause why not, I guess. We were also about to watch the final episode of True Detective, but HBO Go apparently crashed while people were trying to watch it. All fine and good by me because I hadn't watched any of the prior episodes anyway. (Update: I'm watching the first episode now in case you were wondering if I'd ever see it). So while we were all waiting around to see if the show would load up, my always smart and interesting friend Stephanie said she heard about something called cockle bread.

It seems this cockle bread was from the 17th century in England. Ladies would make the dough, then press their lower lady parts up against it to make an impression and then bake it. This would then be given to the object of their affection as a sort of love charm.

Why is this relevant to this blog, to the depiction or discussion of female sexual release in our culture? I don't know, but it has to do with vulvas, it's a little interesting, and I needed something to write. So, enjoy the little tidbit of lady-junk history, and have a great start to your week.

Random Hite Report #6

Share

Tweet

Hello! Today you get more RANDOM HITE REPORT! As you may or may not know, this is where I take one random page and one page only out of this super important book from the 70's, and transcribe it for you here on the blog. It's women answering detailed questions about their sex and love lives, and it's incredibly interesting and insightful. Enjoy your taste. 

The following is from the chapter "Older Women" in the subsection "Other women were interested in sex, but were having difficulty finding partners they liked" 

Pg. 512 The Hite Report Dell. 1976.

maybe more women (??) but I have some fear of loving a person who might have a long-term illness --- senility, etc. I've coped with that enough."  

 "I feel that I could give two sets of answers to those questions --- one concerning a perfect marriage and one concerning sex relations in widowhood. I seem to be able to interest only married men and that means clandestine relationships. I have not achieved and orgasm with any of my partners (although I do in masturbation). The more promiscuous I become (I had several short-term relationships since widowhood) the more I believe I want what I had for so many years; the love, attention, and affection of one man. However, life is enjoyable, especially with men, but my ego gets in the way with married men, as I want to be the only person on the totem pole!"    

"I would also like to have seen questions asked on ethics --- what moral imperative have we laid on ourselves, and which seem valid? Like male intellectuals taught me it was immoral to tease, so I didn't neck or anything unless I went to bed with someone---a good and bad thing that worked more to men's advantage than mine, I feel now. Because marriage is so difficult, I will never complicate it by having anything to do with a married man, but people all around me are adulterizing. Sometimes I feel, 'the hell with their marriage, I need somebody to love too!'"    

"At fifty, I have come not to look or hope for an ideal. I think I have poor judgement in men, and besides, no man has seriously approached  me in years. Well, none that I would consider. I want to do a lot of things, and I have to get them done before it's too late. Men take up a lot of time---at least the men I choose. I am tired of helping them get their PhDs, write their books, learn to love, raise their children, and learn to let women achieve. I cannot bring myself to have a homosexual relationship---I just don't feel that way. I can stand it without sex and I don't want any relationship now except friendship, which I find vital. I need to talk,

Dallas Buyers Club - The SSL Review

Share

Tweet

It's Oscar Night, and since the latest Snow-pocalypse here in Indy didn't turn out to be so bad, we'll be headed over to our annual Oscar Night fest with our trusty Oscar friends. We will eat, we will talk shit, we will laugh, we will tear up slightly, we may even be surprised that some actor who has died this year was even still alive in the first place. It will be fun had by all, and to go along with this theme, I will be SSL reviewing the last of the SSL-review-eligible Oscar Nominated Best Pictures, Dallas Buyers Club. 

Okay, actually I just looked at the list again, and I realized that The Wolf of Wall Street may in fact be eligible. I mean, there was a whole lot of doin' it in that movie, but I'm not sure that there was ever the indication that a female orgasm was happening in any of the scenes, and I'm pretty sure there wasn't a discussion about female orgasm or anything about female masturbation, so honestly, I'll have to watch it again later to make sure. 

Either way, there was still a fairly significant amount of Best Picture nominations that could be and were SSL reviewed. I'm not exactly sure what that means, but it's interesting. 12 Years a Slave and Philomena were both quite favorably SSL reviewed. One said clitoris and another rubbed that very thing realistically into an orgasm. Her was a little less favorably reviewed, given its porny wails of lady ecstasy, and I'm afraid Dallas Buyers Club will also be not so favorable. The movie was good. The ladygasm, however, was unrealistic.

I'll make this quick and try not to spoil anything for those who haven't seen it. Long story short, a man who has previously been shown to partake in sex (the P in V boy girl kind) quite often, has been unable to do so for a pretty long period of time given the fact that he has AIDS. Surrounded by a lot of gay men with AIDS (this was the 80's), he is pleasantly surprised to become aware of a woman who has AIDS. This is all happening in 2 adjoining motel rooms that double as an office with lots of people coming in and out. Dude sees the woman in the next room, asks if she's actually got AIDS, and the next cut is all the people in the motel/office, hearing the tell tale sounds of two people fucking, including her porn screams. A quick shot shows Dude standing in a shower stall. She is straddling him, with her weight seemingly supported by him and her back against the wall getting, well, banged is the best way to put it. They both clearly finish up amazing orgasms at the same time. 

So, she is getting a penis pushed in and out of her vag. Neither he nor she is using any hands on her clit or anywhere near it, and she’s vocalizing like a porn star, like she’s coming as hard as anyone could come. It’s pretty bogus. I will say that there is a possibility that his pelvis is banging against her clit with each thrust, but honestly, a tap on the clit every so often is not the kind of steady pressure and stimulation that is pretty universally understood to be needed for both penises and clits to get there.  Plus, she’s up in the air, and would have very little control over the movement of her pelvis, which does not seem conducive for a person’s (male or female’s) ability to orgasm. 

I went into a lot of detail there, but the basic idea seen by the viewer is this; a woman is banged up against a wall and has a super hot, sexy, intense orgasm just from the banging. It’s what we see in porn, what we read in romance novels, what we see in TV shows and movies. It is what our media understands female orgasm to be, and yet it is a ridiculously unlikely way for a woman to orgasm.

So, since this scene just added to the pile of other things that helps women and men completely misunderstand how a woman might orgasm, and builds on the idea that it is common and particularly sexy to orgasm in this easy, hands free, getting banged kind of way. I give this movie a 0 vulvas. None at all. Sorry McConaughey.

The G-Spot/Vaginal Orgasm Debate is Ridiculous

Share

Tweet

Charlie came across this article on Jezebel about the confusing nature of the G-spot/vaginal orgasm debate, and as is the practice of pop articles on female orgasm, they asked a sexpert about it. What she said was taken without a bat of an eye and pretty much unabashedly and appallingly defines the current (and completely insane) state of discussion on the female orgasm.

I asked sexologist Dr. Logan Levkoff over e-mail what she thought about the whole debate. Here is what she had to say, "What this ongoing research does (for the lay community) is question the legitimacy of what women experience when they climax. Orgasms are subjective; orgasms can be spiritual and not directly connected to either the clitoris or the vagina. Does a vaginal orgasm exist? Depends on who you ask — but try answering ‘no' to a woman who has had (or believed she had) one."

This is what I imagine a spiritual orgasm is like. 

So, an orgasm is defined as...well...it's defined as anything and everything. There is no actual definition one could work from (for women of course. We all understand what an orgasm is in men). Oh and also, don't say anything that a woman might not like, even if it's true (because that's good science?).  I'd laugh if it weren't so true and so right on about where we are right now as a culture. We need to change this discussion.

The thing is, pushing against this ridiculously confused mindset when it comes to female orgasm is pretty damn radical. It shouldn't be, but it is, and the movie I made does just that with a simple idea. The stimulation of the inside of the vagina has never been shown to cause orgasm (the standard definition). I stand by that, and if you look into it at all, it's not a crazy statement. However, it plays as radical because for some reason, almost everyone in the research sexology community and the sexpert community straight up ignore this lack of physical evidence. Sure, most can get behind the uncontroversial idea that many women (about 70 - 80%  most would estimate) cannot orgasm from stimulation of the vagina. Sure, that's fine. Everyone knows that, but saying that maybe that last 20 to 30% are either ejaculating and calling it orgasm or having spiritual/emotional highs and calling that orgasm, or orgasming from incidentally rubbing their clitoral glans during intercourse and calling that orgasm, or simply not orgasming at all and saying they orgasmed - well that's where things get dicey. 

To do that, one has to "question the legitimacy of what women experience when they climax," which I am perfectly happy to do, because I don't even know what Dr. Logan Levkoff means when she talks about a woman's "climax." I assume it means orgasm since that's what the article's talking about, but even so, I still couldn't know what she means because these sexperts use orgasm to mean anything. Here's the deal. I know to many it seems mean and presumptuous and narrow, but I don't have a problem saying that maybe lots of women don't understand how their own sexual organs work, or that maybe some women lie about their ability to orgasm, or that there is one definition of orgasm and that using it to mean something different is unacceptable. I think these things need to be said.

Women get little and often terribly inaccurate information about their orgasm and organ of sexual pleasure from both structured education and from everyday education like media depictions and popular lore. It's not like women are known to be universally well educated about their orgasms, so why is it so strange to think that women might feel confused or be uneducated enough to call something that isn't an orgasm an orgasm, or be insecure enough to lie about their orgasm? I would think it pretty uncontroversial to say most women don't understand how their sexual organs work, and that there is a lot of women lying about orgasms. I don't see these assertions as offensive or off-base, and I think ignoring these is the same as tolerating them. I don't blame any women for dealing with this terribly confusing and uninformed sexual culture in whatever way she can figure to do so, but I don't want it to continue, and that means we need to be realistic.

I'm also going to say that there is one definition for orgasm and using it in other ways, specifically when experts use it in other ways, is unacceptable. It is. We don't do it for men. For them, the scientifically uncontroversial and documented physiological definition of orgasm coincides with the societal understanding of orgasm. For women too there is the same uncontroversial, documented understanding of orgasm, and the word "orgasm" is used to describe that...sometimes, but for some god-awful reason there are several other ways that orgasm is used - and not just in fringe communities, but in normal scientific and sexpert speak. It's not okay. 

This isn't fun and games here. When an expert tells a woman that she could "orgasm" from a particular stimulation and that expert means something other than the established uncontroversial, physiologically defined "orgasm" (the one we use for men and should use for women) - that is not trivial, either for the woman or for scientific understanding of orgasm. That woman does not become more knowledgeable. She becomes more confused, and may even take on a completely inaccurate understanding. And, how are we supposed to move forward with the scientific understanding of "orgasm" in females when we can't even agree on what constitutes an "orgasm." That should be first priority. How can I study or talk with other scientists about igneous rock, when dropped coke cans, the thing we all know as igneous rock, and clumps of dirt are all being discussed and researched as "igneous rock." They are 3 different things, and describing igneous rock as red and aluminium just because we want to call coke cans igneous rock, is a terrible idea. It's just the worst science - the WORST.

Let me be clear. There is a definition of orgasm, caused by stimulation of the clitoral glans or penis that is documented, definable, and uncontroversially accepted as an orgasm. We accept this when it comes to men, but we find it perfectly fine to throw in all kinds of other ideas and call it orgasm when it comes to women. Unless we find that stimulating the vagina causes this uncontroversially defined physiological reaction, then we shouldn't be calling whatever happens from this kind of stimulation (pleasure, ejaculation, an emotional high, stars shooting from your vag and becoming one with the universe) an orgasm just because we feel like it. It's bad for science, bad for women, and we need to acknowledge this. 

Philomena - The SSL Review

Share

Tweet

Well, the Olympics are over, and I'm on to the Oscars. I love them. I love movies. Plus, I'm a sucker for live TV. The last few years I've been obsessed with trying to watch every single movie that gets a nomination. Some are pretty tough. Short documentaries ain't no easy thing to find, and if I miss the 2 days that the short live action and animations come through town, I'm screwed on that too. I think I'm gonna make it on all the other ones though, so don't you worry about that. Now, seeing all those movies doesn't help me win the Oscar pool. I'm actually terrible at it. However, like I said, I love movies so I kinda just like seeing them all.

So all that to say that I just saw Philomena a couple days ago. It's one of the Best Picture nominations, and by golly, it's also eligible for an SSL review (kinda). Honestly, I hadn't really seen much about this movie. I think I might have partly seen some of a trailer, but I didn't know what the movie was about except that Judi Dench was in it.

Judi Dench and Steve Coogan in Philomena (this is actually the scene containing the quote below)

Now maybe you saw a trailer, and if you did you probably didn't expect there would be a discussion or depiction of female sexual release or masturbation, and you'd be almost right. There wasn't discussion about female sexual release per say. It was more of a couple sentences out of Judi Dench's mouth that touched on pleasure, but what made it interesting to me in an SSL kind of way was...well let me just show you what she said. So as not to ruin anything, I won't give you any background except that Philomena (played by Judi Dench) is telling someone about an experience from her youth.  

But what made it so much worse was that I enjoyed it...the sex. Ah, it was wonderful, Martin. I thought I was floating on air. He was so handsome, the way he held me in his arms. The thing is I didn't even know I had a clitoris, Martin. And after the sex was over, I thought anything that feels so lovely must be wrong.

Now, this is kinda an open statement. I mean, we don't know exactly what she means. Did she realize she had a clit and that it felt good during that sex, or did the sex awaken her sensuality, and she later discovered it. Did she orgasm? How was the clit involved in this sex? We don't know, but I don't think it matters. She said the word clitoris. CLITORIS, first off - how often do you hear that at all in a movie? Then on top of that she is clearly linking that clit to sexual pleasure. It's so very rare to specifically involve the clit in movie sexuality in any way at all, so I was just floored and very pleased. So, I had to tell you all. Philomena, my friends, gets a 5 Vulva Rating! Oh, and Philomena is simply a lovely movie on top of all that. I recommend you check it out.

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

Is Ejaculation an Orgasm? Betty Dodson Tells Ya Straight

Share

Tweet

I'm sure I've mentioned before that I think Betty Dodson is kick ass. Well I agree with myself once again. Betty and her cohort Carlin Ross answer the question in their vlog, "Is female ejaculation an orgasm?" Hells no. Ejaculation is ejaculation. Betty lays that shit down straight. I. Love. It. All too often, the word "orgasm" is used to describe all kinds of things that are not actually orgasms.

It's a confusing problematic aspect of sexpert talk in an already confusing sexual culture for us ladies. I'm over it, and I think Betty might be too. If anyone is fighting the good fight for the Orgasm Equality Movement, these ladies are! Check it out.

 

Olympic Bulges

Share

Tweet

Well, I'm kinda obsessed with the Olympics. I just like watching them. I don't watch sports any other time, but I like me some Olympics. I also don't have cable. We just use Hulu and Netflix, which is usually fine, but it means I can only watch Olympics through my antennae on regular ol' TV. Luckily, we have a huge antennae cord that can be snaked around the house into a back room where the antennae will actually pick up signal. Luckily for us, the Olympics are on NBC so that trick works, but if it were CBS, then I would need to move the antennae out the front door onto a trash can in front of the porch.

It is incredibly annoying to me that the Olympics don't have a online viewing option unless you are a cable subscriber. If you have cable, and can watch the Olympics on like 10 different channels anyway, then you get a passcode to get onto a place with streaming Olympic stuff, but if you are like me and only watch things on the internet anyway, you are shit out of luck...unless a kind relative lets you use his passcode. Then you can screw over the cable companies and use their precious streaming Olympics anyway. Seriously, I would pay a little bit to get the 2 weeks of access to online streaming Olympics. Stop being assholes, cable companies and the Olympics - and let me see 2 man bobsledding on the internet. But I digress.

None of that has to do with orgasm equality or Science, Sex, and the Ladies, or anything I usually write about, but the Sochi Olympics do involve seeing penis bulges in those long sleeved onesies that winter athletes all wear.

I was checking out what Cosmo Magazine online had to offer about female orgasm lately (spoiler alert - a lot of New Positions to Hit Your G-Spot! bullshit), when I found an intriguing collection of 19 Best Olympic Bulges. For once, Cosmo, you have impressed me. Now, dude junk bulging from athletic wear, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with ladygasms, but I think it's fair game for this blog because our culture needs more balance in our sexual objectification of people who are famous for really cool things that have nothing to do with their sexiness or sexy parts. Women get this type of objectification way more than men. This situation gives the hetero men out there so much more to fantasize about and enjoy on a sexual level.

Well, we hetero ladies would be overwhelmed to get even a tenth of the masturbation fodder that men see in normal ol' media on the regular. So, in the spirit of sexual balance, and because Sochi is rockin' the Olympic at the moment, Please go check out -->  Cosmo's 19 Best Olympic Bulges.

Some of them are not that interesting to be honest. However, # 11 (seen below) was awesome cause it's literally an outline of a dick. Oh, and a lot of them just look like a straight up camel toe. I feel the picture choices could have been better, actually. Cosmo, can you never live up to my expectations?

Steven Nyman, USA

Photo Credit: Getty Images

Cast And Crew Screening!

Share

Tweet

Well, the cast and crew screening of Science, Sex and the Ladies was last night, so this marks the end of my blog once a day post marathon. I know you'll miss me, but I'll be back 2 or 3 times a week. Also, more good news...the screening went really well. I mean it's cast and crew, so they are a lot of people we know, and they're gonna be at least polite. So, I realize we may not be getting the whole story, but I'll tell you what, people were really excited about it. I got texts and emails from 5 different people on their way home letting me know about ideas they had for more group showings. We are encouraging people to share the movie in small groups anywhere from their own homes to art galleries to meeting halls to bars. Anyway, it looks like we may have some coming up including a "silent screening" and the first SSL Dude screening. So I feel pretty happy about the whole thing. I'll keep you posted about how the small screenings are going. Till we meet again...

AnC right before the SSL cast and crew screening

I'm So Excited! Tonight's the Cast and Crew Screening!

Share

Tweet

Today is the cast and crew screening for Science, Sex and the Ladies. I'm so excited, and because of this, I embedded the Pointer Sisters singing the song "I'm So Excited" below. Enjoy it. It really does get ya pumped up. Seriously, though, I really am excited. This will be the first real screening. The cast has been waiting about 5 years to see this thing, and I'm really pumped to see them all again. As we speak, I am at my AnC partner Barnaby's house typing this pout real quick while Barnaby and Charlie load the food and goodie bags into the car. We'll be headed over to the venue in about 5 minutes Holla! I'll put up pictures tomorrow.

p.s. YouTube won't let me embed the actual Pointer Sisters video. :(