10.31.2012

Some New Ideas On The Ol' Sexy Costume Situation



HELL-o everyone! Happy Halloween! mwa-ha-ha-ha!

I thought I'd throw up a quick SSL style thought for your Halloween enjoyment. As we all know, 'tis the season for sexy anything costumes for the ladies. Sexy pirate, sexy ninja (fyi - sexy ninjas and sexy pirates don't have as big of a rivalry as regular ol' ninjas and pirates), sexy grandmas, sexy kitchen sink. You name it, and it can be made into a sexy Halloween costume for women (or a funny one for men). 



One might say that being the "sexy" version of a normal costume is a bit boring and overdone, but I'm not gonna hate, not today. Sometimes you just want to find an easy costume, and you also want to be sexy for the party you're going to. I get it. I just think we could make better use of this "sexy" costume craze, so below are my two ideas that I hope you all take with you to your festivities this Halloween season.

1 Mention often to the males you are talking to that you'd like men's costumes to show more skin, and you'd like the men wearing them to have nice bodies. Maybe this small act by many of you ladies out there will get costumers to start making more off the shelf sexy male costumes; and further, maybe it will inspire a bunch of men to hit the gym over the next year so they can rock those new sexy costumes made just for them. One day, with luck, we will be able to walk down the male costume isle and see only sexiness from one end to the other!

2 If you are a lady that chose the "sexy" pre-made costume route, make that shit work for you. Find a nice someone special, lure them in with your sexy costume, get their head between your legs, get off, and then go home...or back to the party...or to pick up some late night Steak 'n' Shake. It's up to you really, but the point is, take this opportunity to enjoy some "me" sex; a little of the no-work, all clit-lovin' kind.  You were unselfish enough to share your sexiness with all those at the party, so don't feel bad. They might try to be mopey or pleading to get some reciprocation, but stick to your guns (the ones attached to your sexy cowgirl costume) ladies - and really enjoy that sexy costume this year!

10.28.2012

The Female Orgasm Explained...badly.



Just by chance I wondered onto this webpage (Check it HERE). It's called The Female Orgasm Explained, and frankly, it's a super ignorant explanation. It's not surprising that there is a crap webpage about the female orgasm. I mean, that's more common than not, but I was in the mood to blog about it, and it is a special level of bad, so I thought I'd give you a quick rundown. Here are its sins.

1 To start off, there's just some stupid grammar and spelling issues; like writing "changes" instead of "chances" or "and" instead of "an." It's just unnecessary.
2 It says "The female orgasm goes through four physiological stages," and then lists "excitation," "plateau," "orgasm," and "resolution." These are the stages of the human sexual response cycle created by Masters & Johnson in their groundbreaking 1966 book Human Sexual Response. They are not the stages of a woman's orgasm...since, well, orgasm is one of the stages listed. One might say that the first two stages are involved in arousal; then there's the orgasm; then the final stage is the stage where one gets back to pre-arousal levels.

3 This statement:
In case you haven't realised by now, the penis is an extremely sensitive organ. If she's crying out like the movie, but there are no uncontrolled contractions and spasms about your manhood... she's faking.
That's pretty much bullshit.
Firstly, if a woman were having an orgasm while your penis was in her vagina, it's no guarantee, and frankly, pretty unlikely that the penis would feel the rhythmic pressure.
Secondly, a woman could simply squeeze her PC muscle as rhythmically as she could to make her partner think she was orgasming. It wouldn't fool a scientific investigation, but it might make her partner feel confident that she orgasmed. The PC muscle is the one that spasm's during orgasm.

4 This statement:
Mutual orgasm is essential to procreation. Man and Woman are physically designed to have orgasm to ensure the longevity of the species, but it is also most pleasurable. Male sperm endeavour to swim their way to the ovum to enable fertilisation, but most all sperm lack the stamina to make the entire journey to the ovum unassisted. This is where the female orgasm becomes crucial.
People have long been trying to prove that female orgasm helps with procreation, but it simply isn't the case. Masters and Johnson couldn't find a way that female orgasm helped move sperm to where it needed to be, and Elisabeth A. Lloyd in her book The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution did an in-depth review of all scientific literature on the subject and also concluded that there is no reason to believe the female orgasm helps in any way with conception. 

 So, I guess what I'm saying is don't trust the info on that page.





10.24.2012

Yeah, You Heard Me, Vaginal Stimulation Hasn't Been Shown To Cause Orgasm: A Defense



*It's 3/8/2021, and I wrote this almost a decade ago in 2012. It's all still completely relevant, and I stand by what it says - well worth the time to read in my opinion. However it doesn't specifically address a theory about 'vaginal orgasm' that has become incredibly popular since then. I recently wrote a post HERE that addresses this incorrect but widely touted idea that the inner part of the clit was discovered in 1998 (it wasn't) and that there is new evidence this inner part is the reason for vaginal orgasm (there isn't). Same grasp at trying to explain the cause of a phenomenon that is desperately hoped to exist but doesn't actually seem to...it's just a new decade and a fresh, new 'reason' to fill headlines.*

I'm going to address a common criticism of my writing; women telling me that the description of female orgasm I put forth doesn't describe their personal experience. I actually think that my way of discussing orgasm does include more women than it might seem at first glance; it's just that our language of orgasm is different, and I don't usually address that properly. The problem begins with the controversial and seemingly divisive statement I often throw out there; I often outright say that female orgasms arise from clitoral stimulation, and not from stimulative friction on the inside of the vagina. I stand by the statement, but I also understand why it's criticized. It seems to leave out women who say they have "vaginal" or "g-spot" orgasms.

I do stick to a particular definition of orgasm, and I do find that some claims about female orgasms are unsubstantiated through scientific investigation, but in order to explain fully, there is a lot of background that needs to accompany this, and there rarely seems to be enough time or space to include it. To clarify my statement and my meaning is exactly my intention here.

Why I think this is an important discussion to have

 A lot of people have told me, and probably will continue to tell me that I shouldn't be trying to tell women what is and is not an orgasm; I freely admit that I am trying to make the physical definition of an orgasm popular knowledge, but I am not telling women there is only one way to have an orgasm. I am simply trying to encourage the proper use of the word orgasm. When we speak about female orgasm, the word is thrown around to describe all kinds of things that are not orgasms; things like ejaculation, non-orgasmic physical pleasure, or spiritual/emotional highs associated with intercourse. I'm not saying these are undesirable or bad, but I am saying they are not orgasms, and calling them or insinuating that they are orgasms confuses all the women out there who are trying to maneuver their way through a really confusing sexual culture. A willy nilly use of the word "orgasm" leads to the persistence of harmful, misleading misunderstandings of what an orgasm is and how a woman might get one.

There is a need for our culture to finally begin dealing with the female orgasm from a perspective of scientific knowledge; to be clear about what happens physically; to speak about it in realistic and fact based ways. We have too long been wishy washy about what an orgasm is and too all-accepting about any old idea any person has about how a woman might get one. I understand that I am walking a fine line here. I know by pushing a science-based definition on the female orgasm, there will be those who feel as if I am saying anyone who's experience doesn't fit into that definition isn't having a real experience, but I have a different view. I think that having clear definitions does not also have to mean having clear exclusions. I think that the conversation about female orgasm has been so convoluted over the last 60 years that it cannot move forward unless we start discussing it in terms of facts and begin being specific in our language. Change hurts, but I believe this is a change that is necessary. I believe women and society as a whole are fully capable of engaging in this type of discussion; of being accepting while still understanding female orgasm in a scientific and structured way.

So, what is the definition of an orgasm?

Pioneering scientists William Masters and Virginia Johnson (M&J) did the first and most comprehensive observations of how male and female bodies react to sexual arousal and orgasm and released the book Human Sexual Response in 1966. Masters & Johnson's work is still a standard of physical orgasm research, and if you want a more detailed physical description of orgasms, check that book out. Importantly, though, there's been tons of research in the years since that also physically documented orgasms from clitoral and penile stimulations (and despite lots of effort and what I'd call desperate attempts to prove 'vaginal orgasms' exist, no physically documented orgasms from stimulation inside the vagina). M&J's physical orgasm and arousal findings have been consistently corroborated and built upon over the past 60 years. They showed that males and females basically have the same physical reactions. During arousal, the pelvic muscles begin to tense and blood begins to pool in the genital areas (this pooling causes males to get erections, and it causes women to begin emitting lubrication from our vaginal walls and causes swelling to occur in our visible vulva area and in our clitoral legs, which are hidden deep in our pelvis; and btw women have as much blood pooling in their genitals as men, the male reaction is just - you know - easier to see). Orgasm is the sudden release of the muscle tension and blood pooling that has built up during arousal. For both men and women, the pelvic muscles will release the tension with spasms at a rate of about 1 every .8 seconds. It's very similar in both sexes; it's just that men also usually ejaculate at the same time they orgasm. This ejaculation/orgasm at the same time thing is not a normal occurrence for women. This Masters and Johnson definition is a standard, evidence-based, scientifically uncontroversial physiological definition of an orgasm, and is what I refer to when I say orgasm.

What is not an orgasm: The following things are not within the physical definition of orgasm and not what I refer to when I say "orgasm"


A general pleasure during sex; or a physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual high that cannot be described by the description of physical orgasms set out by M&J. Orgasm and pleasure are not interchangeable. They can be interconnected, but they are quite simply not the same things. Pleasure without orgasm is absolutely something that can be valued in sexual interactions, but talking about pleasure during sex as if it were an orgasm, doesn't help give women and girls useful cues about what to expect when it comes to what should actually elicit orgasm. We don't confuse orgasm and non-orgasmic pleasure this casually for men, and we shouldn't for women either.

Arousal - In the same vein as above, arousal is not orgasm. What arouses a person is quite unique and has as much to do with the mental aspect as the physical, but the final stimulation needed to push a woman into orgasm is largely the same for all women - clitoral stimulation. Just think of it in terms of how you understand male orgasm. Yes, he could get insanely hard and aroused by watching a naked woman and having her kiss his chest and neck, but it would seem silly to assume that he would orgasm without his penis being touched; even if it's just a little touch, we would expect that he would need it to put him over the edge. It shouldn't be thought of much differently for women.

Ejaculation - Female ejaculation does exist and some women who have them say they find it pleasurable, but it's not an orgasm. Ejaculation and orgasm are physically different events in both men and women; men just happen to usually ejaculate simultaneously at the time of orgasm and (most) women do not.

This is where that oh so revered G-spot comes into this discussion. It is touted in women's magazines and pop culture as some kind of amazing, yet elusive spot that causes earth shattering orgasms...for the lucky few. Unfortunately, that's just plain unsubstantiated. There is clearly physiological evidence of g-spot stimulation causing ejaculation in women, but no physiological evidence of g-spot stimulation causing orgasms (there are plenty of survey's where women say they do have G-spot "orgasms," but I have never seen one where these claims are backed up with physiological evidence). The only physical reaction to g-spot stimulation that has been recorded and observed is ejaculation. For both sexes, stimulating their G-spot/prostate without also stimulating the clit or penis can cause ejaculation but not orgasm, and to be clear, the sudden release of muscle tension and blood congestion that is a hallmark of orgasm, does not happen with ejaculation. By all means, enjoy and seek ejaculation if you like it, but let's be clear that it is something physically different - not something we should call an orgasm. (If you want to look into this further, I suggest The G-Spot and Other Recent Discoveries About Human Sexuality. This book sort of "discovered" the G-spot in 1982. It wants badly to support the idea of a g-spot orgasm, but if you read it critically and look for physical evidence, it simply fails. The information in there about G-Spot induced ejaculation, however, is groundbreaking and continues to ring true these many years later.)

What things have been shown to cause orgasm?

When I say female orgasms arise from clitoral stimulation, and not from stimulation of the inside of the vagina, the part about orgasms coming from clitoral stimulation is pretty uncontroversial. Any kind of stimulation of the clit can cause an orgasm. Masters and Johnson physically documented this, and it is important to note that all the orgasms they recorded exhibited the same basic physical reactions. There simply wasn't any evidence of a separate "type" of orgasm; no "vaginal," "G-spot," or "uterine" orgasm. So the really controversial part of that statement is me saying that I have come across no physical evidence that penises or fingers or dildos stimulating the inside of the vagina have caused an orgasm. That is not to mean, however, that no orgasms can occur during the act of penetration. Below I will list ways that can cause orgasm during acts of penetration.

Direct Clitoral Stimulation - That's right, simply getting your own or your partner's hands down there on the clitoral vulva area during penetration works wonders. You could also get a vibrator, mouth or whatever floats your boat down there to work the clit area during intercourse. (I highly recommend this method BTW). 

Grinding  - Grinding the clitoral glans area against something during the act of intercourse/penetration is another form of clitoral stimulation. It can be against pillows, bedding, teddy bears, your partners pelvis - whatever. As long as the clitoral glans/vulva area is being stimulated, it makes sense that an orgasm could occur in this intercourse situation. I'd also like to add that this seems to be a way that some women orgasm during intercourse without really realizing that it's due to the clit stimulation from their grinding. It can be unintentional (However, from my own experience, I'd say it won't be a very consistent way to orgasm unless the woman knows what she's going for and works for it)

M&J Rube Goldberg-esque Indirect Clitoral Stimulation The closest thing to the sought after no-additional-clitoral-stimulation intercourse orgasm, was documented and observed by M&J. So, there is evidence that a small amount of women can attain this intercourse orgasm, and M&J even found 2 women who had orgasms from nipple stimulation with no direct clitoral stimulation. Before you get too excited, though, I think it is important to understand what scientific investigation has told us about how these orgasms happen and how they compare to other orgasms these women have.

 Both groups were aroused physically almost to the point of orgasm to start with - before the nipple stimulation or intercourse happened. For the first group (a group that was specifically sought out within the possible test population - since M&J held dear the idea that women should be having hands free orgasms during intercourse, even though their investigations clearly showed that female orgasms were caused by clitoral not vaginal stimulation), M&J hypothesized it was a Rube-Goldberg situation where the penis pulled on the highly aroused inner lips, which pulled on the clitoral hood, which rubbed against the clitoris. It was a small bit of stimulation, but enough to push them over the edge. The second group (2 women) started manipulating their nipples after they too were physically almost to the point of orgasm. The nipple stimulation was enough to put them over the edge to orgasm. My personal thought is that the nipples were clearly a favorite touch place for these women, and already being almost to the point of orgasm, they tensed their PC muscle (pelvic muscle) which moved the area down around the clitoral glans just enough to put them over the edge. (Try tensing the muscles that would stop your stream of pee then letting it go -  particularly when aroused). Now, M&J didn't have any specific hypothesis for how the clitoris was stimulated in this situation, but they clearly stated that all the orgasms, whether they were from direct clit stimulation or these indirect intercourse/nipple ones, can be described the same way physically.

Before you start feeling unlucky because you aren't one of these rare women who can just come from a little touch to the nip or from the ol' in and out (someone like our lucky heroine from Fifty Shades of Grey), let me tell you this. Although the orgasms they had were physically similar to the ones these same women had during direct clitoral stimulation, they were also the weakest ones they had - both in terms of the physical intensity of the muscle spasms and in terms of the women's own subjective feelings. If we think of orgasms in terms of clitoral stimulation, it makes perfect sense that these would be weak orgasms - given that these were the orgasms caused by the most indirect stimulation of the clit. The orgasms they had as a result of masturbation (of the clitoral/vulva area) were the strongest, and orgasms as a result of a skilled partner's manual stimulation of the woman's vulva/clitoral area were the second most intense. (It seems that if our Fifty Shade's heroine was realistic in any way, those nipple and intercourse orgasms she had wouldn't have been so earth shattering, now would they?). Also, remember that even though these women did have an orgasm without specifically touching or grinding their clit, they did need to be physically on the edge of orgasm before they even started these non clit touching orgasm maneuvers. So it's not as if these women simply got banged and came...or got a little nip sucking and came. They put a lot of footwork (including direct clitoral stimulation) into getting to a point where the oh-so-coveted intercourse/nipple orgasm could even have a chance of occurring...and for their coveted orgasm status and hard work, what did they get? A rather weak orgasm, but an orgasm none the less.

Women who have the following experiences fit fully into my statement about orgasm, even if we have semantic differences.
  • have orgasms only through direct clitoral/vulva stimulation
  • have orgasms during intercourse due to some kind of additional or even unintentional stimulation like grinding against your partner or the bedding
  • have ejaculations due to g-spot stimulation - that you may call "orgasms"
  • have ejaculations due to g-spot stimulation at the same time you are having orgasms due to clitoral stimulation ('cause you're messing with the clit and the G-spot/vagina at the same time) and call that whole thing a different kind of "orgasm"
  • have something you call "orgasms" that are based in deep feelings of physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual pleasure...yet, this something could not be defined as an orgasm in the M&J physiological definition.
  • have the occasional orgasm that occurs during intercourse or nipple stimulation but after being intensely aroused (probably partially by direct clitoral stimulation) to almost the point of orgasm; with that orgasm physically feeling like a weak version of the orgasms you get during direct clitoral stimulation

Women who have the following experiences do not yet fit into my statement about orgasm. 

Women who have physically strong orgasms from nothing but the physical stimulation to the inside of the vagina -  the o'l in and out without any clitoral grinding or stimulation.  Female characters like this fill our books, tv, movies, and porn. If this is you in real life, then frankly, I can't find your situation in the research. I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm just saying people like you have not been studied. I know someone will come back at me with a study here or there where women say on a survey that they do orgasm this way, but I promise I have looked at a lot, and I have never seen a study where these claims are backed up by physical observations showing there was in fact a physiologic orgasmic reaction. I'm always open to the possibility of learning new things about the female orgasm through solid investigation, so if you are one of these women, please do seek out being part of an orgasm study. There truly is too little good scientific investigation about female sexual release.

Conclusion

I know the exclusion I make may seem harsh, but I do think it is important to let women know that this is the reality of our scientific knowledge right now.  Every time a woman says she orgasms easily from the ol' in and out, but she's actually orgasming from grinding her clit, or she's actually ejaculating, or she's actually talking about something in a more spiritual way, or she's actually talking about a really weak Rube-Goldberg orgasm she has had only a hand-full of times in her whole sexual life, then she is doing the world of female sexuality a disservice.

I honestly don't think there are women out there intentionally trying to make other women feel inferior or misrepresenting their experiences. Truthfully, the way our culture teaches, depicts, and discusses female orgasm is so confusing that none of us really know how to talk about our experiences. We just do the best we can with what we've been able to figure out. We need a better way, though. We need to understand what scientific investigation can tell us about what a physical orgasm is and how it can be sought. We need to start using plain and physical terms to speak about our experiences with orgasm and sexual pleasure so that we can learn from the realities of our fellow women.

We also need to be accepting. I know my emphasis on the clitoris and on the physical definition of orgasm makes some feel as though I will be encouraging the type of  "my orgasms/sexual experiences are better than yours" situation that happened during Freud's time and that is happening now with the emphasis of mind-shattering effortless Fifty Shades type intercourse-only orgasms. However, I think women are craving the chance to be grounded in reality when it comes to orgasms, and I think we are mature enough to deal with our diversity. There should be nothing wrong with enjoying the emotional high that comes with your sessions of intercourse, even if there is no physical orgasm involved; or in enjoying your ejaculation even without an orgasm also. Also, a woman who says she fits into my second grouping, should be taken seriously. Even if she is part of a small minority that hasn't been studied well, these are her experiences, and we should work to document those experiences as part of the female reality. We do need to understand and make these distinctions though. 

So, when I say that female orgasms arise from clitoral stimulation, and not from stimulation to the inside of the vagina, please know that I'm not just trying to be exclusive, mean or divisive. I honestly feel like I'm doing this for the opposite reasons, and I hope that is eventually how most others will feel also. I truly hope to move the language and the understanding of female orgasm towards a clearer, more realistic, more fact-based place.

***Since this article was written in 2012, I have written more that addresses some questions people may have about research linking the inner clitoral legs to the G-spot and/or vaginal orgasm. As of yet I still haven't found any research showing orgasm can be caused by stimulation inside the vagina. However, there has definitely been some recent and often cited studies claiming to show that 'vaginal orgasms' can be caused by stimulation of the clitoral legs through the vaginal walls. Those studies don't actually show that. THIS post in part discusses those studies and should help put those popular studies into perspective. Also, for deeper info, HERE is a list of my summaries for some relevant journal articles. *****or as I updated at the top, please read THIS post about the incorrect, but widely touted idea that the inner part of the clit was discovered in 1998 (it wasn't) and that there is new evidence this inner part is the reason for vaginal orgasm (there isn't). - 3/8/2021*****

****HERE is the documentary this blog was meant to expand upon. It does not go into as much detail as some of the posts here,  but it does give a better overview of the cultural problems with our understanding of female orgasm than any one post here can do.

10.21.2012

On Vacation!



Well, I'm on vacation at the moment, visiting a friend in Kansas City and Charlie's brother out in Manhattan, Kansas, and we got busy trying to get everything tied up for the trip....so I haven't been as successful as I hoped at getting the blogs up that I had been wanting to. However, I'll have some relaxation time on this vacation coming up to do some writing, and work has slowed a bit, so if you have been missing my twice weekly Orgasm Equality related rants, then just hang in there. I'll be back at it soon.

On a funner note. I'm having a great time so far. Our illustrious host, Mr. Lee Piechocki is a friend of Charlie's from Ball State College of Fine Art. He's been a great tour guide through the KC art scene, which, might I say, knows how to have some fun (Evil Monkey Party). I'd also like to say congrats to Lee who was recently featured in New American Painter for the second time.

10.12.2012

Citations Are Fun!



I've  been working on something that I would guess is not usually a part of the movie making process. I'm checking all the on screen citations and bibliography entries for accuracy and proper MLA formatting. Oh yeah, it's exciting stuff. Actually, it is kida neat. Putting citations in a movie doesn't really have precedence, so I'm kinda making it up as I go, and that is actually pretty fun.

The way I've decided to go with it is to just keep the citation on screen (usually in the lower left hand corner) during the whole statement encompassed within the citation. This idea of using visual citations in the movie was decided upon very early on. Most documentaries give validity to the statements by having experts speak onscreen. The simple fact that the person speaking has some type of expertise makes the statements seem  worthy. We had no interest in creating this movie from a bunch of interviews. That didn't seem quite that exciting and entertaining to us, but also, it just frankly wouldn't be an efficient way to make our arguments. Many of the points made in the movie are a result of carefully mixing existing ideas and facts and then gleaning meaning that didn't exist within any one of the facts or ideas on their own. So, people speaking on-screen about their areas of expertise just wouldn't cut it. It always made sense to us to create this movie first as a carefully crafted research paper, and that naturally lends itself to validation through use of citations. Doing it this way allowed us to leave the visual part of the movie to do the job of supporting the arguments in a vivid and entertaining way; instead of wasting visuals possibilities on boring shots of people sitting in their offices speaking into the camera.

Anyway, I'm spending my time lately double checking all these citations, and making sure the bibliography at the end of the credits is in tip top shape.  That's what I've been up to.

10.08.2012

Hope Springs - The SSL Review



First, I feel like I've been neglecting the blog the last couple weeks. I've had a lot of ideas and things I'd like to post, but because my real life job has been running me ragged, I've been putting up some fluffier, less time consuming stuff lately. Luckily I'm starting to crawl out of the hole, so hopefully I'll be able to start posting some of the stuff I've been holding on to for a bit. That brings me to this SSL review.

I saw Hope Springs a couple weeks ago when it first came out. From the previews I could tell that it just might be eligible for the ol' SSL review, but I also love me some Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones, so of course I got me a vat of popcorn and checked this movie out. I was pleasantly surprised, both at the insinuations about female sexual release, and just the movie in general. It was a simple movie, and I really think it could have been a cliche, surface kind of older people rom com, but I think Streep and Jones gave the movie a kindness and depth that was above and beyond the script. It was a sweet and relatable movie, and I would recommend it.

As for the SSL review, this movie's getting a pretty good rating; partially for the depiction of sexual release I'll describe next, but also because the overall feel of this movie, to me, struck at the heart of why talking about his kind of stuff is meaningful. I'll get to that part later, but let's begin with a favorite subject of mine - masturbation, baby. Now, it's rare to see any female character at all who admits to masturbation in a movie, much less a "normal" woman with grown children and a 30 plus year marriage. So, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Meryl Streep's character, when asked by the marriage councilor whether she masturbates, said she used to. (She doesn't anymore. It makes her sad because it makes her think of the non-existent sexual relationship between her and her husband, but by golly, she did at one time.) Even better for those of us who care about depictions of female sexuality, she masturbates that night, and it was done in a sensible, fairly realistic way. Obviously, it being a movie and all, we don't see too much of anything, but what we do see reflects movements that would reasonably be done by a woman masturbating in a way that ends with orgasm; and from the sound of things (and not in an overly rambunctious or porny sort of way of course), it does. Basically we just see Streep in bed with her hand moving under the covers. From her arm placement and movement, it is insinuated that her hand is moving around on her vulva, and it doesn't look as though she is moving her fingers or anything else in and out of her vagina (which unfortunately is too often used in depictions of women masturbating to orgasm). So, I truly appreciate this thoughtful and progressive nod to female masturbation in the movie.

Now to the less tangible part of the SSL review. It was the whole situation of the movie - not any particular depiction or discussion. It struck a chord for me about why ignorance and misconceptions about female sexual response is more than just fodder for feminist ramblings - the misunderstanding about how women orgasm affect some of the deepest emotional parts of people's lives.

This movie is about a man and a woman who are married and living under the same roof, but have almost completely lost their connection. It's a common tale, tangled in all the emotional, circumstantial things that can slowly pull married people apart, but there was also this glimpse into the couple's sexual history; the sexual history that led them to their current situation; which I thought was refreshingly honest.

The basics, as I felt could be gleaned from the discussion in the movie go a bit like this: She never really orgasmed from the sex the two were having, and she began to feel as though he really just wanted "it" not her. She mentioned that he would always close his eyes so tight when he was doing it (seemingly as he was about to orgasm).  For his part, he began to feel that she wasn't that into it, and frankly, having sex with someone who doesn't really want it isn't that great of a feeling. He used to be sexual, but he didn't want to have sex with a woman who didn't want to have sex with him, and he didn't want to be unfaithful, so he eventually started to avoid the whole situation to the point where he slept in a different room and hadn't had sex for years. She, in turn, missed the intimacy with him, and was hurt and confused as to why it stopped over the years." But...as Jones said in the movie (and as Charlie and I have enjoyed repeating since we saw the movie), "Sometimes when it's off it's just off."

I think the movie did a fantastic job of giving each character genuine reasons for getting where they were. She loved him and being physically close with him, but didn't have orgasms with him (this is so so common and makes so much sense when we realize the simple fact that the most normal, acceptable sexual interaction, intercourse, is great for stimulating the male organ of sexual pleasure and horrible for stimulating the female organ of sexual pleasure - the clit). He was once a lusty young man who loved and wanted his wife more than anything. He had fantasies and desires about his sex life that he didn't feel his wife would be interested in.  Eventually, as the excitement of youth and newness wore off,  she saw him as just wanting to orgasm in her, yet she still craved the parts of sex that seemed possible to her - long slow arousal, romance, and loving physical intimacy, but was too often disappointed with the act. He wanted a partner who wanted him as much as he wanted her, but he was also too often disappointed.

Yes, of course good communication could have helped this situation early on, but it would have also helped a whole hell of a lot if our culture clearly understood how women orgasm; and if what society described as "sex," and what each partner grew up understanding as "sex," was something broader than intercourse, something that included orgasmic activities for both males and females. That way, when they tried to communicate about "sex," it would be easier because they were both experiencing something similar during sex - emotional intimacy, physical intimacy, arousal, and orgasm. As it is now, sex is something that for many women does not include the orgasm part, but does for most men. It's hard to understand each other's point of view when that very large experiential difference exists.

I suspect communication breakdowns - made deeper because of our misunderstandings about the female orgasm - are happening in household all over; to husbands and wives, old and young. I think the feelings Streep and Jones were experiencing are so deeply relatable to so many. Even if it doesn't get to the point of living in separate rooms in a sexless marriage, I would guess that almost all long term male-female partnerships can relate to some aspect of this situation. Yes, there are other things that can and do strain long term sexual relationships, but the fact that women rarely orgasm during male-female sexual encounters and men usually do, is one of the biggest; and one that is least discussed in any sensible way.  As much as this movie could be played off as simply reflecting the sexual repression of an older generation, I think it speaks to something much deeper and, I would bet that many a younger couples out there will relate.

It would have been really cool if the movie had touched more specifically on these differences in male vs. female sexual experiences, but one can't expect a movie to include everything one hopes. It was a genuine, tender look at the pain these sexual challenges cause in marriage. In short, I felt like the plight of Streep and Jone's characters was the plight of all us heteros dealing with long term sexual relationships. I don't know what the scriptwriter's intentions were, but I think this movie scratched the surface of being something truly progressive, and I'll give it props for even scratching the surface of these common sexual feelings. I also love that we see some realistic lady-bation from a character who was meant to be quite "normal." I give this movie 4 out of 5 vulvas.
(!)(!) (!) (!)

P.S. This movie actually kept reminding me of The Hite Report on Male Sexuality. It's Shere Hite's next book after the groundbreaking The Hite Report on Female Sexuality. It asked over 7,000 men qualitative questions about all aspects of sex and their sexual relationships. It was done in the 70's and as much as the female version had given deep insights into the frustrations women were experiencing, this male version had given as deep and meaningful of insights into the frustrations men were experiencing.

Here's just one answer of the many in this book that I think are relevant to the feelings Jones brings up in this movie.BTW, I highly recommend this book. [Published by Alfred A. Kompf, Inc. 1981 edition. pg. 601]

"I will be married twenty-four years next month. Overall I like it, but there is a slow, deadly erosion of sex. The affection still lingers. I still love my wife in many ways. She does not like sex-she probably never really did-and I have tried just about everything, chiefly patience and gentleness and forbearance, with no real change. It is a sad thing. I wish it weren't this way. It never was that great, for us. I wish we could have kept moderately happy and gone to bed more often. We still sleep together in the same double bed. In all the years I don't think she has ever asked for sex, in any form, and invariably has seemed relieved when I didn't want to. There is still a feeling of warmth and partnership, and we love our kids, but the spark, the magic, has long departed...."

10.03.2012

Some Phrases That Brought People To This Blog



Just for fun, I thought I'd list a few of the most "specialist" of the search phrases used to get to this site. Enjoy, oh enjoy.

"backmassagers missued" - You mean used awesomely?Those words probably sent our searcher HERE

"get me some pics of sex acts" - Yes, internets, do my bidding!
Not so sure where this may have taken the rather demanding searcher.

"movie the lady with a tattoo on her hand" - I think this is a jank search for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.
Definitely went to the SSL review of that movie HERE.

"spanish girls in abus" - what are those crazy Spanish gals doin' in a bus?!?
I have no idea why that led to this blog. I really don't.

"betty dotson masturbating" - It's Dodson, and yeah, there's a lot out there about her and masturbating.
Probably went HERE to the ol' Betty Dodson interview.

"dildo centerpiece" - Ahh, a fabulous craft idea! Just for your info, we here at AnC went for a dildo platter (featuring a fake vulva) instead of the dildo centerpiece at the dinner table in our movie.
Bet ya it went HERE! Check out that pic!

"beautiful woman tastefully masturbating" - Why I say! That is lovely. Who cares where that search ended up.

 "pooing is sexually pleasing" - The Shorgasm?
 I'm gonna say, I think this went to the post about not poo-pooing metrosexual dudes. Otherwise, I'm just not sure.

...and finally...

"Trisha vulva" - That's my name and the word "vulva." I hope they were actually looking for my vulva.

9.27.2012

Random Hite Report 1



Hello, welcome to a new segment on the SSL blog, Random Hite Report! It's simple really. I flip through the pages of The Hite Report: A Nationwide Study of Female Sexuality by a one Ms. Shere Hite and copy the contents of the page where I land. Anyone who reads my blog will know that this 1976 book is a fave of mine; not only because of its shockingly realistic and progressive insight about the female orgasm but also because of its very touching insight into the lives of the women who took part in this huge, comprehensive survey. This is an under-appreciated and under-read book if you ask me.

So, sit back, getcha a beverage, and enjoy a little...Random Hite Report...you never know what yer gonna get!

Pg. 518 The Hite Report Dell. 1976.

talked to about other women. That was the first time I knew that other women couldn't come without clitoral manipulation, like me. I have had many wonderful experiences, some much better sexually, due to the cumulative experience of several years, and the tenderness and love I feel for my partner, but that one stands out for many reasons. For one thing, to learn that age makes no real difference in sex, that I was attractive to him, was wonderful for my ego, especially so soon after my divorce. Another thing was the twenty-four hours of anticipation, knowing I could change my mind."

However, quite a few of the women were disappointed and bitter about their sexual experiences.
The following three women explain at length:
"Sex isn't important to me. I'm fifty-eight years old, married to the same man and faithful thirty-five years. Lots of rough years. We've raised two fine children, a dentist and a lawyer-have four darling grandchildren. About five years ago, my husband at about fifty-two started drinking every night-knocked me around. I've never heard a word of praise except while having intercourse, and I keep wondering how in hell I could enjoy that when I'm so poor in every other way!
"I only have orgasms occasionally in dreams-about strangers. Kissing the back of my neck is most important to me to have an orgasm. I told him that for years, but he never does it. I do not like oral or rectal sex, but both have been forced on me. I can be feeling pretty mellow with vaginal intercourse and when he mentions oral or rectal, I go on with the  act, but the glow is gone; I hope he gets his fun just talking about it.
"I've tried masturbation and get nothing from it..."
"In the early years, I initiated sex several times but it never got anywhere-it has to be his idea. Sex is bound to be good if you are 'friends' with your partner-guess you can tell I'm pretty bitter. I went to a marriage counselor two years ago-I'm immature-my husband hates all women, starting with his mother he sends me roses-buys me gifts and tells me how stupid I am."







9.23.2012

Celebrating Songs About Laby-bation



Hi there, all! It's the weekend, and I'm not feeling so serious here, so I thought I would simply go for something fun today. As you know, this is a rather pro masturbation blog, and in addition, this blog is keen on particularly championing female masturbation. I mean if we ladies, as a group, are ever going to get to a point where orgasm in a partnered situation comes as naturally to us as it does to men, then we, as a group, need to masturbate more - cause once we realize how easy it is to simply orgasm during masturbation, then we can begin to incorporate that into into the much trickier situation of partnered sex. So, I say we stop feeling so squeamish about it; stop, for those of us who do do it, acting like we don't; and for those of you ladies who haven't tried it out, just start exploring down there. I promise, you'll be glad you started the journey.

On that note - let's celebrate by listening to a couple songs from some fab ladies who were rockin' enough to make songs embracing some ol' jillin' off.

Cindy Lauper is just the coolest, so she goes first. "She Bop." Yes she does indeed Bop. Enjoy.

Next is the classic, "I Touch Myself." It's not so subtle, but why do you need to be, really?

9.18.2012

Our Happy Hand

Share

Its Charles filling in for Trish today. I thought I would give you a couple pics of our Happy Hand character from Science Sex and The Ladies. This was one of the final touches we put on the film and if you're a 3d guy or gal please be kind in any remarks about my workflow/work structure here. I've only just learned how to do this and I'm certain everything is a bit of a mess.

We were back and forth on how to achieve the Hand Character for a long time, built lots of mock ups but ended up settling on a 3d version for little things like wiggling fingers and eye blinking. None of us knew how to do  it but we figured it out in the end. The hardest part for me was learning the indiosyncracies of  creating the hair. In my simple mindedness I wanted the character to be a hairy palm - but a cute one- because it is our masturbation mascot. I fooled around with glasses as well (bad eye sight) but the look became more academic or nerdy than cute and I didn't want to create a character that seemed preachy, because our advocacy of Masturbation is a corner stone of the film.

Happy Hand is voiced by the awesome Cathy Hamaker who also named it. I think she was a little worried about being credited as Masturbating Hand - the name we had for it in the script. I can see that.

Here's a screencap of the work in progress. The eyes were a little lazy here.


and a Final render. I was slowly able to optimize the render time from 30 seconds a frame to 3 and considering there are over 6000 frames of Happy in the Movie that adds up.



For all you techies reading this. We created Happy Hand in Cinema 4d exported an image sequence with alpha channel and comped it in After Effects. I exported with no anti aliasing because everything that I render in C4D has to be blurred slightly to match our HVX footage anyway and it gained me 3 seconds of render time. Pretty straight forward.

9.14.2012

Laura Berman Gives Bad Orgasm Advice



This, my friends, is a video of Laura Berman giving orgasm advice to a couple (Dash and Kelli). It is stock full of misleading, inaccurate, and frankly, harmful information about the female orgasm. I’m gonna use the word flabbergasted; not at the situation that a popular, mainstream sexpert spit out some shitty info (that’s status quo), but at how popular the sexpert is and how misinformed the sexperting was. I mean Laura Berman is a best selling author of sex advice, she’s a doctor – so she seems credible, plus she was a regular on Oprah and on Dr. Phil. I mean as sexperts go, she’s about as mainstream as one could get. So we can’t just sluff this off as some random YouTube video. This is the status quo. This is the bullshit that is being fed into the minds of a large amount of people; the kind of bullshit that is legitimized by the high profile types of media with which Laura Berman is associated. We should be really...well flabbergasted.


So, in this video Berman advises a couple in which the wife has lost interest in sex. She has been trying to do it once a week, to make her man happy but it's more like every 3 weeks lately. Plus, he's started to turn her down because he knows she's just doing it for him and not really interested. Unsurprisingly, he doesn't find that to be too much fun. Oh - and then we also find out that Kelli can't orgasm with him. She can do it by herself, just not with him.

Berman responds to this in the following way.

Berman: "Only 30% of women reach orgasm during sex, and if they do reach orgasm, it's through other types of stimulation, oral sex, manual stimulation, and so often when that's that case, it's an emotional mental block. Sometimes it's related to messages you got growing up about what nice girls do and don't do.
 Kelli: Yeah, absolutely. I was raised Catholic.
Berman: Yeah - so there's some guilt and inhibitions there.
 So she goes on about that. Then she says...
Berman: The other thing is that I can't tell you how many women have been to OBGYN's and never had their clit looked at or looked at it themselves. Have ya looked? Have you mapped...
Kelli: I feel like mine's...like just from showering in a room with a bunch of girls at massage school...I just feel like mine's all tucked in.
Berman: Right, That's what I'm wondering.
Kelli: ...and some of those girls that are all hangin out. I think they get to have more fun.
Berman: Dash, how's Kelli's clitoris. Does it seem normal?
Dash: Yeah it seems normal, but it's a little hidden.
Berman: Oh okay, does it come out? I mean, does it get bigger with arousal?
Kelli: I don't know.
Berman: Maybe you have a defunct clitoris.
Kelli: I know! I know! That's why I always wanted to come see you, cause I have to figure this out.
Berman: So I think you need a sexual health check-up in that regard.

Okay, from that fantastic exchange, all kinds of genious-ness was insinuated to the watching public.
1. Some poor women have clits that don't work (like those that have trouble coming from sex).
2. There is a "normal" way a clit looks.
3. Most of the women who can't orgasm from sex can't because they have emotional or mental block.
4. It makes sense for a woman to worry about not orgasming from sex.

I call super bullshit on all of this. First off, Kelli can orgasm. She said she could orgasm by herself, so it's highly unlikely that she has a mental block or a defunct clit. And by the way, what the hell is a defunct clit? I think she might have been referring to it not getting erect, like a man who has trouble getting hard, but even if that's the case, not all clits look like they are bigger when aroused. Yes, women get as much blood filling their clit as men get in their penis, but most of the clit is underneath the surface, and you won't see that swell. The vulva lips will swell when aroused, but she was asking about the clit. It's a stupid question for a doctor and sex expert to ask a patient. She should know that the little nub of the clit we see may look exactly the same size as it did before arousal. Berman also asked if the clit looked normal, as if the vulva/clit area of a women all look about the same. I mean that is one of the most diverse areas on the body; size, shape, symmetry, color. That she would expect an answer to that question to be in any way useful is ridiculous. And...to top it off, she didn't correct Kelli after saying she thought the gals with the hangy-out "down-theres" have more fun. Women have long been worried that any orgasm problems they have are due to their anatomy down there; the clit and vagina are too far apart; the clit isn't big enough, you know, things like that. However, scientist have been trying to prove these are issues for a long time but it just doesn't add up. There is not correlation between those types of anatomy differences and a woman's ability to orgasm. Berman really should have set her, and all the viewers, straight about that common misconception.

But back to the fact that Kelli can orgasm. So, Dr. Berman, really? seriously? It's a mental hang-up keeping Kelli from orgasming with Dash? If I say it once, I'll say it a million times, "normal sex" (you might know it as plain ol' intercourse), is great for stimulating the penis, the male organ of sexual pleasure and crap for stimulating the clit, the female organ of sexual pleasure. That is just plain true. I mean, might the problem be that Kelli just isn't getting the stimulation her clit needs during normal sex?

Here's my diagnosis. Kelli, you know how to orgasm. Now, just do that while you are having a sexual interactions with Dash; hell even while you are having sexual intercourse with Dash. Yes, it will be awkward at first because that kind of sexual interaction isn't the kind we usually see in porn, movies, tv, or read about in sexy books, but it is the kind that will allow you both to orgasm.

But, that brings me to the other problem in this video. The whole thing insinuates that women not orgasming from sex is some sort of problem; as if women are just meant to orgasm from nothing more than a man moving his penis in and out of our vaginas. It makes it seem like masturbating with your hand during intercourse or orgasming from other types of sexual interactions are fine maybe, but lesser options; ways to orgasm if the ultimate goal of orgasming from mere penile in vagina stimulation isn't happening. I really think that's how most people feel about it - at least to some degree, but it is crazy to think that. This just isn't a problem. It's just the way it is. The way our bodies are and the way intercourse happens, just doesn't make sense that a female orgasm would occur. The only reason we think it's supposed to is because people and movies and porn and tv all say it should. Putting something in and out of the vagina is simply not a good way to stimulate the female organ of sexual pleasure.

Berman gives really bad advice, people. It is insanely irritating to me to see another example of the sexual status quo reinforcing to women that, because our bodies and our orgasms don't fit nicely into the normal, accepted ideas and expectations of sex, we must be physically broken or incapable - or we are simply not equip mentally and emotionally to get things right when it comes to sex. For once I would love to hear some truly mainstream sexpert say, "Hey ya'll it's not women that are messed up, it's our sexual norms and expectations that are all f'd up." The normal expectations of what happens in a sexual situation could include a variety of things that ensure both partners have orgasms - and intercourse does not have to be one of these.

Stop telling women we need to change. Our bodies work just fine, and our feelings, mental hang-ups, whatever you want to call them, about sex (like when we become uninterested after we've done it for years without having orgasms regularly) make sense within these crap circumstances. Maybe if more ladies had an orgasm every time we got naked and dirty with our partners, the way men usually do, then maybe less men would have to coddle their uninterested partners with romantic presents and candle light dinners in order to spark some interest in allowing a little sexy time. Women and men deserve better sexual lives.



9.11.2012

In Defense Of My Hetero-centric Style of Female Orgasm Activism



Well, certain posts from this blog have been lucky enough to get some play on Reddit over the past few months, mostly on TwoXChromosome and SexPositive subreddits. I think they are 2 really great communities, and it's really cool to hear the comments about the ideas I'm putting forth in these posts. It allows me to better prepare for what kind of things will come at me once the movie is released. So, on that note, I want to address some criticisms that keep popping up in comments. Honestly, people are mostly supportive, but when they aren't it almost always comes in one of two forms. 1. Women telling me that the description of female orgasm I put forth doesn't describe their experience. I will write a post commenting on that in the near future, and 2. People telling me that my discussions don't properly include discussions of non hetero experiences. Usually "hetero normative" is the word put forth, and people often feel that in itself makes any argument I make a bit less valid. I will address this criticism here.

So...yes, it's true. Many of the arguments in this blog and also the movie we have made are, in fact, hetero-centric. The short answer to why? Because the societal understanding of the female orgasm is embedded deep in male, hetero-centic sexual culture, which means hetero sex is most relevant to arguing problems in our understanding of female orgasm. Also, because I'm not forming my arguments to influence progressive, sexually open folks or sexuality and  gender scholars. I would much rather create arguments that speak to a somewhat conservative hetero couple that has never read a piece of progressive writing on sexuality and is a little off put when men and women seem to pop out of the gender box. These are the people we need to convince if any real change can come about in our culture.

So let me elaborate.

On one level I get it. Open, sexually thoughtful people crave a society where discussions of sex are completely inclusive and accepting; where all forms of sexual expression get equal time and respect. It's a noble hope, and I too would love to see a world where saying I "had sex" with someone could mean anything from penetration to 69ing to mutual masturbation; where the sexual interactions between any consenting adults are portrayed in our culture as legitimate "sex" and respected in the same way male-female penis in vagina sex is.

So when I frame my criticism of the state of female orgasm in terms of it's lack within regular old penis-in-vagina intercourse, then I see that it strikes a nerve in some. It seems as though I'm ignoring all the experiences related to female orgasm (or lack there of) out there that have little to nothing to do with classic, hetero intercourse. In ignoring those experience, it is assumed that my more focused argument could not possibly be the whole story, and to some that in itself is enough to disregard the whole thing. I do, I get it, kind of.

On another level, I think it is a completely bogus criticism. My blog, my movie, and my activism are focused on the specifically physiological aspects of the female orgasm. The simple truth is that discussing things other than hetero norms of sex is really just not highly relevant to my activism. The ignorance about the female orgasm was born out of a world obsessed with prizing and preserving hetero, male-centric intercourse as the most important, fulfilling and legitimate type of sexual interaction. This ignorance has persisted, because frankly, that obsession, to this day - even 40 years after the sexual revolution, has not lessened much.

So, when I critique the culture of female orgasm, I largely critique hetero culture. There's simply not a lot of reason to do otherwise. It is what needs the critiques most - way way most.  Those of you out there who can see beyond the male-hetero-centric societal norms got there despite our culture, and probably incrementally. We must expect that getting anyone else to see beyond would entail first chipping away at the most normative aspects of our sexual culture.

Another reason I feel fine staying largely hetero-centric is because the larger sexual culture is so hetero centric that focusing on it alone is enough to spill into all other types of non-heterocentric sexualities. If you are a person who has a clit, a vagina, and not a penis (this includes those intersex individuals who have full or partial vaginas with a larger or more penis like clit), then as a group of physiologically similar people, our understanding of ourselves sexually is shaped in similar ways by the male-hetero-centric culture. So whether we grew to be a traditional hetero wife, a wildly sexual hetero lady, a trans individual, or a lesbian (wild or no), we still were all fed similar shit in our sexually formative years; depictions of women orgasming effortlessly from simple, hands free P in V intercourse; a sexual education that omitted information about your orgasm because it simply doesn't coincide with reproduction the way the male orgasm can; and insinuation after insinuation that made it seem intercourse in and of itself should be orgasmic for women and that we didn't have legit "sex" until penetration of our vaginas and male ejaculation occurred. Even for those of us who don't have to deal much with the orgasm perils of navigating P in V intercourse in our sex lives, we all still have to deal with the subtle male-centric hetero expectations that are tangled in our sexual upbringing. We were all still led to be confused about how, specifically, our own genitals work in relation to orgasm and how orgasms can best be facilitated with another person.

I feel like forming arguments about female orgasm in relation to the physiology of the female genitals and the actual physical connections that happen during the sex acts being discussed, allows the arguments I make, at their base, to be relatable for all people who carry around female or female-ish genitals. Even if I am discussing cis-gendered, hetero intercourse, the physical actions and the orgasmic physiology I discuss/critique would still apply to the bodies of highly male-gender-identifying lesbians or women who have never had sexual relations with any partners. This focus on the physical is where my activist interest sits; not in the emotional, relational, or spiritual aspects of a woman's orgasm.  This way of discussing female orgasm is rarely undertaken, but I believe it usually yields a more functional, more focused argument that is much easier to follow for more people than a piece of activist writing that tries to discuss female orgasm in terms of spirituality, emotion, relationships, or tries to touch on every aspect of every different sex/gender/preference possibility out there.

This brings me to my other point. I don't want to scare away the status quo folks. This may seem unfortunate, but speaking about things like patriarchal society or cis-gendered or bringing up homosexuality, trans individuals, or alternative relationships can be uncomfortable, distasteful, or scary to a lot of people. Even to fairly liberal, kind heteros like many of the people I know in my family and in my workplace, it can be boring or seem unrelatable. Most people haven't put much thought or learning time into the politics, philosophy, or science of a varied human sexuality, and aren't much interested or don't have much time to do so. These people are the majority, and when they begin to call bullshit on the female-orgasm-stifling cultural standard of sex, then things will start to change. If they begin to expect more realism in the male-hetero centric media, more female orgasms in their personal hetero sexual interactions, and more factual discussion in our hetero-centric education system, then we might actually be in for the sustaining cultural shift that I, and I imagine many of you, hope for.

I not only think this "hetero normative" approach will be a benefit for all the heteros out there who will begin gaining the tools for more mutually satisfying sexual relationships, but it can also make people who don't fit the old-school gender mode seem more relatable. Once a person sees that even a normal husband and a wife could have a fulfilling, orgasmic, sexual relationship without intercourse, and that it might even be better than the old fashioned ways, then he or she is equip to better appreciate and understand how 2 men, 2 women, or an intersex person could have a fulfilling sexual relationship. It becomes more clear that we all, no matter where we fit on the gender, sex, or preference scale, have an organ of sexual pleasure, and we can all enjoy a fully legit orgasm with any other person. That idea is actually pretty radical, but it could be significantly less of a stretch for many if they take the first step of re-imagining what is "normal" for hetero couples.

So, what I'm saying here is that when someone critiques one of my posts or my movie by simply saying it is hetero-centric, or hetero normative, or however he/she choose to say it; well, I just don't think that's a very thoughtful or interesting criticism, and I don't think it has an eye to activist strategy. Please, by all means, point out a specific area where a discussion of something non-heterocentric would have strengthened the points I made, but don't just disregard this stuff because you off-handily suppose I am not discussing enough aspects of enough gender/sexuality possibilities.






9.07.2012

We're In A 30 Must See Sex Blogs List Ya'll!!!



Guess what? Well, if you didn't get it from the title of this post, then I'll reiterate. We're in a list of 30 sex blogs you just must see!!! Get Lusty did a list and we're on there among such names as Susie Bright. Plus there's some fairly famous sites like Early to Bed, Feministe, and The Good Men Project, and then of course there's the sexy fun blogger Dangerous Lily - who I think may have been the connection that links my blog to the people who made this list after she caught and re-posted my Mutual Masturbation is Hot post. I know it's not the biggest thing that's ever happened to me, but it's really exciting to see that someone I have never met found my blog somehow and recommended it on their blog. I certainly appreciate it.

Now it says that they are in no particular order, but I'd just like to point out that I'm #2, so...I'm gonna go with it.Check it out and check out some of the other recommended sites. I'm currently going through them myself, and who knows, maybe I'll find something that needs blogged about.

9.04.2012

Orgasm Equality on World Sexual Health Day!!!



Hello all! You may not know it, but today, September 4th, is World Sexual Health Day. Now, sexual health in the most classic sense is not something I really have discussed on this blog, but I actually think that this blog is all about sexual health. It's not about condoms or disease or all the things we normally think about when we say sexual health; all the things you learn about in sex ed at school (if you were even lucky enough to have had a sex ed as part of your education). This blog is about the part of sexual health that is too sexy to talk about in school and too raw to discuss or depict accurately in the media. This blog is about the female orgasm; in all its glory, secrecy, confusion, and unfortunate scarcity. And, it's about the women who have to navigate their sexual lives within a culture that misleads both men and women about the realities of female sexual release. This blog to me is about Orgasm Equality.

I believe a healthy sexuality must include a feeling of control and empowerment over one's own sexual release. Women as a whole are not there yet. Certainly not to the extent men are. My blog and my movie are a part of a long but largely hidden line of activism that works to change that. So, today on World Sexual Health Day, I just want to say aloud (or on a blog, I guess) that I am passionate about this issue, and I think everyday about how to push it further and to more people. Orgasm Equality, my friends!!!!!

9.01.2012

5 Minutes to Orgasm Everytime You Make Love - an SSL Review



Hold the phones. I found the book of my dreams. Okay, not the book of my dreams. I have a couple really, but this is a book of my dreams, and honestly, that's a little intensified because it was so unexpected. 5 Minutes to Orgasm Everytime you Make Love by D. Claire Hutchins; it's exactly what I've been scouring the sex advice section of bookstores over the past 14 years for. I found it at a Half Priced Books here in Indy (I do love that place).

Frankly, the title turned me off along with the cover that included a woman with eyes close, face upturned in pleasure. It looked like some gimmicky, bullshit book that was going to go through breathing exercises or something like that so women could relax and really be in the moment - that, they would say will guarantee a quick orgasm every time. I thought it would be ridiculous and irritating, and so of course, I had to read a bit to get the gist.

Turns out, it was what I hoped every other advice book I looked into would be; realistic, to the point, and absolutely correct. I'll sum it up in a couple lines. If you want to orgasm quickly, easily, and reliably when having sex, then get your hand down there, and do it. That's it. If you already masturbate, you know how to do it. Just incorporate that into your sex act. If you don't masturbate, get to learning. Take ownership over your orgasm just like men take ownership over theirs. Stop handing over the responsibility of your orgasm to your partner.

There is, of course, more information in there about how to move in that direction. I will say, too, that it goes along in a self-help-y step by step way that is kind of unnecessary in my opinion, but it's probably more marketable. Plus, it's fine. The content is so right on I couldn't possibly complain...and bonus - it's a super, super quick read, and that's coming from an extremely slow reader like myself. If you are currently able to orgasm during masturbation, but would like to orgasm more frequently or easily during partner sex, this is absolutely the book I would recommend. If you haven't masturbated yet and want to orgasm more frequently or easily during partner sex, then I recommend first to read For Yourself and then pick up this book. That's the only sex advice I will give, and it boils down to know how to masturbate and use it during partnered sexual activity.

That this book and these sentiments are novel, blows my mind. Most women who masturbate can orgasm easily, reliably, and quickly. Yet, we still have this strong cultural storyline of women's orgasms being the "slowcooker." We're supposedly less capable and equip to orgasm, and we supposedly tie our orgasm to emotion more. That's what sexperts, scientists, and cultural lore tells us and what we tell ourselves. We take 30 minutes. Men take 5. Yeah, if you're talking about intercourse, where a man is getting plenty of penile stimulation and a woman is getting little to no clitoral stimulation. It's stupid. Women need clit stimulation to orgasm, men need penile stimulation. Intercourse alone does one of those things very well. If we put all that together, it's easy to see that women could orgasm easily during sex. We just need to think of sex differently and make it happen.

This is not the only book out there that says this, but it is the only book that I've seen made after the early 70's that does. Some feminist books during that time, like The Hite Report, say the same stuff. 5 Minutes to Orgasm was made in 1998, just around the time I was becoming sexually active, but I never saw this book or the books of the early 70's. I, and I'm guessing any other woman who's figured this out in her own sex life, had to come to it on her own through trial, error, and often a supportive partner. That's a damn shame. This is simple stuff, but our cultural understanding of sex has us so confused and mixed up that we can't see it clearly. Reading the reviews of this book on Amazon and Overstock are even more discouraging. Women are very resistant to this kind of advice. There is still a deep, strong feeling out there that women should be able to have fabulous orgasms simply from the act of intercourse, and any other way of achieving orgasm is not real or is lesser in some way. If that's your feeling, then good luck finding that illusive magical secret to orgasming reliably, quickly, and easily during intercourse. Let me know how that turns out.

 The books of the 70's and this book, should have changed the way we think about and approach sex in this culture. Yes, they have pushed against that wall, but it hasn't been broken yet. My movie (Science, Sex and the Ladies) will definitely help push, and I hope, hope, hope, something will break - even if it's just a crack.

Thanks D. Claire Hutchins. I will be after you for an interview - so watch out!