pantryslut: (cleavage)
When doctors recommend "no sex" (as with certain pregnancy complications, detailed in an earlier post), they always mean the same thing that the mainstream culture means when they say "sex": what some of us queers tend to call "penis in vagina sex" (PinV or PnV for short). It's just a base heteronormative assumption, one that's extraordinarily common and one that, say, obstetricians are particularly prone not to question because, hey, that's how most of their patients became their patients in the first place, if you see what I mean.

It always reminds me of the subject line of one of the advice posts at the site I work for: "fisting after sex?" I actually yelled at the screen "Fisting *is* sex, dammit!" in frustration.
pantryslut: (pregnant)
Rather than quote the actual questions here (you can see them at the original post), I've grouped things together into topics and restated the questions to help organize the material a little bit. If you feel you've been misquoted, or I missed the point, or I've forgotten you, just holler.

Wait, you mean you can have penetrative sex while pregnant? I didn't know that. Details? )

I want to know about positions! )

How about your sex drive? Have your preferences or capabilities changed? )

I hear your orgasms are different... )

Do the babies react in any way to your having sex? How? )


And I think that about covers it! If you have more questions, go ahead and ask below.
pantryslut: (pregnant)
Yesterday, many people expressed to G. interest in the details of [his and] my sex life -- specifically, pregnancy and my [/our] sex life.

Which is cool. I'm a sex writer and all. I am happy to share. In fact, I feel a little guilty that I haven't already shared, like I've been holding out on you all. Not my intention :)

But, like you folks, I am curious.

What exactly is it that you'd like to know?

I'm serious. Ask me your burning pregnancy sex questions in the comments below, and I will answer them to the best of my ability. Anonymous is on (screened), so if you're shy but polite, you can go that route.

I'm taking any and all sorts of questions -- from practical details to body quirks to more conceptual queries. 'Dumb' questions, subtle questions, weird questions, nosy questions, blunt questions. Bring 'em on.

Keep in mind, though, that I am not a "pregnancy sexpert" and all answers will be about me, me, me, and my experience only. And, of course, I'm not done yet :), so things may change later.

And, because I love you all and want you to be happy, I will also share my general impressions in an ongoing fashion without any specific prompts from here on out.

And I will probably put it behind cuts for the squeamish... ;)

OK? Go!
pantryslut: (cleavage)
I really ought to write something in defense of man-boobs. Because, you know, I kinda like. And I am not ashamed.
pantryslut: (freaks)
Two more things on my mind today...

1. I am also really over White Knights and the men who think they are one. Get off the damn horse already.

2. I am having trouble articulating my mixed feelings about things said recently in regards to consent and performative sexuality, as part of the fallout of the Open Source Boob Project. Because, you know, I'm queer, and sometimes I like holding hands with my non-normatively-heterosexual-looking partners, and people tend to get freaked out by that, and I don't really give a fuck about their consent, much less their "discomfort," thank you. You know? We're back to the need for an analysis of power, aren't we? We're back to: who's more likely to get the short end of the violence stick -- the 19-year-old Goth girl on a leash (so offensive!), or the Italian billionaire groping someone in Monaco?

Yeah. Not articulate. No position paper. Just saying, "it's more complex than 'don't frighten the horses,'" I guess.
pantryslut: (cleavage)
I just wanted to note here that when I posted my little vent of yesterday morning, I was not yet aware that there was a sustained critique of the Open Source Boob Project all over the blogosphere. I had heard about it the night before, was immediately skeeved, went to bed thinking about why, woke up, articulated a piece of it, and that was that. I wasn't really intending to lay out a sustained analysis, and I didn't think that many other people would even necessarily know what I was talking about.

I am really tremendously impressed and pleased to see the similarly appalled reactions and subsequent detailed discussions going on about it here, there, and everywhere. I mean, I knew I wasn't the only one, but damn. I love you folks.

I have to say, though, that if anyone has come away with the impression that this sort of socially clueless male entitlement exists only at SF cons, well, let me tell you about some of the stuff I used to hear walking down the block in my old neighborhood, then. You know? Alternatively, watch an hour or two of any network sitcom...
pantryslut: (cleavage)
(note ironic icon)

The Open Source Boob Project is a perfect illustration of the limits of sex-positive discourse. If you don't have a critique of power embedded in there, the result is the same old, same old -- my female body, passive and accessible and sexualized, end of story. I don't care if women want to touch them, too. (Them, not me. Oh, but it isn't about reducing me to a body part, honest! I lurve your mind, too!) I don't care how nicely you ask. I do not gain empowerment or self-respect or enlightenment from your gaze, much less your sweaty little palm. Geddit? And you know, I have spent my *entire life from about 5th grade on* with people who weren't attracted to *me* (ugly, fattie), but really wanted to feel up my chest. Please? But I asked so nicely! Of course you can always say no! I respect your limits! No pressure! Don't you see I was paying a compliment? We are trying to create a better, more honest world, you know.

Feh. Had to get that out of my system.

LOLcocks

Apr. 18th, 2008 02:06 pm
pantryslut: (Default)
By request.

These were spawned from a discussion with [livejournal.com profile] badgerbag about how many women have experienced the phenomenon of men acquaintances sending them unsolicited photos of their junk. What's the appropriate response? Give 'em a LOLcaption and send 'em back. Examples follow.


NSFW. Srsly. )
pantryslut: (casual sex)
So I see this article entitled "How To Seduce A New Mother," and of course, I am compelled to click on it.

It starts out quite promisingly: a new mother is hanging out with her new mother friends in a coffeehouse. She is spending a lot of time with them these days, you know. Oh, goody, I think. She's going to seduce one of her friends! Lesbian mommies a go go!

But no, it quickly becomes "get yr man to do some housework. Feather dusters are hawt."

Argh.
pantryslut: (work)
Bwahaha! Every word he says is true!

Thomas Roche on porn reviewing, or, "The Pro Circuit: Free Porn, A Nightmare."

"It’s probably a testament to my Bangsian gusto that it took some months of frenetic viewing for the porno rose to lose its blush. I think it happened right about the time I discovered that my office was so packed with the stuff that I needed to actually sit on boxes of free porn in order to review my free porn."
pantryslut: (vanilla)
It has been noted today that I laugh a lot when having sex. No, like, a lot a lot. More than that, even. Some of you know exactly what I mean :) And we're not even counting the tickling my feet at the sex party thing, which involved not only laughing but shrieking and cursing.

Better than that, I seem to have a knack at making other people laugh during sex. Again, some of you know exactly what I mean. It's not like I go out of my way to try or anything, I just...have a knack, I guess. I push the right buttons, the ones labeled "giggle now."

I dunno, sex is fun, right? Don't *you* laugh when you're having fun?
pantryslut: (freaks)
I cannot tell you how teeth-grittingly angry statements like "women can easily get sex [from men] anywhere, they just need to go to a bar or a grocery store or other public space" make me.*

This shit makes me so mad, in fact, that I become completely inarticulate in the face of it. It's just so wrongheaded, I don't know where to start disentangling the morass of incorrect, sexist assumptions here.

I, of course, am not actually entitled to critique this idea, b/c when people like this say "women," they do not mean me. I am fat, and I wear pants and no make-up, and you know the rest. I am ugly and undesirable and that's not what they meant.

But I'm not the first to be teed off on this subject, and, fortunately, other people can be more articulate than I. Back in December, for example, prominent blogger Chelsea Girl wrote an excellent polemic on just this subject.

"The generalization that really bothers me today, and mostly because it arose as the basis for a comment to a recent post of mine wherein I lamented my recent lack of sexual activity, is this: that women can always get laid, whereas it’s ever a challenge to men.

Pondering this truism, I find it harder to discern whether at its core the idea is more misogynist or misandrist. It is an idea that glows forth ultra-violet in its disregard for women as much as it does in its disregard for men, and that makes it rare indeed."

The author of this polemic, unlike me, does qualify as attractive and desirable by contemporary heterosexual US standards. She has the credentials to call this bullshit what it is, as it were.

Still, lots, and lots, and lots of people came out of the woodwork to tell her she was wrong. Just plain wrong. Most of these people were men, of course. There was a lot of quoting of truisms like the "bad pizza" one, i.e. for men, sex is like pizza -- bad pizza is still pizza. (Which I think says something else than the people who repeat this stock justification really mean, but that's another story.) Men know. They just know how it is. We gurlz can deny it, but we're just deluding ourselves. B/c men will always take sex when offered. Always. They don't have standards, and they never say no. That's the premise, innit? Bad pizza is still pizza.

Excuse me while I choke. On laughter or anger**, I'm not sure which.



* To top it off, today I ran across this statement, almost verbatim, as "evidence" that my workplace is essentially a scam, b/c why would women need to post real profiles anywhere online, ever, in order to get laid? Now, my workplace and its business model may have its problems, but come on.

** See? Still too angry to put together a coherent critique. Might take a book anyway, and I'm just not that patient. I'd rather just smack anyone who says this in the mouth, please.
pantryslut: (Default)
Best. Contest. Evar.

"Bisexual porn movies have notoriously bad names. Don’t believe us? Check out the list of nominees for Best Bisexual Video from last weekend’s GayVN Awards:

“Bi Accident,” Devil’s Film
“Bi Pole Her,” Third World Media
“Naughty Bi Nature 5,” Macho Man
“The Bi Apple,” Adam & Eve

And these are the good bisexual movies, people.

Can you come up with a better — or at least funnier, or even more ridiculous — name for a bi porno? We’re offering a copy of the award winning porno flick “The Bi Apple” (directed by friend of Boinkology Audacia Ray) to whoever comes up with what we judge to be the awesomest title for a bi porno movie. Yes, it must have bi in the title. Extra points if you come up with an equally awesome plot description."

Link may or may not be SFW (I think it's fine, but, you know).
pantryslut: (Default)
This is a really powerfully moving article on the aftermath of the death of Emily Sander, a.k.a. "porn star" (Internet naked model) Zoey Zane.

"Many other writers employed Johnson's facile day-night construction, cribbed from the tagline of 1984's exploitation classic Angel: "Honor student by day. Hollywood hooker by night." In one sense, this was appropriate; the reporters and the filmmakers were selling the same titillation."

Which is immediately followed by:

"Sander's death is shocking. But what isn't is the fact that, in America Gone Wild, a "sweet, good kid" — as her grandfather described her to ABC — might take her clothes off for money and post her naked photos online. For half a century now, Hef's Girls Next Door have been leaning nude on hay bales and stirring lemonade topless. Playboy bush is a perfect timeline of both the country's increasing comfort with pornography and pornography's corresponding discomfort with the natural. Before '69, the magazine hid the bush entirely. When it appeared, it immediately began to thin, becoming less unruly every year — a patch, then a tuft, then a Velcro strip, then a sharp-lined eyebrow. And then, finally, to keep up with Penthouse and strippers and former Mouseketeer starlets, nothing at all."

Trust me. Read the whole thing. Some of the stuff from the message boards that the writer repeats is, I warn you, disturbing and sad. But the article is really worth reading. I don't entirely agree with the conclusion, but it's certainly thought-provoking.
pantryslut: (vanilla)
[livejournal.com profile] katasutra brought my attention to an article on the concept of 'slow sex,' an intended parallel to the "slow food" movement. [livejournal.com profile] katasutra was asking for thoughts and comments, but mine were too long for a comment box. So I'm posting here instead.

My first reaction upon reading the original article was that I like "slow sex" as a term for mindful, engaged sex a lot better than -- cough -- "urban tantra." See, I had occasion to do a bit of research recently into the latter term, coined by Barbara Carellas. I watched an interview with her in which she explained that what she meant by the term was, basically, "conscious," self-aware, embodied sex.

All of which is good, but calling it "tantra" seems a bit of a culturally appropriative stretch. (Her wish to redefine what "orgasm" means is another whole story, too.) I mean, yes, breathing and touching and energy exchange, all good, but at this point in my life it's hard not to see calling it "tantra" per se as much more than a marketing ploy. One that kinda irritates me, actually.

So in that respect, despite some of the flaws and assumptions in the original "Slow sex" article," I am kinda liking the term.

"Slow sex" reminded me, too, of something Annie Sprinkle once said: "The way I see it, there is junk sex, health sex, and gourmet sex. Junk sex is very fast, very genitally focused, and not always very nourishing. It can even be harmful to your physical and emotional well-being. Health sex is healing and nourishing. Gourmet sex takes a lot of time to prepare and savour, and it takes skill and knowledge."

The parallels to the slow food movement become clear here. And I think that the pitfalls and flaws of slow food and slow sex are similar: that it is an elitist concept that harbors a tendency toward snobbishness and judgmentalism about other people's choices, when they're not as "slow" as whoever might like; a feeling that one must ascribe to the ideal all the time, or be a failure for wanting M&Ms or a one-night stand once in a while; that "slow" itself is a misnomer in the first place, since it's not the speed but the focus that we're concerned with.

[livejournal.com profile] katasutra also asked, recognizing the Slow Food parallel, whether there would be an emphasis on "local sex." I say yes. Like this: the larger the venue, the more processed and homogenized our sexual cultural products will be. Consider mass market porn versus amateur porn -- and how amateur porn has changed over the years, toward precisely a more consistent and processed and predictable product, in direct relation to its market share.

Consider erotic writing, and what happened to it, too.

Consider one-size-fits-all sex and dating advice. Consider the binary gender system.

All of which sounds naively anti-capitalist and self-defeating if you look at it from the wrong angle. But all I am really suggesting is this: more diversity, less monocrops, culturally speaking. Let a thousand slow sexual flowers bloom. The concept behind "slow sex" -- not the particulars so much as the premise -- helps explain a lot about why I'm a big advocate of supporting sexual expression and variation, but not so keen on some of the more commercial, processed, "fast" versions I see out there, you know. Yeah, I think I'm OK with the idea of "slow sex."
pantryslut: (twilight)
This is the new erotica, same as the old erotica. (NSFW)
pantryslut: (vanilla)
"So, is it ever reasonable to dictate what kind of sex acts are “feminist”? Well, no, because then you turn into Andrea Dworkin, and none of us want that.*

It is reasonable, however, to think about the way mainstream porn gives priority to certain sex acts and the context in which they’re presented. And it’s OK to stand up and say “No, I don’t think those particular sex acts in that context is female-friendly or feminist.” Choice, consent and desire are what makes the difference and if I’m not seeing that, I will tend to think negatively about certain sex acts in porn."

(Ms. Naughty takes on the facial cum shot.)


* Gosh, it makes me uncomfortable nowadays to see Dworkin invoked like this. Oh well.
pantryslut: (cleavage)
I love this post at Manolo For The Big Girl. (Confidential to [livejournal.com profile] goodbadgirl: It's by Plumcake, so it is not written in the third person and instead uses the proper "I" voice ;) ) I meant to link to it when it was more current, but there you go.

It also makes me want to ask the question:

What do you think my sexy is?

and also:

What do you think is yours?
pantryslut: (work)
Someday, I am going to write a long essay on the trope of the vibrating egg in BDSM fiction. (That would be the egg-shaped insertable vibrator, remote-control-wise). They sure do make the women go weak-kneed in the stories I read. And all that without any direct clitoral stimulation at all!
pantryslut: (work)
Two things noted while browsing through stock photo sets:

1. Sucking your own toes, if you are a female model, is apparently a striking skill in high demand. (P.S. as it happens, I can do this.)

2. It's weird to view the sets of models you know died in untimely and tragic circumstances.

Profile

pantryslut: (Default)
pantryslut

June 2017

S M T W T F S
     123
45678910
11 121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 16th, 2017 11:44 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios