pantryslut

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.

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!

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.

(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.

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.

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?

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).

katasutra brought my attention to an article on the concept of 'slow sex,' an intended parallel to the "slow food" movement. 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.

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."

"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.

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!