A Little Saturday Night Comedy
Saturday, March 1, 2008

In the interest of combating sex-phobia, here's a tidbit -- (Disclaimer: I don't vouch for any of the rest of the "comedy" in Crackle's queue, and some of it was AWFUL, so you probably want to hit pause unless you're adventurous -- or bored -- or both).

Posted byPortlyDyke at 4:33 PM 1 comments  

Labels: Feminism, Gender, Sex

It's Not The Sex, It's the Phobia
Friday, February 15, 2008

My post yesterday was originally intended as fluff, but I find that it has stimulated (or re-stimulated) a long-suppressed diatribe in me.

The longer I live, and the more cultural dysfunction I witness, the more I think that the majority of my culture's problems are rooted in sex-phobia.

That's right. I said it. Sex-Phobia.

Seriously -- people in this culture seem way more freaked out by shitting and peeing than they are by vomiting, even though the latter is usually an indication of ill-health, and the former is a necessary, daily, health practice.

Hmmmm. I wonder why that is? Could it be that the orifices involved in shitting and peeing are simply too proximate to . . . . genitalia?

That's right. I said it. Genitalia.

Vaginas and Penises. Cunts and Cocks. Dents and Dicks. Pussies and Pricks.

If you're feeling a bit uncomfortable with that last line, you're proving my point -- and even if you aren't personally feeling uncomfortable with that line, let it be known that simply by using these words, I have just placed my blog (further) into the depths of parental control blacklists.

Why? Why? WHY?!?!

Why do "family level controls" deny the sexual nature of human beings, when every single human being (at this point, anyway) is the direct result of some kind of sex act? -- When "Teh Family" couldn't exist with "Teh Sex"?

The longer I examine it all, the more fucked up it looks:

Abercrombie and Fitch may display shirtless men everywhere that they want to -- as long as no actual shirtless men shop in their store.

Cuz, if shirtless men actually shopped in their stores, somebody might actually have sex instead of just thinking about it -- cuz we're all just mindless sex-drones who could not possibly resist a shirtless person of either sex -- and if we laid our mindless little sex-droney selves down in the aisles of A&F and did it, did it, did it -- then we wouldn't take all that roiling, boiling, sublimated sexual energy (that A&F is quite intentionally attempting to stir up in us) -- and channel it into . . . . . shopping.

Which leads me to my next point: I think that it is obvious that our culture is Actual Sex-Phobic -- not "Idea-of" Sex Phobic -- since sex is used to sell everything from soup to nuts:


In other words -- not only is it OK for you consider the idea of sex -- but it's completely necessary that you a) do so -- and then b) quickly suppress it -- in order for "Sex Sells" to work -- because if you considered the idea of sex and immediately carried on with a quick wank or a nooner with your sweetie, you'd be so mellowed out you'd never get to the fucking store.

Advertising analysts admit quite frankly that they use sexual imagery as a manipulator because it is the second-most primal human drive after eating. At the same time, we are barraged with cultural messages that sexuality is dirty/forbidden, that sexuality is part of our base, animal selves -- and, supposedly, the sworn enemy of our rational, civilized selves.

That's why the "family-values" folks are always ranting about how civilization is doomed -- Doomed! I tell you! -- if the homos can get married, or the kids see a naked boob at half-time, or Jane Fonda says "Cunt" on national TV.

Of course, since sexuality is such a primal urge, those who do the most to suppress it are probably setting themselves up for a knock-down drag-out internal cage-match with a mighty, mighty beast, who is likely to be royally pissed-off about having been locked in a tiny closet while simultaneously being poked with sticks like this:

I believe that Sex Phobia gives rise to an enormous host of societal ills -- including, but not limited to: child sex-abuse, the porn industry, rape, the subjugation of women, and homophobia -- I'd even go so far as to say that it plays a role in the creation of "Sheeple".

Explain? Of course:

Sex Phobia and Child Sex Abuse: When children are "protected" from real information about sexuality (while simultaneously being indoctrinated with the idea that sexuality is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman --a situation portrayed as the pinnacle of L.O.V.E., and anything else is dirty, wrong, bad, evil, perverted -- but never mind that we haven't told you much about what the whole sex thing is, just trust us) -- then kids are ill-prepared to understand what constitutes consensuality and healthy sexuality, or how to know when they're being abused, because they equate sex with love, but if they aren't married, then they're being dirty/wrong/bad, so they can't tell anyone about it, and around and around and around it goes.

Not to mention that suppressed sexuality in adult perpetrators is, I believe, the active ingredient in child sex-abuse -- because when you believe that sex is dirty/wrong/bad but are still faced with this primal urge, it makes perverted sense to channel that urge into something that must, by its very nature, be completely hidden. I believe that this is why so many pedophiles work hard to maintain a "squeaky-clean" image -- on the outside.

It's been my experience in analyzing my own experience of abuse, and hearing the stories of others, that pedophiles play willfully on the ignorance of sex that we actively foster in our culture's children. So it is that, when Uncle Greebly wants to play "find the candy in my pocket", the child is often left with a sickening sense of dis-ease and no functional words to describe what it is that they are experiencing. They just know that somehow, it is wrong, and usually, they project this wrongness onto themselves, rather than their perpetrators.

Sex Phobia and Porn/Rape: When sex is dirty/bad/wrong, then often, the only way to deal with the inevitable failure of repressing sexuality (and I do believe that repressing sexuality is pretty much always a losing battle in the end) -- is to de-humanize anyone with whom you might engage sexually. After all - if they aren't real, then the sex wasn't real, right? This is the primary distinction I make between "porn" and true erotica -- that erotica is designed to lead you to connection, while porn takes you to increasing levels of dissociation (and we've already covered what I think about dissociation).

Sex Phobia and the Subjugation of Women: I'm constantly assaulted with the insanity-inducing Madonna/Whore Complex. You're supposed to be sexy, but not sexual (you filthy slut). If you're a virgin, you're a prize -- but only insofar as you are valuable to a man for deflowering and possession. While you're a virgin, you're supposed to be demure, dainty, and . . . well . . . virginal, but once you're a wife you're supposed to be a sex-goddess who knows 12,200 ways to please her man. This is supposed to happen overnight (your wedding night), with only shitty women's magazines as your guide, since all you learned in sex-ed was this:
I believe that keeping women confused about their roles (don't cry or you're weak, cry or you're a Frigidaire -- I'm sure you can't imagine who I'm referring to) -- is key to keeping them disenfranchised. While women keep running to fulfill the role that they think will lead to their equality, the ground keeps shifting -- because they are still primarily valued as a sexual object -- in a sex-phobic society.

Doesn't that sound fun? To be primarily valued as something which is considered innately dirty/bad/wrong? Wheeee!!

Sex Phobia and Homophobia: I believe that one of the reasons that homosexuality and other forms of sexual queerness is threatening to fundies, etc. is that it puts sexuality directly in the spotlight. For centuries, religious institutions (especially Christian) have dealt with the icky, messy, dirty, bad, and just plan wrong reality that Humans Have Sex by dressing up sexuality as an unfortunate necessity to follow the divine command to "be fruitful and multiply".

Homos just ruin the living shit out of that concept -- fornicating their perverted brains out with no end product in mind but pleasure (filthy sluts). In a sex-phobic society, queers actually do pose a threat to the status quo, because they demonstrate that baby-making may not actually be the entire purpose of the dangly-bits and the sticky-bits.

One of the things I've witnessed over the years in terms of LGBTQ rights activism is the intentional toning-down of presentation of queer sexuality in an attempt to assimilate into the status-quo culture. I've always argued against this, because I realize that, to a homophobe who wants to remain a homophobe, no amount of "See! I'm just like you!" is going to make them forget the real problem they have with me -- who I have sex with. The proof of this is that most fundamentalist churches do not throw homosexuals out of their congregations -- as long as they abstain from having queer sex. They don't have a problem with me living with my girl-friend -- they have a problem with me licking her pussy (and other stuff).

And finally:

Sex-Phobia and the Creation of Sheeple: If the powers that be can convince you that one of your most natural and powerful human drives is dirty/bad/wrong, and get you to devote a lot of energy suppressing, hiding, and attempting to subjugate it, you're going to have less energy to do important things like think, speak, act, vote, etc..

You're going to walk around in a state of fear that someone might actually figure out what a filthy little slut you really are, and spend a lot of time trying to keep this enormous part of you under control. You're going to be worried that, any moment, the scolding may start, if you slip up and say something honest and truthful that just happens to be "one of those words we don't say on TV".

In the dynamics of power, it's much easier to control someone if you intimidate them to a state where they will control themselves. It follows, then, that if you can intimidate someone into suppressing something as primal as their sexual instincts, you've penetrated into their psyche very deeply, indeed.

The only more primal instinct that would allow you to exert a greater level of control over a human being would be eating -- and surely you've noticed that the powers-that-be have been working on that one too -- shaming the nation for enjoying food, ringing alarm bells and screaming shrilly about the "obesity epidemic" -- an epidemic that they invented by arbitrarily changing the BMI and making 25 million Americans fat who weren't fat before -- literally overnight.

But once again: I digress.

There are many who say that the increasing sexualization of our society is a problem -- but I don't think that sexuality is the problem at all -- I think that it's the suppression that is the problem.

The one-two punch of sex-phobia wouldn't be a problem if we just got the first punch -- the sexuality -- without the second -- the socially-sanctioned and required suppression of the sexuality.

Take the porn industry, for example -- if porn were really out in the open, our society would be forced to take a look at the demeaning aspects of it -- but that's not how porn exists in our society. It's secret. It's shameful. It's everywhere, but under the surface. I think that the damaging aspects of porn rest precisely in its hidden-ness.

Let's look at that Target ad again:
In a way, I think this is porn at its worst. I believe that the advertisers intend for us to be titillated by this -- but we're not supposed to acknowledge that titillation -- just respond to it unconsciously -- because the underlying message -- "Woman as Target. Point Dick Here," -- if discussed frankly, would force us to talk about predatory sexuality as opposed to consensual sexuality, and to talk about either of those things, we would have to talk about . . . . . sex. Ewwww.

So the designers can maintain a level of plausible deniability, and say that it was just a design-choice, and that if they moved her down, you couldn't recognize the logo and, and, and, and . . . . when in fact, the design, as it is -- sucks, in my opinion. The pose looks completely artificial, and I can't really see the person I'm supposed to be relating to (unless I want to relate to her crotch) -- the person who I'm supposed to see and go "Gee! She looks really happy! Maybe if I buy some shit at Target, I'll be happy too!" (Wow. Now that I think of it, advertisers at Target have a really hard job -- cause I don't want to buy any of Target's shit. I can almost whip up some sympathy for them. Almost.)

I say: Down with Sex Phobia! Stop the Suppression!

Regardless of the current level of your sex-drive, you have one -- stop letting them talk you into suppressing it -- go to Abercrombie and Fitch and hump the first mannikin you see.

If the security guards come for you, tell them that A&F led you on.

Hell, it works for rapist.

Posted byPortlyDyke at 11:59 PM 10 comments  

Labels: Sex

Something You've Probably Done
Thursday, January 24, 2008

A warning before you read on -- this post is NSFW (not safe for work) -- if you work for anyone who is sex-phobic.

Me?

I work for myself -- and I'm not sex-phobic by any stretch of the imagination, so this post is not NSFW for me.

This post is about masturbation.

Like I said: Something you've probably done.

My astrological complex is: Gemini/Cancer Cusp, Sagittarius Moon, Scorpio Rising.

I could use that to "explain" the importance of sex in my life, but I don't think I need to. I like sex. I've always liked sex.

While there are some people who do not like sex (and by this, I mean people who genuinely do not like sex, as opposed to people who hate the idea of sex, or think that sex is dirty/bad/evil/wrong), and while I completely respect the proclivities of people who do not like sex, I think that there are many people who do like sex, but whose upbringing and cultural entrainment may have steered them away from a complete enjoyment of their own sexuality.

Hence, this post.

About masturbation.

When I was a teenager, Saturday mornings were the only real free time I had. Mon-Fri was School (or a Summer job), dinner, family/homework in the evenings, and Sundays mornings, there was Church to get up for, then more family. Thus, Saturday mornings were preferred masturbation time.

My mother thought I just liked to sleep late (yeah, as if).

As they say: "Practice makes perfect" -- so I did my level best to practice the art of self-pleasure. I also believe that my lovers benefited from my endless self-experimentation, so it's all good.

Please note the following video, and how it's "funny" because it's preposterous to us that people would be this completely frank and open about this uncomfortable subject -- "Playing in a One Man Show", "Engaging in Super-Safe Sex","Much Goo About Nothing", "Tugging the Vertical Smile", "Getting To Know Yourself" (or my personal favorite, courtesy of best-friend -- "Waving at the Pod") -- in short -- Wanking:


I've wanked in many times, spaces, and dimensions, with and without aids, alone and with others. Despite all social commentary to the contrary ("You wanker!", "What? Hole in your inflatable girlfriend again?", etc.) I think masturbation is a good thing, and I say that as a person in a completely satisfying sexual relationship with another human being.

Too often, in our culture, I think masturbation gets short shrift. It's the thing you're supposed to do only if you have no alternative ("alternative" being: sex with another human being). While making love/having great sex with another consenting human is fantastic, there are still times when some "quality time" with yourself and your genitalia can be just the thing.

It's odd to me that something that is so nearly-universal in humans is still the source of humor-through-shame.

Which is why I was glad that I found the following video clip.

When I first saw it, I was absolutely stopped in my tracks, and wondered if it could possibly be "real" -- however, I believe that most of the people on this clip are really doing what you think they're doing -- and the vulnerability of that astounded and still astounds me. This is one of the most amazing videos I've ever seen on the internet.

It's outrageously courageous, in my opinion, and I salute all the brave souls who participated.



Keep doing what you've probably done.

Posted byPortlyDyke at 11:54 PM 6 comments  

Labels: Humor, Sex, Truth, Very Personal Details, Video

A Modest Proposal: The Thorny Issue of Sexual Consent
Thursday, October 18, 2007

There's been a lot of discussion about what constitutes "consent" in terms of sexual encounters. Personally, I'm a strong proponent of just asking my sexual partner (even after we've been together for years) the simple question: "Do you want to have sex with me?"

Figuring out what to do after asking this question is a very easy If/Then statement:

IF Answer = "Yes", THEN *sex ensues*, ELSE *sex does not ensue*.

Now, when I've proposed this solution to rape-apologists some people, they have challenged my programming sequence with a very thorny "ElseIF" equation: "But what if she changes her mind in the middle of it and then accuses me of rape?" -- because according to these rape apologists people, this apparently happens all the time -- just every time you turn around, I guess (on some planet).

These rape apologists individuals also say that getting clear consent before gettin'-it-on is a "mood-killer", and one of them stated "unless a woman is chanting "Yes' over and over for hours without interruption . . . . any woman can then claim withdrawal of consent."

And that's when it hit me -- my fool-proof solution to the thorny issue of "consent":

1) Get a clear "yes" from your partner before engaging in sex AND 2) BECOME A BETTER LOVER

See, I've never really thought of it as a problem if my lover was chanting (or screaming) YES! YES! YES! "over and over for hours without interruption" during sex. ("Don't Stop!" and "Keep doing whatever it is you're doing!" also do not disturb me in the slightest.)

In fact, this situation has been so common for me that I had simply assumed that it was par for the course.

You may be wondering: "But PortlyDyke -- How do I become a better lover?"

So here are PortlyDyke's Quick Tips for Better Consensual Sex:

1. ALWAYS get consent from the other person(s) involved before engaging in sex. Awkward as it may sound, I have found that most people who want to have sex with me actually enjoy being asked. (I still ask my partner of many years, and y'know what? -- it tickles her pink! -- no pun intended) Yes, this means that you may have to deal with the inconvenient fact that your prospective partner is too drunk/unconscious to either comprehend your question or answer you -- but in that case --DO NOT PROCEED. See? Isn't that simple?

2. If, at any time during the sexual engagement, your partner says "Stop", "No", "Don't" -- then stop, no, DON'T! If your partner resists you physically -- stop, no, don't. Immediately. DO NOT PROCEED. (There are some exceptions to this rule if you are engaging in consensual S/M, but if you're playing those games without talking it over first and employing "safe words", you deserve whatever fallout you get, AFAIC.)

3. Now here's where the "better lover" part comes in -- If, at any time, you perceive that your partner looks uncomfortable, apathetic, disinterested/disengaged about what's going on, stop and ask them questions like: "Are you enjoying this? Is there something else you want?", etc.. Then listen to their responses and take creative, consensual action on what you hear. I suppose that having apathetic, listless sex may be a turn-on for some people, but if you want to hear that resounding and enthusiastic consent (YES! YES! YES! over and over for hours without interruption), then continuing without enthusiastic response maybe isn't such a great strategy in terms of building your sexual mojo. Jus' sayin'.

(On a totally serious note -- if you are having sex with a stranger, and both of you aren't sober or conscious enough to at least have a coherent talk about STDs and birth control before you make the beast with two backs or commence with the muff-diving/sword-swallowing -- maybe you should consider exchanging phone numbers, going home alone, and having a nap. Seriously.)

Posted byPortlyDyke at 3:17 PM 10 comments  

Labels: Bad Behavior (Others), Consent, Feminism, Rape Culture, Sex, Trolls, Truth, Very Personal Details

Scratch a Prude, Sniff a Perv
Thursday, July 12, 2007

Something I get, and two things I don't get.

I get that the phrase "Methinks the Lady doth protest too much," is cliche.

Why, then, doesn't our culture seem to get that? That's the first thing I don't get.

As glass houses come tumbling down about the ears of "RIGHTeous" men, over and over and over again, you'd think the accuracy of our Hypocrite Early Warning System would improve, wouldn't you?

Why is it, after so much experience, that when some asshat starts screaming about teh gay, or teh fambily valuez, or teh trampling of christian rightz, we do not simply slap a decibel meter on them, calculate the frequency and acoustic levels of their outbursts, chart the algorithm from past data, and set the fucking timer for their projected MMM??!! (Moments to Moral Meltdown)

I mean, really. I do not get why there is any element of surprise to the whole thing anymore.

It just so obvious. One of the ways that I personally determine where people score on the "gay aptitude test" is their level of knowledge about/interest in anything gay (regardless of whether this expresses as a positive or negative attitude).

Example: A friend (I call her "Sherry") was quizzing me about being a lesbian. I had always thought of her as one of the most heterosexual people I had ever met, but until this day, I wasn't exactly sure why I thought that. She asked me, "So, when you make love with your girlfriend, don't you miss the closeness?"

I was completely baffled. "What do you mean?"

"Well, you know . . . . the closeness."

"I really don't know what you mean, Sherry. Do you think we have sex, like, from separate rooms, or something?"

I then realized that she simply could not imagine having sex without having a penis in a vagina. She literally could not imagine it. That's why I think of her as unremittingly straight.

See, people who don't want to have a certain kind of sex don't seem to spend a lot of time imagining what it might be like. They also, in my experience, don't spend a lot of time insisting that other people not have that kind of sex -- it just doesn't occupy much (or frequently any) space in their minds.

The second thing I don't get is: How in the world do these people think they're not going to get caught?

These are some of the same people who supported Bush's illegal wire-tapping and internet-harvesting programs. Surely they must know that we live in an increasingly transparent age in terms of personal information.

Is it simply staggers-the-mind quantities of denial?

Is it passeth-all-human-understanding levels of arrogance?

Is it something in the communion wafers? I mean, really --- how do they manage it?!?

See, now right at that moment, I almost feel sorry for them. I have known the agony of the closet . . . . the terror that someone might find out who I really am, and judge me, and scorn me, and fire me, and beat me.

But I never for an instant actually thought that it was impossible that someone might find me out. So I came out of the closet, instead.

So what do they got that I don't got?

Oh, yeah -- they've got the "Get Out of Hell Free" card. As Kate Clinton once said (I paraphrase): "You say your confession, do your penance, and you're back on the street."

In the interest of supporting the Constitution and forming a more perfect Union, establishing Justice, insuring domestic Tranquility, providing for the common defence, and promoting the general Welfare, I am now requesting that each of you begin exercising your Hypocrite Early Warning System.

Exercise:
Choose a screetcher about values/morals/wev, and using the algorithm of past cases, calculate their projected time to MMM.

This is not a psychic, woo-woo exercise. Be scientific. Use your brain.

Special Credit if you successfully predict what method they will use to dodge responsibility for their acts. This is multiple choice:

1. It's a misunderstanding.
2. I've already confessed it to my preacher.
3. The Devil made me do it. He's after me personally because I am such a force for Good.
4. All of the above.
   

Posted byPortlyDyke at 11:59 AM 7 comments  

Labels: Bad Behavior (Others), Homophobia, Sex, Xtians