AlterNet.org: Sex and Relationships

The Long, Strange History of Sex Toys

Wednesday Lee Friday, Kinkly — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:43:00 -0700

Whether for fashion, decor, worship, or for fun,dildos are a part of human history.

Physical representations of the phallus have been around for almost as long as there have been penises. Whether for fashion, decor, worship, or for fun,dildos are a part of human history. So let's take a look at the long, strange trip dildos have taken.

In the Beginning ...

The first known dildo recovered by paleontologists dates to the Paleolithic era. Made of siltstone and polished to a high gloss, the debate rages on about whether its primary purpose was for religious ritual or personal pleasure. To my mind, this debate has more to do with puritanical paleontologists who can't conceive of a society where religion and sexuality commingle. The fact remains that dildos made of carved stone or bone were widely discovered among normal personal artifacts like combs and sewing needles. I imagine this eventually led to the invention of nightstands, and nightstand drawers.

Leave it to the Greeks and Romans to take the next leap forward. To get a feel for the time, it's important to keep in mind that Greeks and Romans were polytheists who worshiped a variation of Dionysus, god of wine and fertility. Also called Bacchus or Liber, worship of the sex god included parades through the streets, where giant phalluses were raised up like protest signs. At the end of a marital fertility parade, a maiden would come forth and crown the religious phallus with a wreath of flowers.

We also know that both male and female Romans and Greeks used dildos for pleasure. In Aristophanes' anti-war comedy "Lysistrata," women discuss using and sharing dildos while withholding sex from their partners in an effort to stop the war. Men going off to war also gave their wives so-called "olisbos" to prevent "hysteria," which was then thought to be caused by lack of sperm. Since these olisbos did not actually contain sperm, I'm not sure they'd really thought that one through.

Historically, the connection between female hysteria and dildos was something male doctors had a hard time letting go of. Romans are also thought to have invented double dildos for use in ceremony, or with a friend. The Greeks are responsible for the first use of leather or animal intestine to cover a carved penis, adding a more natural feel and a complexity of texture.

Take THAT, Silicone!

There's a funny historical rumor that it was legendary seductress Cleopatra who invented the first vibrator. Rather than being carved from wood or rock, this one consisted of a gourd hollowed out and filled with … wait for it … angry bees. If true, that might make Cleopatra the biggest risk taker in all of history. But then, what else would you expect from a people who thought crocodile dung was the best method of birth control? Although the bees make for a better story, it's more likely that Cleopatra used the same lacquered wood or stone dildos as the other ladies of her time. There is even record of Julius Caesar giving Cleo an elaborately carved, gold inlaid penis "sculpture." Whether she ever tried it out is something we'll probably never know. (Learn more about the vibrator's strange history inVibrators: Bigger and Generating More Buzz Than Ever.)

The Chinese were also considered great innovators in female masturbation. Back in the day, wealthy Chinese men were apt to have too many wives for them to service regularly. It was thought that providing penis substitutes would keep these wives faithful and prevent them from resorting to lesbianism. Ancient Chinese dildos have been discovered that were cast of bronze and other metals. Some of these were hollow and allowed liquid to be released at the appropriate time. Fancy!

In India and Persia, virgins were sought after and yet somehow reviled. You'd think the people who gave us the "Kama Sutra" would be a little more sex-positive. Blood from the hymen was thought to be unclean and best avoided by new husbands. Therefore, the local holy man would show up on the wedding night and use a large stone dildo to break the hymen. Sometimes this was done in the center of town, either in celebration or to confirm the virginity of the bride. In the story "One Thousand and One Arabian Nights," dildos are discussed as being made from gold or silver, or intricately carved and inlaid ivory.

The use of dildos remained more or less the same for a long portion of history. Some cultures didn't create dildos at all, preferring more natural items like gourds, plantains or unripe bananas. Like everything else in the Renaissance, dildos of this era were ornate, inspired and appreciated for their artistic merit. In fact, the word dildo comes from the Italian "diletto,"meaning "delight." Even as Christianity entered the scene and puritanical values gained a foothold, substitute penises were still an active industry. After all, they still had to deal with the menace of "feminine hysteria."

Hysteria, Womb Problems and Paroxysm

As the 20th century dawned and technology advanced, new materials were incorporated into the manufacture of dildos. Rubber was the hot new material for a time. Then something amazing happened. Electricity. One might argue that there's a big difference between a dildo and a vibrator, especially an early vibrator. And that's true. But when you're talking about the scourge of hysteria in females, a nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat.

It was believed that "female troubles," which ranged from headaches and fatigue to irritability and depression - could be solved through inducement of hysterical paroxysm, which you and I would call an orgasm. Hysteria was considered a "womb problem" and was the sort of thing Hippocrates referred to as "anything that made the woman troublesome to those around her." I admit, I had no idea Hippocrates was such a sexist jerk.

During medical appointments, doctors began helping women have orgasms in a very hands-on way. When the task became too time consuming, General Electric stepped in by making its fifth electrical home appliance. Yes, the vibrator was actually the fifth commercially available electric appliance, after the tea kettle, bread toaster, sewing machine and fan. These handy vibrators were designed to get those troublesome women un-hysterical, so doctors could go back to important work like inventing Viagra and curing baldness. (Now that you know that vibrators are considered appliances, be sure to ask if one is included next time you're buying a house.)

Electricity is certainly not the only modern innovation in dildo technology. The introduction of silicone was a great leap forward in the functionality of dildos used for sexual stimulation. Silicone is hypoallergenic, feels more like real skin than other non-porous materials, and does not degrade when used with water-based lubricant. Glass dildos are another way that form and function meet artistry. Modern tempering techniques result in blown glass that is thick and strong - just what most of us are looking for. Glass dildos are available in lots of different sizes in nearly infinite designs, and are also non-porous. (Yes, glass! Check out these beauties.)

We've Come a Long Way, Baby

These days, dildos are available in every variation imaginable, for every taste and experience level. Some states have actually taken the time to pass laws restricting how many dildos a person can keep at home. Try though I might, I fail to see the inherent threat of a large collection of phalluses. Ancient Rome's double-ended dildos remain popular today. Cleopatra's angry-bee-filled clitoral gourd, on the other hand, never really caught on.

Whether you're trying to cure feminine hysteria, stop the Peloponnesian war, or just enjoy a couple of orgasms, dildos have always been - and will continue to be - at your service. The best part is, getting one is a lot easier than it used be. And you won't have to carve it yourself.

Guys Actually Do Worry About Sex on the First Date

Mary Elizabeth Williams, Salon — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:20:00 -0700

We assume men just want to have sex as early as possible. But the truth is more complex

It’s a question that decades of sexual liberation still hasn’t diminished: If you put out on the first date, are you just a big, relationship-dooming whore? Because, after all, the choice about whether to have sex is always up to the woman, and the responsibility for whether those initial dating actions bloom into true love or having your calls go straight to voice mail also belongs entirely to her. Hey, here’s a radical idea: Sexual consent applies to men too.

Give credit where it’s due in the latest example of this old trope – when the Cut ran a story on “Fucking on the First Date? How It Worked Out for 8 Women” Monday, it did at least include a few ladies whose entire lives were not ruined just because they were down for it right away. Inspired by a new book (called “It’s Okay to Sleep With Him on the First Date,” a title straight out of the Department of Things I Didn’t Know We Needed Permission For), author Alyssa Shelasky admits she’d never go all the way that soon. But she also cites women who managed to find their soul mates, who fondly assert relationships launched with “our pure and uncomplicated sexuality from the start.”

That’s at least an acknowledgment that heterosexual interaction is more than just a game women win by holding out for as long as possible. It’s a step up from Emma Wall’s Telegraph piece just last month lamenting about men who still secretly believe that women who have sex on the first date are “a little bit slutty” and that “women who don’t impose an arbitrary period of abstinence on new partners are seen as easy, unchallenging, unrespectable.” At least columnist Ian Douglas gamely refuted it, encouragingly writing that “The majority of men, I’ve found, are rather pleased when they find a woman who wants to have sex.”

That certainly seems to be the case, especially among men who are secure enough to not screw a woman and then judge her harshly for it. My friend Dawn says of the man she’s now living with, “We liked the fact that I jumped on him. Literally.” She adds, “And if a guy doesn’t respect you for getting it on when you both really want to? Then he isn’t someone I would want in my life anyway.” And my friend Colin describes his first date with his wife of 16 years by saying, “I made the first move, but it was completely unplanned and unexpected. Everything just seemed to click.”

Yet it’s important to remember that the ultimate goal of every single date in your entire life is not a successful relationship. You can go out with someone, have very nice sex, but because of your personalities or life circumstances, choose to not pursue it further. That’s actually OK here in the 21st century. More significantly, when you go beyond idiotic pop psychology books and the idea that dating is a military offensive to be mounted with strict strategy, you remember that the dynamics of dating are far more sophisticated than He’s Gotta Have It.

And it’s still far too commonly assumed that the question of whether to have sex on the first date is one only a woman gets to answer. The default setting for a man, meanwhile, is ready, willing and able. But the truth is subtler and more complex. My divorced friend Neil recalls that there have been times when “I felt uncomfortable and pulled back, so to speak. It wasn’t because I didn’t want to on a physical level, but it was, a reaction to previous dates with other women where we just charged ahead, but the day after it was like, what just happened? That first date is such a crap shoot.” He adds that when a man holds back it can be downright advantageous. “Not to be too tactical about it,” he says, “but a guy playing a little hard to get seems to be a turn-on.” And my friend Paul admits that sometimes, he’s just not that into it right at that moment. “There’s the belief that we’re obligated to engage because we’re masculine and it’s expected,” he confides. But, he says, “When I truly want something, I truly want it and it can be wonderfully powerful.”

It’s not that men and women aren’t different, that biology and social conditioning don’t shape how we interact. It’s not that we don’t carry around our expectations and fall into certain roles now and then. It’s just that chemistry is complex. And in the real, grown-up, messy, fun and funny world, sex is a whole lot more than something that one person gives and another one gets.

Argentine Sex Workers Fight De-Humanizing Abuse with Legislation, Graffiti

Roberta Radu, The Guardian — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:48:00 -0700

Argentine sex worker union fights to change societal perceptions of prostitution and change laws that leave police harassment and brutality unchallenged.

On a Buenos Aires street corner, a Banksy-style graffiti shows a scantily clad woman leaning provocatively towards the edge of the building. Round the corner, the woman's hands reach out to a pushchair carrying a toddler. This, says the Argentine Prostitutes' Association (Ammar), is the reality of the sex trade in Argentina, where 87% of sex workers are single mothers.

The graffiti is part of a campaign led by Ammar, the first de facto trade union for sex workers in Latin America. For the past 19 years the group has been fighting to change the way society looks upon prostitution and make sex workers aware of their rights.

Ammar helped draft a bill due to be presented in the senate that would class sex workers as self-employed. If it becomes law, it would enable them to register with labour authorities, pay tax and get a pension.

"We wanted to show we are first of all women, mothers and breadwinners and then sex workers and that we need laws to protect us. Some of us chose this work and there should be a legal framework for it. We need it to end marginalisation and to empower us," Georgina Orellano, an Ammar activist and former sex worker said of the campaign.

Prostitution without pimps is legal in Argentina but Ammar activists believe the current legislation leaves sex workers exposed to police abuse because it does not establish any rights. Harassed by police officers at every corner, many women end up trapped by prostitution cartels that exploit them.

Given the growth of the illegal sex trade, Gustavo Vera, director of the Alameda Foundation, which campaigns against human trafficking, thinks such a law would be ineffective. In the past year, activists from his organisation have identified and closed down 140 brothels in Buenos Aires.

"Maybe a law like this would work in Sweden or Holland, but this is Argentina. Human trafficking is a serious issue and cartels are extremely powerful. I don't think there can be such a thing as prostitution by choice here," Vera said. "[Ammar] says prostitution can be a choice but is it really when financial circumstances push you into it?"

Orellano defends the right to choose because she considers herself and other women in the trade to be typical workers.

"There's an entire class that doesn't get to really choose. Does the maid or construction worker choose that job? Sex workers are no different. To put it bluntly, they use their hands to work, we use our body but we are all workers. It's not an easy choice but it's what we have to do."

Freelance journalist based in Buenos Aires. Follow her on Twitter.

Minors Who Commit Sex Crimes Shouldn't Be Branded for Life as Sex Offenders

Lindsey Bever, The Guardian — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:51:00 -0700

The punishment should fit the crime, certainly, but our system shouldn't brand teens 'sexting' each other as child pornographers.

Two high school football players will be labelled as sex offenders in an Ohio courtroom this week.

Seventeen-year-old Trent Mays and 16-year-old Ma'Lik Richmond of Steubenville, Ohio – both convicted of raping a 16-year-old girl last year – will be classified as sex offenders during their hearing on 14 June. The judge who tried their case in juvenile court will place the teens at one of three sex offender levels. Unlike adult sex offenders, the teenagers' names will not be put on publicly accessible websites. Nevertheless, the teens will still become registered sex offenders.

Rulings like these often restore our faith in the American legal system – not only should we punish those who commit heinous crimes against children, but we should also make their crimes known as a way of protecting others who could unknowingly become their next victim. Then again, it's imperative to remember that – regardless of the crime they committed – these two are still minors themselves.

That's not to say these teenagers shouldn't be punished. They should. Rightly so, their cases were tried in a juvenile courtroom. But now, the two face a transfer from a state juvenile detention centre to a facility that works with sex offenders – setting up a dirty past that will likely follow them.

In 2006, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act was signed into law, forcing states to amp up registration systems to track those who commit crimes against children. It was a positive step toward cracking down on criminals who are often considered the worst of the worst.

But let's not forget: children who commit sex crimes almost always do so with or against other children. Human Rights Watch released a report last month that spells out the harm public registration laws – which apply for decades or even a lifetime – can cause for juvenile sex offenders. The classification restricts where kids can go to school, where they can work and even where they can build a life. Offenders are prohibited from living near parks, playgrounds, schools or areas where children gather.

Federal and state registration laws have their place and are needed; but too often, the punishment doesn't fit the offender – or the crime. Yes, many juveniles who have been forced to register as sex offenders were convicted of grave crimes such as rape. But some were convicted of consensual sex with other kids. Others were convicted of public nudity – an offence many children can claim. It's time to look at these laws and establish clear guidelines regarding their application.

In 2011, there were about 747,000 registered sex offenders in the US, according to Human Rights Watch. Depending on the state, that number could include a drunken frat boy who got caught urinating in public where children were present, or two teenagers who can't keep their hands off each other. Most shocking, in some states, kids who are caught "sexting" each other, or sending nude photos via text message, could be considered guilty of distributing child pornography, especially in states that have not addressed sexting in the laws. That means that teenagers who "sext" could potentially be labelled sex offenders.

For example, a 15-year-old Pennsylvania girl was charged with manufacturing and disseminating child pornography in 2004 for posting nude photos of herself on the internet. She was charged as an adult and now faces registration for life as of last year, according to Human Rights Watch.

Should instances like these be legal? Of course not. But let the punishment fit the crime. Holding youthful offenders to the same, or even a similar, standard as adults can cause irreversible harm – ranging from public humiliation to emotional and psychological damage. Secondarily, it often causes severe educational disadvantages since the presence of young sex offenders in a traditional school setting is typically forbidden.

Rehabilitation should always be the first consideration when trying children who commit sex crimes – whether with a willing or an unwilling participant. With minor offences such as public urination, give them community service. For sexting, send them to counselling. And for rape, charge and sentence them in a juvenile court. But do not mark them with a label that could last a lifetime.

Some state laws are more careful to classify the wide range of "sex crimes" appropriately, but there should be a nationwide system in place to protect children's privacy rights. If the purpose is truly to put these kids on a crime-free path in the future, then give them something to work toward today.

Male Menopause? Scientific Study Says It's Possible—If 'Cougar' Women Have More Kids

Anna North, Salon — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:06:00 -0700

Study authors note that if women preferred to have kids with younger men, female menopause would be reversed—men would go through it instead.

Scientists have long wondered why women’s fertility declines after a certain age. Now researchers have a new theory: It’s all men’s fault. And over the long haul, older moms could have a solution.

Biologists Richard Morton, Jonathan Stone and Rami Singh have created a statistical model they say could explain how menopause evolved. If men choose to mate only with younger partners, Stone told Salon, this preference “allows mutations that otherwise would be removed by selection — because the mutations cause negative effects like reduced fertility at older ages — to accumulate in a population.” Essentially, if women were all bearing children early in life, they were able to pass along these age-related mutations to their offspring — they never got weeded out by natural selection. Over time, mutations conferring infertility may have built up in the population, leading to menopause for all women.

The study authors note that if women preferred to have kids with younger men, this trend would be reversed — men, essentially, would go through menopause instead.

And if menopause developed over time, maybe it can be eliminated over time also. This would mean not just extended fertility, but also a lower incidence of various conditions that can come along with menopause, from hot flashes to bone loss.

At least in the United States, births to older women are now on the rise. As more older women reproduce, will natural selection start to eliminate the mutations that historically made them infertile? Said Stone, “In societies like we find in North America, I think that a trend has emerged for women (and men) to reproduce at later ages (compared to even the recent past). If that is true, then, in the context of our computational genetic research, perhaps this would effect a later age for menopause.”

Older mothers have come in for lots of criticism lately, getting blamed for autism and other ills. But Stone’s research suggests that in one way, older moms could be doing the human race a favor: Over the very long term, they could have a hand in pushing back menopause for everyone else.

Stone also noted that individual people shouldn’t worry too much about their effect on humanity’s fertility patterns. “The effects that we observed in the computer simulations would take tens of thousands of years, perhaps more, to manifest,” he said. “I hope that we don’t ruin anybody’s Father’s Day!”

Should Men Avoid Posting Naked Selfies If They Want to Score Online Dates?

Jodie Gummow, AlterNet — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 14:25:00 -0700

What your profile picture is telling women about you.

In a technological era, the Dos and Don'ts of online dating are not always clear-cut. With a vast array of online dating options to choose from, it is easy to overstep courtship boundaries when interacting with the opposite sex as we try to determine what exactly constitutes “acceptable” conduct on our quest to find a potential match.

While most dating sites do not condone the circulation of explicit content or naked photography, in reality the online dating world is jam-packed with thousands of profile pictures comprising of half-naked male "selfies"—self-portraits—as well as men who are eager to send women lewd graphic material.

As an online dater in New York, the singles capital of the world, I have received my fair share of uninvited male genitalia pictures and dating requests from men with half-naked selfies. Whenever I am confronted with such images, I am always left feeling bemused as I ponder what drives a man to publicly post a nude picture of himself online. Does it make me a prude because I find such images distasteful?

Irrespective of my own personal judgments, what seems apparent is that many men do not understand that certain types of selfies drastically affect their chances of meeting their match. There is a huge difference between a man posting a tasteful body shot of himself surfing at the beach compared with a semi-nude picture snapped in front of the mirror at his home—the former option appealing much more to a woman’s psyche.

Likewise, while it is acknowledged that not all women are necessarily opposed to the idea of dating a man with a provocative self-image, according to serial online dater, Alessandra Doria, 26, most women would probably not view these men seriously as a potential life partner.

“If they have a good body and showed some intellectual interest on their profile, perhaps I would date them. I have my own version of a selfie and I’m pretty well educated. Over the years I have encountered some guys who have had the intellectual standing to back up their pictures, while others just have no brains. Men put these photographs up for different reasons; some put it up because that is all they have to offer, others because that is all they are interested in offering,” she told AlterNet.

So how does a woman who is seeking a meaningful lasting relationship online get the message across to a man that his naked selfie is not the way to her heart? One disgruntled New York woman took extreme measures in the most public way possible on such a quest. A guy named Trevor got more than he bargained for when the woman responded to his unsolicited naked online selfie by reposting the image on her blog and emailing the picture to his mother, for all the world to see.

The incident generated mass discussion, particularly from online female daters who shared similar experiences about men trying to win them over with shots of their private parts. One woman exclaimed, “To the men of the world, from a woman…it is not romantic to send us pictures of your penis."

Whether you agree with the woman's actions or not, perhaps the bigger issue this spectacle raised is whether men in this digital-dating era are actually cognitively aware of the message that their half-naked selfie is projecting to the opposite sex.

According to Jeannie Assimos, director of advice and content for eHarmony, if a man posts inappropriate self-shots of himself online, he is sending a message that he doesn’t have healthy boundaries and is in this for sex or attention. Moreover, any women seeking a relationship partner will absolutely run the other way if they see these types of images.

“As far as selfies go, the message this conveys is that you don’t have many friends, so have to resort to taking your own photo which can be a little worrisome. Many women who see this are going to think, does this guy not know anyone who can take a nice photo of him? It’s one thing to post this on Facebook, but if you are on a site like eHarmony and are looking for a partner for life, people are going to take you less seriously,” Assimos told AlterNet.

Referring to eHarmony’s blog, “Posting your Best Cover Photo,” Assimos explained that shirtless photos send the following negative messages to women:

You are superficial and spend more time focusing on your abs than developing other parts of your personality.
You are obsessed with physical appearances, and she won’t measure up.
You aren’t serious about online dating or at least looking for anything serious.

Yet, despite what the relationship experts say, there is still a proliferation of men opting for the "half-nude, muscle-flexing, pouting-lip snapshot in the mirror" over a good old-fashioned killer smile…so why?

Could it be that women have played a contributory role in fueling the male selfie-trend through our own online dating antics and profile images? To answer this question, I turned to the male users of the dating site okcupid, where dozens of men with half-naked pictures were more than eager to shed light on the male selfie phenomenon.

According to user Eugene, upon changing his profile picture to a half-naked selfie, his page received 10 times the attention it normally had from women—roughly 40 visits and 10 messages in 10 minutes.

“Mainly I put it up just to shake things up a bit to see what happens. If anyone judged me negatively for it with everything else I have in my profile and the 300 questions I've taken the time to fill out...it's their loss,” he said.

While this muscle-bound man was quick to shatter my pre-conceived notions about men who take half-naked selfies by providing me with stimulating conversation and surprising me with his knowledge of classical music, he did concede that such imagery can be misleading to women.

“I guess taken out of context from the rest of my profile, which is brimming with clever and intelligent anecdotes, cultural references and jokes, it could be taken as just another meathead body shot. Half of me understands that—I make fun of it sometimes as much as anyone else—while the other half thinks it's actually sexist and promoting a double standard to think that way. Girls are expected to show their body on their profile; women can be [half-naked] and smart at the same time. Similarly, guys can be intelligent and sensitive while showing off a little skin,” he said.

Another user, S3PB, whose profile comprises of nothing more than body shots agreed. “I think it’s irrelevant what profile pic I have. There are just too many guys on these sites and all we’re trying to do is get noticed,” he said.

Similarly, Navybluecrew with his rippling abdominal shots said that he receives many messages from women who want to meet him, despite the fact that he has chosen not to reveal his face.

“It astonishes me how many women have approached me based on my profile pic alone. I’m not concerned about my image, as I do not take this outlet seriously. However, even if I were looking for a serious relationship online, I would still choose pictures which do not show my face,” he said.

Of course, there are those users like Bigsauge76, who with such a name makes no secret of his dating intentions.

“In three years I've probably had 20 dates from this profile, and I have slept with five. I couldn't count how many women sent me at least shots of their breasts. I am presenting the image of a guy who wants to use okcupid to get laid. I do, in fact, have a separate conventional profile here with regular pictures,” he said.

It seems a large proportion of men with their half-naked selfies appear well aware of the consequences of their images and relish their high success in securing dates and attracting women.

Regardless of whether we like it or not, people are always going to draw inferences about who we are based on the image that pops up on their screen. This picture is our first and sometimes only chance to make an impression, so it pays to be mindful about what image we are presenting. When in doubt, fellas, perhaps Assismos is on to something when she says: “if you are really and truly looking for a serious relationship, my advice would be to put a shirt on!”

When a Woman Wants Sex Like a Man -- Why Do We Deny the Intensity of Female Lust?

Tracy Clark-Flory, Salon — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:03:00 -0700

Writer and academic Katherine Angel bares all in a strikingly honest book about women's desire, and her own sexuality.

When as a teenager Katherine Angel felt herself suddenly overflowing with lust, she began to wonder: Where are the similarly hungry women? In “Unmastered: A Book on Desire, Most Difficult to Tell,” she says of her burgeoning erotic wanting, “The words I would have put this into, had I felt the urge — the words I still put this into — are these: I feel like a man.”

This is a book for every woman who has ever felt like a man for being sexual.

It is largely a sexual autobiography, but also self-conscious proof-positive that women are capable of being just as desirous as men. She writes poetically about having her partner ejaculate on her: “I love this. The sudden wet coolness on me. The smell: summer rain on cement. Fresh, open windows.” Of her lover’s swollen member, she says, “It is beautiful. It unnerves me, in its gorgeous attentiveness.” It would be a daringly personal work for any woman to write, but perhaps especially so for Angel, a Cambridge-educated academic and feminist who has researched female sexual dysfunction.

More than the personal risks, though, she explores the challenges and contradictions of being a sexual woman in a culture that — oh, you know — fears, suppresses and devalues female sexuality. Angel connects the way women are generally socialized to be “sympathetic, charming, unselfish” to the ways in which they take on male wanting as their own — or, as she puts it, the “porousness, in intuiting the other’s desire, and conflating it with one’s own.”

She beautifully details the Fun House mirror maze of desire. She writes of watching porn, “I imagine sex with her — or is it me? — through his eyes. I see myself as he might. I allow myself desire for her through my desire for him.” (That is an observation that completely jibes with sex research showing that female porn viewers spend a lot of time looking at the women’s bodies and the men’s faces responding to them.)

Not only does she find herself adopting her partner’s wants but also protecting him from his own masculine insecurity:

Yes, you are my big man, fucking me. Yes, you’re so big so hard. Yes, you are everything you feel under pressure to be. I am not disappointed! You know that deep well of fear that flickers in your eyes? I can see it, I can feel it, and I am telling you that it does not exist. I am pouring myself into that well; I block it up with my sympathy, my empathy, my acute feeling for your anxiety. I am proof of your masculinity, of your endless potency.

But this isn’t pure self-sacrifice, as she later admits in a characteristically complicating conclusion: “I lock him into his masculinity. I am anxious to protect it, for it pains me, it pains my femininity, to see it fragmented.” In Angel’s view, she’s as invested in her partner’s masculinity as he is in her femininity, and they limit each other because of it.

I spoke to Angel by phone about how feminism initially constrained her sexuality, what sexual empowerment truly means and why she decided to include the story of her abortion in a book about female desire.

It seems that writing this book comes with its risks, given the personal nature of it, the subject matter and your work in academia. Why did you feel compelled to take that risk?

At a very deep level there was a story I needed to tell as a writer, that was to do with understanding the way these very complicated questions about sexuality and feminism and power and gender kind of play themselves out in my life. There was a story I needed to articulate, and I needed to do so in a very particular voice. Part of that feeling was looking around and seeing how incredibly problematic we seem to find women, desire, women’s experience of their bodies, all those kinds of issues.

I struggled to not repeat a kind of endless gesture of judging and shaming, and also just a kind of very sort of polemical world of opinion where people close down very complex, difficult questions, and want to diagnose something, or make a kind of universal statement about how women should act or what they should feel or how they should think about whatever it is, whether it’s sex or pornography or abortion or whatever. I find that kind of language very polarizing, this conclusive language that wants to tie everything up very neatly and reach a conclusion. I find that doesn’t at all reflect my experience of what it means to be not just a woman or a sexually active woman or a feminist but just of being a person. It’s not how I experience my life.

One of the questions you wrestle with in the book is what sexual empowerment looks like for women. Do you have an answer for that?

I suppose I feel that in a way, that question is impossible to answer, because I think sexual empowerment or emancipation is so individual. What I need in order to feel emancipated and free and powerful is probably quite different from what you need, or what everyone else individually needs. I don’t feel the urge to answer that question in a general sense, except to say that I think one of the problems is the way we seem to require women to rationalize their desire. I think we demand slightly less of men, in that way. We’re always ready to interrogate a woman’s particular sexuality and her choices — whether it’s the level of what someone likes to do in bed, or how they dress or speak in public or how they behave.

Another problem is this view we have that women’s sexuality and desire is always the effect of something else, the effect of external forces acting on it from the outside. The desire of men, or the desires of an exploitative pornographic industry, or whatever. I feel that questions about the effect of very powerful social norms on how we experience being women is something we need to be thinking about all the time, but at the same time I feel it’s equally damaging to women for us to be sitting around with our arms folded going, “Why do you do what you do, and is it OK to want that, and is it OK to do that?” I think everyone is trying to — whether they’re aware of it or not — everyone is trying to grapple with formidable forces of sexism and misogyny and trying to work out or negotiate those complex forces of power in their own individual lives, and everybody manifests itself differently.

One of my favorite passages from the book touches on the seeming separation between brain and body, and how you can become physically turned on by “misogynistic, coercive, tacky” pornography that depicts, as you put it, “dead-eyed unions.” What do you make of that disconnect between what the mind thinks and the body feels?

I guess, in a sense, it’s not quite clear to me what the mind and the body are. It’s not clear to me where actually we draw that line. But I think in all these discussions about pornography and arousal and sexual desire in women, one of the things that tends to get a bit relegated in the discussion is the powerful role of shame in how we experience our sexuality, given that at the very earliest points in our lives we’re being told by the culture around us that there are things that aren’t the province of women. We’re not sexually desirous in the way that men are, or we’re not into pornography or visual in the same way, and what we want is emotional connection and somebody to raise our children. All those tropes are so powerful, and when we’re looking at questions of how women respond to pornography, I find it almost impossible to talk about in a way, because one’s experience of one’s own body and bodily responses isn’t just a physical experience, it’s an experience that’s filtered through your own person, through every single conversation you’ve had about sex and relationships. It’s filtered through the sex and relationships you’ve had, all the messages you see in the media at every moment in the day. So I think trying to isolate these components of sexual desire has been problematic.

You write, “What is it to define, or even to know, our desires — to identify which are our own, and which result from a kind of porousness?” I’d like to redirect that question to you now.

Well, that’s a pivotal moment, I think. That’s where I pose the question that frames the rest of the book, in a way. And what I find interesting in that question is that part of me has an urge to try and draw that boundary, to say, “What do I really want?” I think the book is about trying to find your own language, about trying to work out what you want not just from sex, but also from your life as a whole. One of the trajectories in the book is sort of individuating and trying to find out who you really are and what you want to, in my case, write. It’s partly a book about coming to find your voice in a larger sense. But I think that it’s such an important feminist question: What do we individually want as women regardless of what magazines are telling us we want, or advertisers are telling us we want, or men are telling us what we want, or whatever?

What I find worse is that there’s a tendency to view women as more porous than men, if you like. So we tend to see male sexuality as a kind of simple, mechanistic given and that women are constantly prey to these cultural and social norms. The fact is, I think we’re all shaped by these cultural and social norms. There’s no such thing as an authentic sexuality that then gets encroached upon by powerful forces from the outside. Sexuality and our desires are things we kind of develop over time in response to this bewildering array of biological, individual, social, cultural cues. The challenge, then, for us as individuals, is to kind of work out what to do with that and what we want to resist and what we want to claim. It’s a profoundly feminist question, but I think the way the debate tends to unfold is that we worry about women as these passive, empty vessels that receive the influence of culture, and I think that’s something we need to make more subtle in the conversation.

There is a lot in the book about protecting your partner’s masculinity, inflating it, even. You admit that this is in fact not just in service to him but also to yourself. How so?

Our sexual desires are so shaped by ideas about gender. Whether we like it or not, or whether we’re conscious of it or not, and I think regardless of our sexual orientation or identity, we’re always dealing with ideas about masculinity or femininity, because that is such a powerful structural concept of modern life. So I feel that first of all, as a whole, that’s partly what sex is about. It’s partly about grappling with gender and trying to assert it or undermine it or play with it or fragment it or resist it.

But it’s also, as I point out in the book, partly about my feelings that part of socialization and emergence of a woman or a girl is the deference to man — make sure the male ego is protected and safe. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I certainly know in my own life the ways that I do that — unconsciously, as a kind of habit — and I wanted to be honest about that. I suppose I also wanted to point out that it’s a mutual thing. In the book I touch on how it’s a mutually calibrating process. I think my experience of heterosexual sex is that partly what you’re doing is taking pleasure in that. You’re taking pleasure in taking roles and enacting them. Whatever we might think about that, it’s a powerful aspect of sexuality.

You write that “guilty — excited — lonely” you “fashioned a feminism that contained my desire.” Can you talk about that?

That’s the part of the book where I talk about growing up and feeling unsafe and harassed [as a young girl]. It made me feel that I had to be very, very careful in how I negotiated my own desire and how I manifested it and how I expressed it. What I’m trying to do in the book is look back at how my feminism and sexuality emerged in a very complex, symbiotic relationship, and I do think that the feminism I was adhering to reinforced this feeling that to use your sexuality or enjoy your sexuality or to display it, to voice your desire, is very problematic, because you could be potentially playing into the hands of the aggressive misogyny that was out there.

It took me some time to realize, “That is not the feminism I want.” I refuse to take a position which endorses any kind of silencing of women’s sexuality. One way to respond to misogyny and violence is to feel you have to adapt your sexuality to it, and I think that’s such a flawed road to go down, and a lot of people have gone down that road, feminists included, and I think it’s dangerous.

You include your story of getting an abortion. Why was that important to a book about female desire?

What I wanted to do with the book is paint a portrait of how sexuality can operate in a particular life. Just my life, obviously. It’s just my experience, but I wanted to show that a life can be full of intense pleasure and excitement and joy, but can also be full of pain and episodes of suffering. So I wanted to include the light and the dark, because I feel people tend to push away one side of that equation, in a way. I wanted the book to be kind of a complex, spacious object that could contain these different aspects, just because that has been my experience of sexuality.

Oftentimes with the specific issue of abortion, again I felt that women – around the controversial question of abortion, women are asked to take very stark positions about what the experience is. And I’m completely pro-choice. I will fight to the last about reproductive freedom and rights. But it’s a very complex physical experience to go through for most people. Not for everyone, some people go through it without difficulty, but for me I experienced it with a surprising amount of distress, and I wanted to reflect on why that was. It was partly that because I was pro-choice, I didn’t allow myself to feel that this could be an experience I would find distressing, and then denying that distress about it made me more distressed. But it was also that I felt I couldn’t be honest about how I felt about it, because if I was honest and said, “This was kind of a shitty experience for me,” that would be betraying my feminist roots, that I’d be playing into the hands of antiabortion rhetoric. This sense that you have to take a very simple line, that you’re asked to basically betray the truth of how complex reality is — what it is to have a body and have desires and be a person — basically, I feel like that kind of insistence is a form of violence toward women’s experience.

6 Little-Known Facts About Nipples

Ducky Doolittle, Kinkly — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:53:00 -0700

Nipples are more interesting than one would think.

We all have nipples, those delightful little nubs. For many of us, they're actually what's called a secondary erogenous zone, especially for women, which means that stimulating them can send pleasurable feelings right down to the genitals. Even so, some of us are very sensitive and others find their nipples are an absolute no-go zone. Wherever you find yourself on the spectrum, we believe these curious nipple facts will thrill you. (Read about other, lesser-known erogenous zones in The 6 Most Underrated Erogenous Zones.)

Your Nipples Are Perfect

No two nipples are alike. That means that the two nipples on your body may not be a mirror image of each other. This is normal.

The larger outer ring is your areola. For some women, the areola is light pink. For others, it can be darker and range from red to brown. For some women the areola becomes darker when they’re sexually excited. As a result, some cultures have even been known to paint their nipples to darken them in the hope of inspiring passion in their mates.

Within the areola there can be little bumps. These bumps are the product of your Montgomery glands. These glands produce a protective, white, oily lubricant for the skin. This is also normal. Don’t squeeze those little bumps; they are there for a reason and opening them up can cause infection.

Females can grow hairs around their nipples. Our entire bodies are covered in fine, often almost invisible hair and sometimes a woman will have darker hairs that look almost like little eye lashes on the outer edge of the areola. These little hairs are more proof that you are normal.

Got Milk?

There are two features that are unique to mammals: our hair and our milk producing breasts. The scientific term for having nipples is mammillated.

Each nipple has about 15 to 20 tiny openings. Some connect to milk ducts and some to the Montgomery glands I mentioned. The little whitish bumps you're seeing let you know where some of these openings are.

Other animals, like goats and cows, have one reservoir called an udder. The milk discharges through an opening in the udder called a teat. Still more curious is the platypus. A platypus does not have nipples or teats. Her milk is secreted out of two round patches of skin on her belly. Weird, huh?

Headlights On

Erect nipples always draw our attention, although it is a misconception that erect nipples are an indication that a woman is sexually aroused. (In other words, just because she’s got erect nipples doesn’t necessarily mean she’s raring to go!) Nipples become erect for many reasons, some of which are not sexual in nature, like if you are cold, or if they get sensation from your clothing rubbing on them. And sometimes a woman’s nipples may not be erect even when she is sexually excited.

Innie vs. Outie

Inverted nipples are fairly common. Anywhere from 10 to 20 percent of all women have them. An inverted nipple is caused by shorter-than-usual milk-bearing ducts in the breast. Those ducts are attached to the nipple and, in these cases, prevent the nipple itself from projecting. So the nipple may lie flat or even push in a little rather than projecting out. Inverted nipples don’t pose any health risk, although they may be an obstacle to new mothers as they breast-feed.

The easiest way to check whether your nipples are inverted is to gently pinch behind one, around the edges of the areola. If the nipple protrudes, it is not inverted. If your nipple is inverted it will actually retract into the breast. If you have inverted nipples and are interested in correcting it, there are solutions. Gently rolling the nipple may do the trick. For pregnant women who need to correct inverted nipples for breastfeeding, check out a maternity shop for disks that attach to the nipples and are designed to be worn inside a bra. This simple device gently stretches the tissue and encourages the nipple to stand outward.

Evolutionary Awesomeness (or Trickery?)

Human females are the only mammals that develop breasts and nipples that remain full and prominent, despite the fact that they are not lactating. Every other mammal only experiences prominent development during pregnancy and lactation.

Scientists speculate that the human female’s full breasts and erect nipples are a product of evolutionary development as a species. For other mammals, large breasts would be a sign that the female is lactating and not ovulating, and is therefore unavailable for procreation. Human females have developed ways of disguising when they are and are not fertile in order to confuse male mates and appear to be sexually desirable even when they are not ovulating. But we're also one of the few species that has sex just for fun! (Did you know that humans also have a hidden erogenous zone? Find out where it is in Your Hidden Erogenous Zone.)

Triple Nipple

Every now and then, you'll come across someone with an extra nipple - it's not that uncommon! These "supernumerary" nipples are common in many species, including primates, rodents and ruminants. Guys have extra nipples more often than females; 1 in 18 males and 1 in about 50 females have extra nipples. And a very select numbers of people have as many five or six nipples. Extra nipples usually run down the abdomen, along the milk line, but they have also been found on other locations, like on a person’s foot.

Whether they're big and bouncy or cute and pert, breasts - and their nipples - have a lot in common. But they're also all a little bit different, and a little unique. That means you'll have a little exploring to do, both with yourself, and with any new partner.

Do Women Have Less Fun Than Men?

April M. Short, AlterNet — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:42:00 -0700

A new study shows a leisure-time gender gap that favors men.

Men spend an average of 34.7 hours per week on leisurely activities like watching TV, playing games, participating in sports and a series of other recreational enterprises, while women spend only 29 hours on the same activities according to a Pew Research Center analysisof pooled data from the American Time Use Survey of 2003 to 2011. The gender gap in leisure is about five hours per week.

The analysis reveals that while women work 10 paid hours less than men each week, women spend about six hours more than men in household work and about three additional hours in child care, bringing the total work time to 45.6 hours per week for men and 45.2 hours for women.

Among working parents in particular the difference in leisure time is slightly smaller, but working fathers spend three more hours of official relaxation time than working mothers each week—28 and 25 hours, respectively.

As the Pew analysis shows, women are less likely to spend their time between activities on leisure, so the gap among couples with children could be explained by the ways in which parents of each gender spend their free time. According to the analysis, mothers’ free time is often interrupted, which might make it more difficult for them to relax during that time.

The Pew report further notes: “...mothers tend to spend more time than fathers in multitasking; the additional hours spent on multitasking are mainly related to time spent on housework and child care.

My Boyfriend, the Sex Addict

Laura Barcella, Salon — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:53:00 -0700

I never believed in that diagnosis -- until I dated Jack, and saw what it was like to be powerless to your desires

“I have a proposition,” Jack said, a whiff of Maker’s Mark on his breath as he spoke over the din of the dive bar on a Saturday night. “Maybe tonight, if you see a cute guy, you could bring him back to my place.”

My voice rose, along with a sense of dread. “For a threesome?”

“No, for you — to sleep with,” he said. “I could watch. From the closet. He wouldn’t know I was there.”

I fought a swell of revulsion. Jack wanted me to sleep with other men? And he wanted to watch? It defied the laws of romance.

Jack and I met online four months earlier (although his name isn’t really Jack). He was cute, with blue eyes and dark stubble. Feeling lonely after having recently moved 3,000 miles from Brooklyn to San Francisco, I ignored my initial anxiety about his age (39 to my 29). He was an accomplished artist and musician and, being a sucker for tortured creative types, I invited myself over to his place at the end of our first date, where we finished off a bottle of cheap Cabernet before having hazy sex that I could barely remember the next day.

That wasn’t unusual: As a near-daily drinker since college, I’d had plenty of blackout one-night stands. Vodka had been a way to overcome shyness and depression since my misfit teens. I had long been self-medicating with alcohol and men.

That evening with Jack bled into weekends of Netflix marathons, chocolate in bed, and sex on the kitchen floor while making dinner. Alcohol was almost always involved; we’d go through a bottle or two of wine with dinner, and when we went out to shows or art openings (which we did often), we’d grab a drink or four from the bar. Nothing seemed amiss at first, and I didn’t ask many questions of him, or of myself. I mainly wanted someone to spoon with — though, having been single for a while, having regular sex again wasn’t a bad thing, either. Jack suggested we become exclusive.

Soon, Jack’s sexual appetites … ripened. “Want to check out Power Exchange sometime?” Jack asked one night, glass of Riesling in hand as we shared a blanket on his living room couch. Power Exchange was a local sex club where leather-leaning types could get whipped and fornicate in front of masses of probing-eyed strangers. “Hrrrmm,” I said, my eyes skimming the TV as I changed the subject.

At a bar a couple of weeks later, we ran into Abby, a friend of Jack’s from the art scene. She had long, straight red hair in ponytails, and a perkily upturned nose. He introduced us, then after she swished away, he whispered, “You should hook up with her. She’s bi.”

This again? “I’m not,” I snapped. I didn’t understand this need to bring others into our sex life. Was I not enough for him? Eyes fixed on the exit sign, I reached for my purse. “Jack, if you need to watch me with other people to get off, you should get a new girlfriend.” I stood up, but he tugged me down and hugged me close.

“I’m sorry,” he sighed into my hair.

Jack never outright pressured me, which made his suggestions easier to ignore (as did the merlot). And so I stuck around. A cozy warmth had developed between us. He was the most physically affectionate boyfriend I’d ever had. He treated his cat like a little Buddha. And he was unashamed to admit that he wanted marriage and kids, like, yesterday. I wasn’t ready, but I found that endearing.

About five months into my relationship with Jack, I started seeing a new therapist. (I’d been in therapy since I was 15.) After hearing about some of my drunken misdeeds, she suggested I try a 12-step meeting. She was the third therapist to imply I had a problem with alcohol, but she was the first one I actually listened to. She was an alcoholic herself, but she hadn’t had a drink in 30-something years. For some reason I followed her advice, went to check out a meeting — and then I just kept going. It wasn’t a conscious choice to get sober. One day turned into another, and as I kept with it, I started sleeping better, my head felt clearer, and I lost a few pounds. I could see how destructive my life had been, and how much saner and simpler it was without alcohol in it.

But that put everything else into perspective, too. In those early morning moments in front of the mirror, I couldn’t escape the niggling truth: I wasn’t in love with Jack. How could I be? His desire to watch me with other people made me feel like an old sweat shirt he didn’t mind loaning out.

We were having breakfast, about a month after I stopped drinking, when the subject of our most recent exes came up. “What have your girlfriends been like?” I asked.

Spreading jam on his toast, he said, “Well, a few years ago I was in a triad with two women. Then I dated Tina for a year. We were polyamorous.”

My heart clanged. “Have you ever been in a long-term relationship? Like, a real one? With one person?”

“I’ve tried.” His voice grew strained. “I’m not great at monogamy, sweetie. I was actually sleeping with eight other women when we met.”

I narrowly managed to avoid spitting my coffee across the table. “Eight women? Why? Who needs that many sex partners?!”

Later that morning after he’d gone to work, I took a peek at his email (I know this was sketchy behavior, but hey, he’d left it open). Since I’d failed to meet his fantasies and he was so bad at monogamy, was he getting those needs met elsewhere? I found an email he’d sent a week ago: “CRAIGSLIST – Re: MFM cross-dresser seeking anon hotel f**k.” He was attempting to arrange a hotel tryst with a male prostitute who would be dressed as a woman. I was floored. I didn’t even care that his date would be a guy; it was the secrecy that infuriated me.

When he walked through the door at lunchtime, I let loose a flood of rage. He shuffled his feet, hovered in the doorway, grew teary. He hadn’t cheated, he claimed — he’d never actually met the Craigslist guy, or anyone else, in person — but he had an addiction.

I knew that alcohol and drugs could be addictive, sure. But I’d always seen “sex addiction” as a lame rationalization for men’s inability to keep it in their pants. Still, watching him desperately trying to explain his behavior, he seemed so powerless and scared. I understood how it felt to need something more, something outside yourself, just to get through a day.

“It’s fantasy,” Jack said. He told me he never meant to hook up with the prostitute; he just wanted to imagine it, to get as close to that fire as he could without being burned. He said he wasn’t attracted to guys. “The transvestite thing was just about crossing boundaries.”

I wasn’t sure if I believed him. Still, I couldn’t help but sympathize. I had spent months blinding myself to our situation with alcohol, and now it seemed like we were in the same boat, just with different drugs of choice. I still wasn’t happy about what he’d done or the issues he had, but I caught a glimpse of the pain and fear that was driving all this crazy behavior. Maybe sex really can be a compulsion, I thought.

About a week after that, he started seeing a therapist and going to meetings of his own. I was happy to see him getting what he needed, but I had to get what I needed, too — and leave the relationship.

Hindsight makes it painfully clear: Our relationship was wrong from the start. I was lonely in a new city, drinking heavily to numb my anxiety, and I craved companionship; Jack was there. I’m grateful, though, for what he showed me about addiction: It isn’t limited to substances. There are so many damaging ways to shut up the blistering voice in your head telling you that you’re not enough. I’m lucky I removed the vodka long enough to see how badly I’d been faking it — in my relationships and everywhere else.

A few weeks after we broke up, Jack found another girlfriend. She indulged all his group sex fantasies, and he even propositioned me for a threesome a few months down the road. I turned him down yet again. Only this time I didn’t feel bad. I felt lucky to be free.

Why All Vaginas Are Beautiful and Labiaplasty Is Such a Scam

Tanya Lee Markul, Rebelle Society — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:26:00 -0700

While we're at it, pubic hair is making a comeback, too.

Have you seen the documentary film, The Perfect Vagina? It’s certainly not for the faint of heart.

I sat through the entire thing feeling squeamish, legs crossed tight, one hand over my eyes and a little curious about the look of my own undercarriage. Why all the tension and peculiar interest?

The film is about vaginal cosmetic surgery, and according to this film, it’s growing in popularity. So what is it about the vagina that’s causing a ruckus? Ladies and gentlemen, meet the labia minora.

According to Wikipedia: The labia minora (singular: labium minus), also known as the inner labia, inner lips, or nymphae, are two flaps of skin on either side of the human vaginal opening, situated between the labia majora (outer labia, or outer lips). Inner lips vary widely in size, colour, and shape from woman to woman.

Labiaplasty (930,000 Google search results), also known as vaginal rejuvenation, labia minora contouring, labial reshaping, female genital surgery or labial reduction, is the surgical procedure of reducing the length of the inner labia or inner flaps.

(I have also learned of a procedure called vaginoplasty that tightens the vagina and muscles surrounding it.)

There is one profound question one cannot help but to ask: Why?

As if we need another item on our already massive list of things to stress over, or another body part to obsess about. Why is it now a big deal if our inner flappage is a bit longer than the outer bits?

According to the film, women who want this surgery are seeking a more ‘youthful’ appearance and/or want to balance out the appearance of their labia minora with the surrounding tissue.

Some women have claimed to be embarrassed of the length of their labia minora. Some say they’ve been ridiculed or teased by family members or partners. Others claim the length has caused them to have problems doing certain activities or from wearing certain clothing articles. Others say that it has caused (psychological) difficulties in the bedroom.

The influence/pressure for wanting a more ‘balanced and youthful’ appearance is said to come from the aesthetic vah-jay-jays featured in pornographic magazines and films or the skilful yet deceitful technique known as beauty magazine airbrushing.

Some also blame plastic surgeons for developing such a procedure and the women who have the money to pay for it (the average cost ranges between 5,000-10,000 USD).

I also can’t help but to ponder, when did waxing and shaving become a part of our beauty routine?

According to sex researcher Dr. Debra Herbenick, young women’s pubic hair has been steadily disappearing over the past decade and that younger women tend to shave it off while older women choose to wax.

What happened to good old-fashioned ‘maintenance’ where we left a bit of the forest intact? Trees do look naked without leaves. Is a bit of pubic hair just not sexy anymore?

Anyways, I tried to find some statistics about large labia minora cases (also known as labia hypertrophy) and unsurprisingly could not find any solid numbers. In all honesty, I’m sure this number is huge.

But, just because your labia minora peaks out from your labia majora, does it really mean you have a problem?

According to the documentary the typical size of the labia minora ranges from two to ten centimetres (0.8 to 3.9 inches).

Supporting this range, a study by the Department of Gynaeology in the UK in 2004 shared the length of the labia minor of women between ages 18-50 to be 0.78 to 3.9 inches.

The fact of the matter is, the labia minora comes in varying symmetry, sizes and colours and are influenced by things such as genetics, childbirth, hormones and age.

What are the risks of the surgery?

I’ve read that some of the risks can include temporary numbness, bleeding, pigmentation changes, pain, decreased feeling in that area, asymmetry between the inner and outer labia, excess scar tissue buildup (that can appear as lumps), hematoma (broken blood vessels or blood clot), puckering of the skin and sexual dysfunction.

It is also important to note that there has not been any substantial findings or research as to the long-term consequences of such a surgery.

If you really love me, don’t you also love my dangles and bobs?

What exactly is the idea of the perfect vagina anyway? Not too tight? Not too baggy? Or in the words of this film “hairless, neat, pink and tucked-in”? If you ask me, the perfect vagina is a myth.

I asked ten random guys ages 25-35, if they thought the size of the labia minora matters. Here are their responses:

1. “It does not matter. What’s important to me are a woman’s curves.”

2. “I don’t think this matters. I don’t think men are that fussy.”

3. “For me it doesn’t matter at all. I actually think it’s quite sexy if you can see them.”

4. “I think it’s a total misunderstanding that any female would get this surgery. I think it’s a total minority of guys that would wish this for a woman. This part of the body is like the ears, it’s a part you cannot judge by prettiness and it doesn’t make sense to me to alter it. This type of surgery, if done just for looks, is a waste of money. Genetically we are coded to be turned on by a woman’s vagina pretty much however it looks.”

5. “All labia minora are created equal.”

6. “I for one, don’t care at all.”

7. “I’d much prefer that she is comfortable with herself versus being neurotically insecure enough to get surgery.”

8. “I don’t think vaginas were meant to look ‘pretty’.”

9. “Couldn’t give a damn.”

10. “I’m sure a guy is just happy to be there.”

There we have it.

Perhaps we should stop reading/watching so much porn, stop perusing beauty magazines and comparing our vaginas. We could also save ourselves a lot of pain and/or money by bringing pubic hair back.

Making love, looking good, feeling great about who you are doesn’t involve being what someone else thinks you ‘should’ be. Of course, it’s a person’s own choice to have this type of surgery or not, but no matter what, a little more self-love couldn’t hurt.

It’s not always easy, but a little bit goes a hell of a long way.

Lesbian Myths, Debunked

Jodie Gummow, AlterNet — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:06:00 -0700

Gender stereotypes about the lesbian community distort gay women's experience.

For a gay woman, it can often be a struggle to determine where exactly she fits in the spectrum of gender identity in both the lesbian and heterosexual communities. Many lesbians are faced with having their sexuality evaluated purely on the basis of their looks, as if sexuality is something that can be “seen” on the body to warrant approval, while others are not “accepted” for failing to act in a certain way. Such narrow-minded, misguided stereotypes create numerous social problems in advancing gay rights and raise an important question of what gender identity means for lesbians today.

According to mental health counselor Tara Lombardo, of the LGBT psychotherapy center, Institute for Human Identity (IHI), gender stereotypes about lesbians are merely an extension of “internalized homophobia.” In other words, the LGBT community has adopted society’s standard of what it means to be straight or gay based on the only model it knows—heterosexual relationships. In essence, it has had to borrow from this prototype.

“For lesbians, representation appears to be 'owned' by heterosexual attitudes that personify what lesbians are and are not, and this is related to women’s sexuality being invisible and based on attraction. A lot of femininity is based on the male gaze. If you remove the male perspective, you have to figure out the female gaze and at this point we still don’t know what exactly that is in the gay community. It has been a long trek for lesbians to come out and work out where they identify within these pre-determined social scripts that exist,” Lombardo explained to AlterNet.

A growing body of social science research suggests that the proliferation of gay marriage is redefining the way we view gender and specifically gender roles within family life. According to Liza Mundy in her recent article, “The Gay Guided to Wedded Bliss,” research has shown that same-sex unions are happier than heterosexual marriages, with lesbian couples experiencing the most intimate relationships compared with their heterosexual and male gay counterparts.

“Same-sex spouses, who cannot divide their labor based on pre-existing gender norms, must approach marriage differently than their heterosexual peers. From sex to fighting, from child-rearing to chores, they must hammer out every last detail of domestic life without falling back on assumptions about who will do what. In this regard, they provide an example that can be enlightening to all couples,” Mundy said.

While the critics of gay marriage warn of the effects of a “genderless” society, Mundy believes gay marriage can help us to shed ancient, old-fashioned stereotypes by re-evaluating gender norms.

“If a genderless marriage is a marriage in which the wife is not automatically expected to be responsible for school forms and childcare and dinner preparation and birthday parties and midnight feedings and holiday shopping, I think it’s fair to say that many heterosexual women would cry, bring it on! Beyond that, gay marriage can function as a controlled experiment, helping us to see which aspects of marital difficulty are truly rooted in gender and which are not,” she said.

We are certainly making some headway, at least in the eyes of the law, with over 14 nations now having legalized gay marriage. Such efforts have generated extensive media coverage of gay weddings and enhanced the visibility of the many different types of gay couples that exist in the LGBT community. Moreover, such transparency has helped to normalize lesbian identity for heterosexuals and thus paint a clearer picture of society’s evolving gender norms.

Despite the enthusiasm surrounding such progress, hiccups and push-backs remain in the struggle for equality. As we celebrate Pride Month this June, we still find ourselves living in a world where gay people are subject to discrimination and anti-gay hate crimes. While some lesbians are fortunate enough to escape such prejudice by slipping under the radar and not being recognizable as gay, these women face other obstacles such as the effects of “femme invisibility."

According to gay rights activist and writer Megan Evans, the concept of femme invisibility is the lack of recognition and validation that feminine lesbians experience by being perceived as heterosexual as a result of looking feminine. The forgotten "femme," as she states in her article, Femme Invisibility, is the feminine-looking lesbian who goes unnoticed because of her girlish appearance.

“We fall victim to heteronormativity and heterosexism: the notion that heterosexuality is the preferred and normal sexual orientation. We are presumed to be heterosexual by both communities, which leads to the feeling that we don’t belong to either,” Evans told AlterNet.

Sadly, pop culture has not done much to dispel such misconceptions. While femme lesbian characters have risen over the last couple of years on popular TV shows such as “The L Word,” according to Evans, most are either portrayed as “femme” or “butch” with not much diversity of representation of the lesbians who sit somewhere in between.

What’s more, story lines about femme characters tend to involve struggles over sexual identity or a lesbian having relationships with both men and women, which only perpetuates the idea that lesbians can be “turned straight” or “swayed by men."

Evans explains: “Frequent comments that I hear as a femme lesbian are, "But you're too pretty to be gay," and "Who wears the trousers?" We are often seen as a challenge for straight males who think that they can 'turn' us, and lesbians mis-label us as straight fag hags,” Evans said.

Lombardo, who is also the associate director of IHI, echoes this sentiment: “The challenge for the queer community, particularly for women, is that if you identify as a femme, you have the burden of proving you are a lesbian as well. There is a struggle with such classification because femme women have to prove their sexuality to both straight and gay communities,” she said.

The lesbian porn industry also fuels misconceptions about “lipstick lesbians" by centering on two femme women to satisfy the sexual fantasies of men. In porn, feminine couples are constantly objectified and dominated to fulfill their sexualized roles according to what satisfies men.

Last week’s YouTube clip, “Real Lesbians React To Porn," which recorded the reactions of real lesbians watching lesbian porn, shattered the myths surrounding the bedroom antics of lesbians. The comical video showed lesbians poking fun at the use of suspiciously long fingernails and oddly placed stiletto heels. With over 2 million views already, the clip confirms what most of us already know: lesbian porn is made for straight men.

“Lesbian porn only reinforces the view that lesbians are not 'really' gay. It also undermines our relationships, for example, when we're seen to be kissing for the pleasure of men, instead of as an expression of love towards our partners,” Evans said.

Undoubtedly in this day and age, it seems unconscionable that anyone should have their sexuality scrutinized for the simple reason that it does not conform to a misguided stereotype. But how do we go about avoiding such stigmatization? The answer lies in positive lesbian role models in the community who can act as mirror images for society

Lombardo explains: “Those who identify as a lesbian all look and act very differently. Because coming out has changed over each decade, it seems that while acceptance of sexuality is more acceptable today, it is still a challenge. Thus, by branching out, people in the lesbian community can act as mirrors for other women. If there is internal shame in a community, there is a tendency for women to isolate themselves, whereas if you can expand your mind and ideology by becoming more active in the LGBT community, you begin to develop a better idea of who you are,” she said.

Megan Evans agrees: “We have Portia De Rossi and Chely Wright, but there are not many high-profile celebrities that have come out to proudly say that they are a lesbian. Growing up I felt that I did not have a role model to look up to so that I knew I could be feminine, gay and happy,” she said.

In response, Evans launched the Femme Visibility Campaign to combat the invisibility of feminine lesbians and change lesbian stereotypes through encouraging fellow femmes to come forward and have a voice. The campaign was launched as part of Evans’ own website, What Wegan Did Next, a blog about her life with her wife, Whitey, as a loving feminine lesbian couple.

“What I strive for is the day that it will no longer be a shock to be feminine and gay. After all, 'feminine' is not a synonym for 'heterosexual.' I hope that with more lesbians coming out and living their lives proudly, that we will slowly but surely show both the straight and gay communities that our sexual orientation is legitimate and that we deserve to be treated that way,” Evans said.

Is the Rise of Filthy Gonzo Porn Actually Dangerous, Or Are People Overreacting?

David Rosen, AlterNet — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 07:54:00 -0700

The ubiquity of dirty, violent porn has many people worried. But is it just the same old moral panic?

Pornography is ubiquitous in America. Estimates as to its market size are all over the map, but most analysts agree it’s a $10 billion-plus enterprise. More troubling for some is the concern that the new digital technologies, particularly the Internet and mobile devices, have extended access (especially to young people) while expanding the scope of the pornographic "imagination," depicting once-illicit sex practices as acceptable, the new normal.

These twin tendencies of modern pornography—greater reach and more explicit depiction—distinguish technology’s impact on the erotic imagination since the first porn photographs were introduced in the 1840s. With each new medium of pornographic representation, more people have access to more porn sources and to the depiction of more explicit (especially once-unacceptable) sex practices.

Today, this development is expressed in the growing split between “erotic” and “gonzo” porn. Conventional “erotic” porn seeks to mirror the Hollywood storytelling style, with recognizable plotlines, characters and sex serving a “romantic” end. Conventional porn runs the full gamut, from vanilla to S&M and everything in between, but reinforces conventional patriarchal heterosexuality.

Something seems to have happened with the introduction of “gonzo” porn. The traditional boundaries of the acceptable depiction were pushed to a new limit. This porn involves sexual performance in which the male actor violates or appears to harm the female performer, depicting sex acts that no actual woman would want to engage in. Some say the genre was launched in 1989 with the release of John Stagliano’s series, The Adventures of Buttman.

For some critics, gonzo porn symbolizes and reinforces the violence women face everyday, whether in their sexual lives or in their real lives. Krystal Fleischman wrote a strong critique of gonzo porn imagery she saw on two websites that drew her attention. The narratives on one site, she wrote, all showed "very rough anal and vaginal sex, and name calling.” At another gonzo site, Fleischman wrote that, "The woman in this film was heavily degraded by her male partner; she was gagged so violently and frequently throughout the film that her eyes were welling up with tears and she almost vomited a few times. The male actor would violently slap the woman in the face whenever she gagged.”

A chorus of academic researchers, journalists and commentators are raising concern about both the ease of porn availability, especially to teenagers, and the apparent increasing appeal of gonzo or extreme porn. Many point to a body of research linking porn viewing to all manner of criminal and other violent behavior, including rape, pedophilia and murder.

“Research on Pornography,” an unattributed report released by the Aurora Center at the University of Minnesota, provides an overview to dozens of such studies, many dubbed “meta-analysis.” (The Aurora Center provides support for people dealing with “sexual assault, relationship violence, or stalking.”) The report’s analysis confirms the findings of two researchers, Vanessa Vega and Neil Malamuth, “high pornography consumption added significantly to the prediction of sexual aggression.”

The summary report confirms a basic cultural assumption: porn is a likely contributing factor to sexual abuse. While a number of other factors (e.g., alcohol/drug use, unemployment, past abuse) likely contribute to sexual abuse, none are considered in the report. Porn is singled out because it plays a unique role in the development of interpersonal values.

For the researchers cited in the report as well as many others, porn provides the aesthetic vocabulary for sex, a critical personal and social relationship. Sex is a complex interpersonal relation mediated by a web of social factors, including fantasies of power and pleasure. And porn is similarly complex, suggesting a visual vocabulary for sexual behavior. As historian Linda Williams observes, “… pornography is not one thing, but sexual fantasy, genre, culture, and erotic visibility all operating together.” Ever mindful that sex research is not a hard science, the Aurora study is filled with cautionary terms like “research suggests,” “indirect consequence” and “predisposing.”

The issue of gonzo porn has provoked a spirited debate within the feminist left. The New Left Review conducted an online debate between Gail Dines, a leading anti-porn feminist, and Sarah Ditum, a British journalist, about gonzo porn. The debate is interesting as it illustrates how two well-meaning analysts can speak past one another. Both are feminists, pro-sex and reject the tyranny of patriarch; Dines insists that she’s a Marxist. Yet, they can’t agree on a definition of pornography.

Ditum adheres to a definition along the lines advanced by Williams, invoking the Oxford English Dictionary’s (OED) current listing: “The explicit description or exhibition of sexual subjects or activity in literature, painting, films, etc., in a manner intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic feelings; printed or visual material containing this.”

Dines rejects such pedantry, arguing that gonzo porn signifies a new phase of patriarchal tyranny: “You will see, with mind-numbing repetition, gagging, slapping, verbal abuse, hair-pulling, pounding anal sex, women smeared in semen, sore anuses and vaginas, distended mouths, and more exhausted, depleted, and shell-shocked women than you can count.”

A quarter-century ago a not-dissimilar debate took place among feminists. On one side were those like Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon and Susan Brownmiller who warned against the anti-women violence inherent in the porn of the day. In the pre-AIDS days, those known as the “sex-positive feminists,” women like Kathy Acker, Betty Dodson and Gayle Ruben, reminded people that the porn they watched was a form of theater, a consensual business engagement which, amidst all its sexism, encouraged the emergence of a new counter-patriarchal feminist porn aesthetic.

The break between these two tendencies within the feminist movement came when Dworkin and MacKinnon decided to put analysis into practice. Joining with Christian conservatives and Republican stalwarts, they successfully pushed aggressive anti-porn legislature in the U.S. and Canada. Their actions split the women’s movement.

In 2001, a First Amendment attorney, Paul Cambria, working with the commercial porn industry, recommended a range of unacceptable sexual display that came to be known as the Cambria list. It restricted a host of onscreen practices, including, "No shots with appearance of pain or degradation," "No degrading dialogue," "No wax dripping," "No forced sex, rape themes, etc." and many more.

We’ve come a long way in a decade. The imagery in the Cambria list, once acknowledged as unacceptable, is today easily accessed fetishes. Query Google and you’re likely to fine not only find porn sites catering to these particular indulgences, but illicit local get-togethers of people into them.

* * *

In the spring of 2011, the Obama administration quietly closed down the Justice Department’s Obscenity Prosecution Task Force (OPTF). According to a DOJ spokesperson, it was no longer necessary to maintain a separate task force but would incorporate “the prosecution of obscenity violations into the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section.” This action, in DOJ-speak, “provides for increased collaboration among experienced attorneys and agents, and gives our prosecutors the most solid foundation possible for pursuing their mission.”

TheOPTF’s closure drew the ire of Republican conservatives. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) lambasted the decision: “As the toxic waste of obscenity continues to spread and harm everyone it touches, it appears the Obama administration is giving up without a fight.” Hatch and 41 other senators urged the DOJ to bring criminal cases against “all major distributors of adult obscenity.” No cases have been brought.

The OPTF was a special unit of the DOJ established in 2005 by the Bush-II administration to stop the alleged flood of “hardcore” pornography spreading throughout society. It was a sop to Christian conservatives for supporting Bush’s election, giving rightwing moralists a platform to wage their censorship wars. They exploited it masterfully. The task force focused on two issues: pornography and sex trafficking, especially involving underage teens and children. Often forgotten, the OPTF was not created by an act of Congress, but established by the DOJ as a moral guardian ofthe nation’s sexual standards.

The task force had nominal results when it came to obscenity prosecutions. In 2006, it won a $1.6 million criminal fine against Mantra Films, a Santa Monica, CA, company operating as Girls Gone Wild, for failing to create and maintain age and identity records. In 2008, it prosecuted Paul Little (who lived and operated his business in Los Angeles) in Tampa, FL, for the illegal distribution of porn “over the Internet and through the mail”; it was a case of jury shopping.

Glenn Greenwald, a civil liberties attorney and commentator, noted: "So, to recap, in the Land of the Free: if you're an adult who produces a film using other consenting adults, for the entertainment of still other consenting adults, which merely depicts fictional acts of humiliation and degradation, the DOJ will prosecute you and send you to prison for years.” Ira Isaacs, a self-proclaimed “shock artist,” seems to be the last OPTF prosecution; he was convicted in 2012 for transporting obscene materials across state lines for sale or distribution.

The culture wars are in retreat, and with them, the federal government’s efforts to enforce “obscenity” standards. Consenting adults are engaging in a greater variety of sexual experience than ever before and incorporating many heretofore-illicit practices. This new sexuality is grounded in a legal and cultural belief that consenting adults have a right to privacy…and to pleasure.

Over the last decade-plus, the Supreme Court has struck down repeated efforts by the FCC to block “obscene” materials from the Internet and the public’s broadcast airways. In Reno v. ACLU (1997), it invalidated provisions of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that criminalized “indecent” and “patently offensive” forms of Internet communication. Since then the Court has been tentative, uncertain with regard to the new sexual culture facilitated by the rapid adoption of the easily accessible digital online media.

Last year, the Court sidestepped the thorny question of what is indecent by voiding FCC fines to two broadcasters. One was Fox for carrying “fleeting expletives” or words like “fuck” and “shit” uttered by Cher, Bono and Nicole Richie at the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards. The other involved ABC’s briefly showing a female actress’ nude buttocks during an episode of "NYPD Blue." The Court also passed on an FCC case involving the 2004 NFL Super Bowl broadcast of Janet Jackson’s “costume malfunction.”

It will be interesting to see if Tom Wheeler, President Obama’s nominee to replace Julius Genachowski as head of the Federal Communications Commission, when questioned by Sen. Jay Rockefeller’s (D-W.VA) Commerce Committee, will be asked about his beliefs regarding the “f” word and limited nudity on ever-shrinking broadcast television.

* * *

During May and June 1955, Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) conducted hearings at the U.S. Courthouse at Foley Square in Lower Manhattan on juvenile delinquency and pornography. The senator was particularly concerned about comic books which, he claimed, provided pre-pubescent male youths with a “short course in ... rape, cannibalism, carnage, necrophilia, sex, sadism, masochism, and virtually every other form of crime, degeneracy, bestiality, and horror.”

Comics were reputed to promote lured sex and, in the mid-‘50s, an estimated 90 million comics were sold each month. Ironically, the most popular comics seemed the most obscene, threatening. In 1954, the Book-of-the-Month Club assailed Batman: “It is like a wish dream of two homosexuals living together”; Cat-Woman was attacked because she was "vicious and uses a whip”; and Wonder Woman was condemned as “a morbid ideal.… Her followers are the gay girls.” Other popular comics, like The Crypt of Terror and The Vault of Horror, were denounced as “sex horror serials” and “pulp paper nightmares” that created “ethical confusion.”

Most of Kefauver’s venom, however, was directed at pornographers, and in particular, the New York publisher Irving Klaw. One scholar described him as “perhaps the most prolific supplier of girlie photographs to both underground and legitimate magazines.” Klaw’s greatest discovery was the celebrated Bettie Page, often referred to as the “Queen of Bondage.”

Nearly six decades have passed since Kefauver held his hearings that ruined the lives of Klaw and Page. Today, the sexuality they represented, a pornographer and a sex-performance artist, seem so tame, so all-American. Their once-threatening pornographic imagery has become nostalgia, easily accessed on YouTube.

So, from this historic vantage point, how should we look at today’s pornography, especially extreme, gonzo porn?

Pornography is the erotic representation of power, expressed in two complementary ways, as a social relationship (the structure of power) and as aesthetic imagination (the vocabulary of pleasure). A half-century-plus ago, Klaw, John Willie (of Bizarre) and Hugh Hefner (of Playboy), among others, helped change the nation’s erotic aesthetic. Reflecting the radical challenge of the post-WWII consumer revolution, the new erotic aesthetic undercut—while reinforcing—the traditional “patriarchal” sensibility. Notions of both masculinity and femininity were challenged.

Much of today’s pornography, especially extreme porn, continues to embody the masculine tyranny of traditional patriarchal sexual relations. In the half-century since Bettie Page pranced about in an S&M outfit, porn no longer represents the same threat, fear or attraction it once did. Nevertheless, a symbolically threatening tendency persists.

A new edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), the bible of psychiatry with regard to mental health, is about to be released. Extreme pornography consumption apparently is being marginalized within a category to be named “Hypersexual Disorder,” stripped of the moral rage attributed to it by anti-porn activists. The psycho-medical establishment sees little threat from gonzo porn; it’s a non-issue.

The culture wars are in retreat, a woman’s right to an abortion being the last major issue that still fervently motivates the Christian right. Gay marriage is legal in a dozen or so states and the District of Columbia; sex paraphernalia (aka “sexual wellness”) is a $15 billion business; swinger get-togethers and “gentlemen’s clubs” are popular throughout the country; and porn proliferates on the web.

The issue of pornography played a relatively minor role in the 2012 election. Today, sexting, the exchange of unacceptable sex images by underage teens, is the major issue with regard to obscene online content. Kids (and some adults) across the country continue to be arrested for exchanging unacceptable images.

An effort in Iceland may signal a new approach in the porn wars, however. Interior Minister Ogmundur Jonasson is planning to introduce legislation requiring the use of Internet filters to block access to violent or extreme pornography, allegedly reducing harm inflicted on women and children. An opt-in provision will permit adults to access sites so blocked.

A number of other countries either currently block or are considering blocking XXX porn sites, including Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Indonesia, the Philippines and Saudi Arabia; the UK is seriously considered similar legislation. While the Supreme Court’s 1997 Reno v. ACLU decision may foreclose such an effort in the U.S., one can only wonder whether similar legislation will be proposed in the U.S. Congress in time for the 2014 elections.

Why the Raw, Animalistic Female Libido Is Repressed

William Hogeland, William Hogeland's blog — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 08:56:00 -0700

A new book by Daniel Bergner rejects age-old thinking about female sexuality.

My friend Dan Bergner has a book out covering recent and in some ways possibly startling research on women’s sexuality, specifically libido. Dan is a journalist, with previous books on the civil war in Sierra Leone and life inside Angola State Penitentiary; in this one, he interviews and brings to life a number of women reporting various kinds of sexual dissatisfaction and distress, as well as a number of research scientists developing new theories of the true nature of female desire.

The book ranges through a wide variety of experience and science, so I won’t try to summarize it or hype it. (A review is here.) What interested me especially in this book are what I see as some of its more radical psychological and social ramifications. It won’t come as news to a lot of readers, male and female alike, I hope, that femaleness involves sexual intensity, or that a woman can possess a sex drive at least as strong as a man’s. What the book really gets into and makes a case for debunking is the widespread idea — which has been advanced partly by conclusions of “evolutionary psychology” — that female sexual drive and intensity are linked, ineluctably, and supposedly in contrast to male libido, with closeness, intimacy, and monogamy.

Some of the research Dan covers suggests that female drive is if anything less discriminating and more promiscuous than male drive. From which I draw the tentative conclusion that if women weren’t restrained by punitive social norms, they’d stop all the “nesting,” and the getting men to nest, and they’d be out relentlessly seeking as much sex as they could possibly get from as many different partners.

And of course, unlike men, when women go out looking for sex, they’re pretty much sure to find it. So we can imagine that without those punitive social norms, families, and thus society, would collapse in a spree of sexual immediacy. When men yield to their libidinous imperatives and go on a spree, there are some self-limiting qualities in play — and anyway, their “good” women are meanwhile keeping the home fires burning and feeling betrayed, hurt, abandoned, and morally superior, as we all (i.e., men and women) evidently think they’re supposed to; sooner or later, the lowlife slinks home. Life goes on.

But if women yielded to urges that might, the book suggests, be at least as strong, all hell would break loose. We’ve long harbored various versions of the notion that women’s sexual connection to monogamy stands as a bulwark against male-induced chaos. But we’ve long wanted to believe that the connection to monogamy is innate to women. This book suggests the opposite: women’s sexual self-restraint in maintaining civilization is far greater than men’s. Because a) the stakes are higher and b) the promiscuity of her libido is greater. [UPDATE: Which goes some way to explaining the roots of patriarchy.]

And the particular kind of discontent demanded of women by civilization is something worse than discontent. It’s dissociation. [UPDATE: I.e., patriarchy is predicated not only on outright suppression but also on an insidious process of female dissociation? OK, maybe we did know this. But I think few have forthrightly connected that idea to the existence of a promiscuous female libido. Once you start thinking of it that way, you realize you may have known it all along -- I only now realize I've known it since high school (!) -- and that's what makes for an exciting book.] Men are allowed and indeed encouraged to feel the pain of restraining a promiscuous libido often described as naturally almost insurmountable. Men can stay faithful and pat themselves on the back for having inner strength and/or fall off the wagon and feel bad; either way, they know how they feel. But women — according to some of the conclusions I draw from Dan’s book — are not supposed to know they’re restraining a massive force. They have to deny it. Because it’s not only that if they gave in to it, civilization would crumble — it’s that even feeling it would have that effect.

And that’s a kind of oppression men don’t know about. That’s punitive on a whole other level.

Now, I’m sure many, many women are fully, consciously engaged with the elemental promiscuity of their own sexual drive. (In fact it even seems to me that back in the early 1970′s, that engagement was alive and well, on the table, within and outside of relationships, and so was its relationship to patriarchy, at least among youngsters counterculturally inclined.) And those women are no doubt channeling their desire as best they can, to their own best purposes. Channeling it into love and work. Even into nesting. Even into sexual promiscuity, which takes channeling too, since for adults, everything does. That’s life. Under those circumstances, society does not crumble; it thrives. But Dan’s reporting reveals a lot of female sexual distress, a lot of stuff not alive and well, and once you’ve started thinking about these issues this way, you can start to see examples of the problem everywhere. We’re not thriving.

Read Sam Tanenhaus’s recent review of Amanda Knox’s memoir. You don’t have to be a defender of the youth party scene in Perugia to note the reviewer’s revulsion not, most saliently, to casual sex but to female initiation of casual sex — reflexively termed “aggression” — with the foregone conclusion that such behavior, especially as then boasted about by the woman (adding insult to injury), damns her a priori.

What gives with the prude-prurience, all these years into the 21st century? I think Dan’s book starts getting at some answers that are not, shall we say, pretty.

10 Things You Need to Know about Female Sexuality

Bella Ellwood-Clayton, Huffington Post — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:16:00 -0700

There's a lot of pressure on women to be sexual. Why not let women define their own sexuality?

What is the true nature of female sexuality? When it comes to women's priorities, why, once in a secure relationship, is sex no longer on top? Exploring what defines women's libido and why it becomes depleted, I investigate whether we have unrealistic expectations about our sex drive, who defines what is normal and abnormal, and if 'low libido' is in fact the natural order of things. I also provide concrete ways women can work toward defining their own jouissance--a personalized female sexuality that can lead to a more sensual, vibrant life.

1. Don't believe the hype:our sexuality is culturally relative. Sexuality is shaped by culture and history. For example, a hundred years ago a woman who loved sex could be regarded as being mentally disturbed, whereas today if you don't love sex you could end up being diagnosed as dysfunctional. With this in mind, it pays to be skeptical of labels that pathologize sexual difference.

2. Our desire to appear desirable exceeds desire itself.

It is well known that media and advertising can have a devastating effect on women's self-esteem--but it affects our sexual self-esteem too. Feeling like we don't live up to the physical ideal, women often grow to view themselves, and even their genitalia, as undesirable.

Rather than having sex, many women simply want to look like they are having sex. We are too busy chasing beautiful to want to kiss beautifully. Too busy chasing the veneer of desirability, to desire. Our animal instincts have become inverted: time devoted to preening overrides time devoted to mating and sexual pleasure.

3. Ditch the rom-com storyline. Passionate monogamy, the goal for most, promises lust-ever-after. But we have unrealistic expectations about relationships. In actual fact, it is natural for sexual intensity to decline over the duration of a relationship, as we age, due to life pressures and when we have children. Although lust may dampen, it is possible to maintain love and connection, and increase our chances of desire showing up too.

4. Actually, low female desire is 'normal.' Women have been made to feel that having a low libido means something is wrong with them. Currently women with chronic low libido are pathologized as having a type of female sexual dysfunction called hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD). The trouble is, many of the researchers who have come up its nebulous definition have financial ties to pharmaceutical companies.

I argue that in a long-term monogamous relationship it is extremely common to have a lukewarm interest in sex and rarely initiate it. Far from being a disorder, low libido is just the natural state of affairs for many women.

5. The so-called sexless marriage. Consider the current definition of a 'sexless marriage'--a relationship in which the couple has sex ten times a year or less. Really? So couples that have been together for a decade and are going through the highs and lows of life, have sex nearly once a month. Rather than brandishing a negative label, good for them, I say.

6.The hand that rocks the cradle doesn't rock the bedroom. Research indicates that one-third of couples experience significant sexual loss upon having children. For instance, across ninety studies, parents had lower marital satisfaction than non-parents, and a strong correlation was found between marital dissatisfaction and greater number of children. For women, it is increasingly difficult to carve out the duel identity of mother andsensual lover. Plus, there is a rival for her affections--children.

7. There is more than one type of sexual prime. As we age, women often experience less desire due to many factors, including illness (their partners' and their own), and issues associated with self-image. However, although many of us are familiar with the notion ofsexual prime in relation to the physical--body, genitals, and hormones--it is not the full picture. An emotional prime also exists, related to spirit, maturity, and fluidity with life. Physical and emotional factors are intertwined and interact in unpredictable and exciting ways. Many women experience a sexual renaissance in their later years. Fortunately, sexual prime can peak at any age.

8. Pursuit of pink Viagra. Drug companies have been busy trying to undress the complexities of human sexuality in a race to create a "pink Viagra" - a global sex drug for women. A plethora of drugs targeting the female libido are steadily being researched. Such drugs, whether creams, patches, sprays or pills, target genital blood flow, hormones, or brain chemistry.

Female sex drugs are not yet on sale at your local pharmacy. Many are currently being trialed - for the second or third time - while most have been flat-out rejected by the FDA because they haven't been considered safe or effective enough for public consumption. This hasn't stopped doctors from prescribing such drugs 'off-label:' using legal drugs for unapproved purposes. Describing this, one big league researcher says an "uncontrolled clinical trial of the safety of testosterone is already happening in the community."

9. Free range sexuality. In many ways female sexuality is still mysterious. And since scientists can't agree about what women's sexual response is, what constitutes female sexual dysfunction, or if women have a definitive sexual peak, it is unrealistic to expect us to have a similar sex drive. For women who no longer care for sex, or for those who never did, refuge may be found in this inability to prove what is 'normal.' Perhaps we can use this to free ourselves from comparing our sexuality to the sexuality of others and instead manifest our own sexual path.

Moreover, there has never been a culture where women have been encouraged to explore and experiment with their sensuality without censure. We don't understand the full potential of female sexuality, free range.

10. Getting sexy back. In pursuit of our full sex drive, if we are so inclined, we can explore a wide range of techniques and practices. Some engage in mindfulness or stillness exercises. Another novel approach is to create distance - particularly important as couples are spending more time together than ever before. For those seeking intensity, there are ways to manufacture a sense of danger, proven biochemically to heighten sexual interest. For the many of us who are leading busy lives, our libido can be rechanneled from other projects. But whatever road we choose, let us work toward defining our own jouissance: a personalized female sexuality. This process, as described in my book Sex Drive: In Pursuit of Female Desire (Allen & Unwin), is not only possible but also liberating, leading to a more sensual life.

Bella Ellwood-Clayton is an internationally respected sexual anthropologist who holds a B.A. Hons, with a thesis on cross-cultural notions of beauty (Concordia University), and a Ph.D. on young women's sexuality (University of Melbourne). In addition to appearances on television and radio, Dr. Bella has written for many major newspapers and magazines. She also gives public talks and has made a popular documentary with National Geographic.

AlterNet.org: Sex and Relationships

The Long, Strange History of Sex Toys

In the Beginning ...

Take THAT, Silicone!

Hysteria, Womb Problems and Paroxysm

We've Come a Long Way, Baby

Related Stories

Guys Actually Do Worry About Sex on the First Date

Related Stories

Argentine Sex Workers Fight De-Humanizing Abuse with Legislation, Graffiti

Related Stories

Minors Who Commit Sex Crimes Shouldn't Be Branded for Life as Sex Offenders

Related Stories

Male Menopause? Scientific Study Says It's Possible—If 'Cougar' Women Have More Kids

Related Stories

Should Men Avoid Posting Naked Selfies If They Want to Score Online Dates?

Related Stories

When a Woman Wants Sex Like a Man -- Why Do We Deny the Intensity of Female Lust?

Related Stories

6 Little-Known Facts About Nipples

Your Nipples Are Perfect

Got Milk?

Headlights On

Innie vs. Outie

Evolutionary Awesomeness (or Trickery?)

Triple Nipple

Related Stories

Do Women Have Less Fun Than Men?

Related Stories

My Boyfriend, the Sex Addict

Related Stories

Why All Vaginas Are Beautiful and Labiaplasty Is Such a Scam

There is one profound question one cannot help but to ask: Why?

What are the risks of the surgery?

If you really love me, don’t you also love my dangles and bobs?

There we have it.

Related Stories

Lesbian Myths, Debunked

Related Stories

Is the Rise of Filthy Gonzo Porn Actually Dangerous, Or Are People Overreacting?

Related Stories

Why the Raw, Animalistic Female Libido Is Repressed

Related Stories

10 Things You Need to Know about Female Sexuality

Related Stories