Author: has written 5285 posts for this blog.

Jill has been blogging for Feministe since 2005.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

101 Responses

  1. Anonymous Guy
    Anonymous Guy May 23, 2006 at 11:24 pm |

    Why else would the amount of ejaculate matter?

    I can’t speak for all guys, but an orgasm that involves a small amount of ejaculate than an orgasm with more ejaculate. I suspect you’re right that “ejaculate like a pornstar” refers to the money shot, but that’s not the only reason for ejaculate quantities to matter.

  2. Philo
    Philo May 23, 2006 at 11:38 pm |

    Erections are not permanentely sustainable.

    Yep, unfortunately like petroleum or a tequila binge, erections are not permanently sustainable.

    But the more masculinity is defined as sexually dominating, virile, and achievement-oriented (”perform like a professional!”), the more men lose out. … It denies women both pleasure and physical safety. It denies men pleasure and authenticity, and centralizes their identities in their dicks. In short, it’s a big crock.

    Amen. It’s funny, the most authentic sex I’ve had has never had an aire of any of the messaging pushed by this ad. Sincerity transcends pornography and I’ll take sincerity over anything I can find on the internets any day.

  3. human
    human May 23, 2006 at 11:42 pm |

    but an orgasm that involves a small amount of ejaculate than an orgasm with more ejaculate.

    Huh? is there a word left out here or something? I’m not parsing this.

  4. Hugo
    Hugo May 23, 2006 at 11:55 pm |

    Here’s my read on it:

    Well, the money shot has moved towards the obsession with “facials”, it seems: ejaculating on a woman’s face is increasingly common in porn. It’s “marking territory” in a fairly straightforward way — the more slathered a woman is in your ejaculate, the more you may be said to possess her.

    Not a positive development in the porn world, all things considered.

    If anonymous guy is suggesting that the male orgasm is more pleasurable when a greater amount of semen is emitted, he may be partially right. Semen builds up over time — if it’s the first orgasm in a couple of days, let’s say, you’re likely to experience more intense pleasure (and ejaculate more) than if it’s your fifth time in the last twenty-four hours. I mean, don’t most folks think it feels better when you, uh, hold back for a few days and let things build up?

    Gosh, that’s as close to full-blown TMI as this born again Christian lad gets these days. Hope that was okay, Jill.

  5. Absurd Noise
    Absurd Noise May 24, 2006 at 12:01 am |

    OMG… Christians ejaculate?!

  6. Erin M
    Erin M May 24, 2006 at 12:16 am |

    We fuck, too. Funny, ain’t it?

  7. Dustin
    Dustin May 24, 2006 at 12:21 am |

    Jill, while I think your analysis of this ad is spot-on, I wouldn’t go so far as to say men don’t have to deal with the “associating-with-small-dick-man thing”. My penis is insulted by my spam all the time! Here’s a sampling from what’s currently in my spam folder:

    Don’t be the “little guy” in the club!
    Don’t be left behing [Note: I hate it when I’m left behing!]
    We cure any desease [Note: Yes, this is for Viagra/Cialis; remember what I said about “ED”?]
    Don’t be inadequate anymore!

    The first and last — the most insulting — are subject lines for the same email you quote in your post. All that dominating and penetrating and ejaculating is what I *could* be; alas, right now I’m the little guy in the club, and wholly inadequate. Meanwhile, all the big-dick guys are getting the ladies, while I’m being left behind…

  8. Kathy McCarty
    Kathy McCarty May 24, 2006 at 12:24 am |

    PERMA-BONER

    excellent !!
    Let it be added to the lexicon with Godbag and Asshat 11

  9. Brandy
    Brandy May 24, 2006 at 2:23 am |

    They make the penis sound like a remote control.

  10. Anonymous Guy
    Anonymous Guy May 24, 2006 at 2:34 am |

    Hugo is right. Sorry about that. Anyway, what I meant to say was that ejaculation itself feels good in a way that is separate from the orgasm (that is, they *usually* happen at the same time, but it is possible to have one without the other). An orgasm is a good thing with or without ejaculating, but a longer ejaculation can certainly enhance things. That said, an ejaculation by itself is usually pretty disappointing.

  11. Glaivester
    Glaivester May 24, 2006 at 7:54 am |

    Well, I haven’t seen any ads in my mailbox, but there are apparently similar products for selling to females, although they are much less common.

  12. big annie
    big annie May 24, 2006 at 7:56 am |

    I’ve always wondered if men who aren’t ‘endowed’ suffer the same insecurities as women who don’t have big tits?

  13. JeffL
    JeffL May 24, 2006 at 8:21 am |

    Annie, I’d say men who are short suffer insecurities that are similiar to women with small tits. In both cases, the “deficency” is on display for the world to see. Breast size/height are also similiar in that they are discusses pretty openly, and most people wouldn’t be shocked to hear “I wouldn’t go out with him/her because she/he is too short/flat.”

    Pretty much every man on the planet is insecure about his penis size (some more than others, of course), but men rarely talk about thier size with other people. At least straight men don’t — I can’t speak for gay men.

  14. norbizness
    norbizness May 24, 2006 at 8:38 am |

    Just the one ad? I think that if I were to actually look at what got culled by my spam filter, I’d have about 400-500 per day.

  15. big annie
    big annie May 24, 2006 at 8:42 am |

    JeffL,
    Makes sense to me. I guess women have the ‘advantage’ of camouflaging their small breasts with silicone, gel bras, etc. Not much you can do about your height.

    I’ve been with a few guys and I can honestly say that the guy with the biggest dick WAS the biggest dick.

  16. Thomas
    Thomas May 24, 2006 at 8:54 am |

    Pretty much every man on the planet is insecure about his penis size

    Nope. Mine is perfectly normal. I’m insecure about plenty of things, but penis size is not one. I would guess a substantial majority of men are insecure about penis size, but nothing like 100%.

    Hugo, I find that orgasm is more enjoyable after a layoff of several days only if I’ve been thinking about sex in the interim. During work tsunamis when I don’t get off for a week or more, it’s not especially an exceptional release. When my wife has been teasing me or I’ve been fantasizing but not coming, the release can be spectacular.

  17. Ole Blue
    Ole Blue May 24, 2006 at 8:56 am |

    See, victoria secret spam is so much better.

    Thank you for reading the penis spam for me Jill, now I do not have to, thanks a lot, I can just delete it all now!

  18. zuzu
    zuzu May 24, 2006 at 8:58 am |

    Well, the money shot has moved towards the obsession with “facials”, it seems: ejaculating on a woman’s face is increasingly common in porn. It’s “marking territory” in a fairly straightforward way — the more slathered a woman is in your ejaculate, the more you may be said to possess her.

    You know, I never got asked to allow a guy to come on my face or my body until very recently, within the past few years. I *always* refuse the face, and I generally tell them I don’t see the point with the rest of it.

    It does seem especially degrading, which is why I refuse. I’m not surprised to learn that it’s a fairly new development in the porn world.

  19. Thomas
    Thomas May 24, 2006 at 8:59 am |

    How human-friendly is a patriarchal system when its construction of the sex act completely excludes 98% of the human body — including notable exclusions of hands, mouths and tongues? Is it just me, or does sex under patriarchy sound really terrible?

    Amen Jill. PV intercourse is a kind of sex. It’s only the kind of sex to the repro-only fanatics. In fact, it brings with it an outsized share of physical risk and therefore requires precautions and has real downsides unless both participants are in a committed relationship — which is, of course, why the repro-only fanatics want to limit “sex” to PV intercourse.

  20. Thomas
    Thomas May 24, 2006 at 9:07 am |

    Zuzu, I think there’s a footnote to your point about ejaculating on people. In the general theme that there’s a lot of sex outside of PV intercourse, I like to tit-fuck (as long as my partner enjoys it). Ejaculating mid-stroke while tit-fucking results in come either on the neck or upper chest, depending on the angle of torso and penis (the term “pearl necklace” has been in circulation since I was in middle school and probably longer, but I don’t use it because I think it’s a little juvenial, and because I don’t really like the idea that we have to euphemize sex). I’ve never viewed it as humiliating or degrading (and I’m well acquainted with humiliation as a deliberate element of a BDSM scene).

    (Do you think I overuse parentheses? Is that a litigator thing?)

  21. zuzu
    zuzu May 24, 2006 at 9:22 am |

    To clarify: I’m not talking about tit-fucking, I’m talking about pulling out and ejaculating on me.

    Boy, this is moving into TMI territory quite fast.

  22. Ezra
    Ezra May 24, 2006 at 9:26 am |

    Dunno about some of this. There seem to be two types of enlargment sales pitches, the BE A GOD sort you identify, but also the mocking one. Maxim used to run ads with a big headline saying something like “672% of women are unhappy with their lover’s penis size!”, and I get quite a few e-mails with a similar bent. So I don’t think it’s quite accurate to say that “Guys get to skip the whole associating-with-small-dick-man thing when it comes to penis ads.” They just get to skip it in this ad.

  23. Lynn Gazis-Sax
    Lynn Gazis-Sax May 24, 2006 at 9:40 am |

    I’ve been with a few guys and I can honestly say that the guy with the biggest dick WAS the biggest dick.

    To be honest, given the small number of erect dicks I’ve seen in my life, and the length of time that generally passed between seeing one and seeing the next, I’m not sure I know which guy had the biggest dick. I have a guess, but it’s only a guess.

  24. Shasta MacNasty
    Shasta MacNasty May 24, 2006 at 9:46 am |

    perform like a professional with your partner

    But I don’t want to sleep with a prostitute.

    penetrate your partner for hours on end!

    Like I have that kind of time. If you are taking hours to fuck me, you are seriously not doing something right.

    Ejaculate like a pornstar in enormous quantities!

    EEEWWWWW!

    realize total and absolute power and domination in bed with your partner, with your new found penis size and sexual performance!

    Considering the fact that my clitoris is NOT located at the back of vagina, this is pretty useless. I’d rather have a man that understands that the tongue is mightier than the sword ANY day of the week.

  25. jeffliveshere
    jeffliveshere May 24, 2006 at 10:03 am |

    Gosh, that’s as close to full-blown TMI as this born again Christian lad gets these days–Hugo

    “Full blown” after talking about amounts of ejaculate and facials? What a wonderfully groanworthy (accidental?) pun!

  26. Broce
    Broce May 24, 2006 at 10:18 am |

    Ejaculate in enormous quantities?

    Great. Now couples can argue about who sleeps in the *huge* wet spot.

  27. zuzu
    zuzu May 24, 2006 at 10:34 am |

    Whither the condom?

    The amount of ejaculate is rather irrelevant if you’re going to be catching it with a reservoir tip.

  28. Erin M
    Erin M May 24, 2006 at 11:00 am |

    You’ll need a bigger reservoir tip, though, zuzu.

  29. Hugo
    Hugo May 24, 2006 at 11:48 am |

    Yikes, Jeff — I’m blushing. I’ll choose my words more carefully next time. Wish I could say it had been a deliberate pun!

  30. Linnaeus
    Linnaeus May 24, 2006 at 12:04 pm |

    You’ll need a bigger reservoir tip, though, zuzu.

    Heh, heh…time to bust out those “Magnums”. I knew I’d have a reason to use them someday!

  31. NuggetMaven
    NuggetMaven May 24, 2006 at 12:05 pm |

    Ads like this just highlight what I refer to as the pornification of America.

    15 to 20 years ago… Push Up Bras and Thongs were on “exotic” (subtext: Erotic) dancers, and Brazilian Waxing or Sphincter Bleaching were things normally associated with the porn industry. I see the same thing happening with the advent of these ads for “ED” medications. It also says an awful lot about sex as a recreational activity, as the main focus is all about the penis. It takes a lot more to engage in sex than merely slipping tab “A” into slot “B”.

  32. Rad Geek
    Rad Geek May 24, 2006 at 12:38 pm |

    Thanks for this post. On a related note:

    I suggest to you that transformation of the male sexual model under which we now all labor and “love” begins where there is a congruence, not a separation, a congruence of feeling and erotic interest; that it begins in what we do know about female sexuality as distinct from male–clitoral touch and sensitivity, multiple orgasms, erotic sensitivity all over the body (which needn’t–and shouldn’t–be localized or contained genitally), in tenderness, in self-respect, and in absolute mutual respect. For men I suspect that this transformation begins in the place they most dread–that is, in a limp penis. I think that men will have to give up their precious erections and begin to make love as women do together.

    –Andrea Dworkin, “Renouncing Sexual ‘Equality’,” reprinted in Our Blood, p. 13.

  33. Deborah
    Deborah May 24, 2006 at 12:50 pm |

    I’ve had long-term relationships with two men who had VERY big dicks and who thought they weren’t big. One thought he was smallish, the other assumed he was average. With one, he was having a lot of trouble with condoms, and I said “Are you using Magnums?” and he said “Don’t be ridiculous” and I insisted. All of a sudden, condoms fit! He honestly didn’t know.

    So my sense is that men are just SO insecure in this area and SO ill-informed that they are easy targets for this nonsense.

  34. maarmie
    maarmie May 24, 2006 at 12:55 pm |

    I understand the harm in this ad, but all this post did was make me horny. A big penis sounds really good right now…

  35. Kyra
    Kyra May 24, 2006 at 1:10 pm |

    OMG… Christians ejaculate?!

    Well how do you think there got to be so many of them?

  36. Kyra
    Kyra May 24, 2006 at 1:20 pm |

    I hate these get-a-bigger-dick ads.

    Seems to me that it’s not the size increase they’re selling that is the big-ticket item, but rather the delusion that after treatment you don’t need to know how to use it—or rather, that having a big dick makes it unnecessary to do anything more than insert, withdraw, repeat until you come.

    ‘Cause all you need is a big dick to satisfy a woman, and if she doesn’t come just from the big dick, there’s something wrong with her.

    Never mind that out in reality (where guys who buy into this crap never bother to poke their heads because they can’t stand being anyplace where they’re not the sun of their solar system), far from being anything wrong with the woman, there’s probably something wrong with the big dick. Both of them, in fact.

    And I don’t suppose it’s occurred to any of these guys who never give the slightest thought to what a woman might really be feeling, that a giant dick might, you know, hurt?

  37. Sara
    Sara May 24, 2006 at 1:24 pm |

    I actually spent a long time talking about the “facial” phenomenon recently, and I just can’t see how it’s degrading unless it goes along with a general fear and shame of semen. Granted, I think that this fear and shame of semen is shared by lots of men and women, so in many porn flicks I do think that the intent is to degrade even if the act isn’t necessarily unpleasant without the anti-semen attitude. On the other hand, I also think there’s an element of acceptance in it, where the dude is gratified by the woman’s enthusiasm for something that’s a natural and pleasurable part of his sexuality that everyone else thinks is nasty.

    Bonus related amusing anecdote: My husband once brought home some kumquats from the grocery store and I was kind of being wussy about eating them whole. He said, “I won’t feel like you really love me unless you swallow my kumquat.”

  38. Hugo
    Hugo May 24, 2006 at 1:53 pm |

    Sara, point taken. I think there’s a colossal difference between a woman inviting a man she loves to ejaculate on her face as a sign of her radical acceptance of him and his body and his sexuality, and the kind of porn you’ll find if you google “facials”. The infamous “bukkake” pheonomenon and the “group facial” thing make it clear that this isn’t about women accepting men and their bodies, but rather about dogs marking territory.

    I’d be stunned if even a minority of men watching “facial porn” ever say “Wow, that’s really impressive. Look at that woman lovingly expressing her radical acceptance of her boyfriend’s body.” What I suspect (and indeed know) that many of these guys are saying is something along the lines of “Look at that fucking bitch take it. That’s hot.”

  39. Sara
    Sara May 24, 2006 at 2:05 pm |

    On the other hand, Hugo, it seems to me that the best way to deal with this problem is not to make rules about where good girls let semen touch them, but to work on the attitude that semen is yucky. I know I would feel trapped if men thought my orgasms were gross and I didn’t blame them. I think it almost necessarily leads to a virgin/whore dichotomy to relegate certain sex acts to only being performable with people you think of as less than human.

  40. Thomas
    Thomas May 24, 2006 at 2:14 pm |

    And I don’t suppose it’s occurred to any of these guys who never give the slightest thought to what a woman might really be feeling, that a giant dick might, you know, hurt?

    Interesting point, Kyra, and I think one that puts the focus on the importance of skill rather than anatomy. Every body is different, but IME, adult womens’ vaginas can stretch to accomodate girth far beyond any naturally occurring human penis (and I don’t mean birth, which is really at the limits of human capacity and quite dangerous). Given enough time, patience, sensitivity and lubrication. By contrast, Tab-A-In-Slot-B penetration can be miserable and painful (for most women, I suspect) with even a very modest penis.

    Penis size is probably a physical limiting factor with anal sex much more often, though there also lubrication and communication can make something work that would be untenable for straight-away insertion.

  41. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite May 24, 2006 at 2:16 pm |

    I’d be stunned if even a minority of men watching “facial porn” ever say “Wow, that’s really impressive. Look at that woman lovingly expressing her radical acceptance of her boyfriend’s body.” What I suspect (and indeed know) that many of these guys are saying is something along the lines of “Look at that fucking bitch take it. That’s hot.”

    Hmm. Seems to me that if a guy believes his cum is disgusting, he’ll have the latter response. But if he fears that his cum — and by extension his body, and his sexuality — are disgusting, he might well have … well, no, not quite the former response, but maybe something along the lines of “She likes me! She really likes me!”

  42. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite May 24, 2006 at 2:26 pm |

    If anything, it seems that semen is given a more privileged place than other body fluids. Of all those I listed above, which are you more likely to swallow?

    You left saliva and vaginal fluid off of your list. I think that those two — and semen — are for most adults in a distinct category from the others.

    Would you similarly make the argument that letting someone pee on your face isn’t demeaning because it’s accepting all parts of your partner?

    No. There’s clearly plenty of porn that’s about humiliation, and semen can obviously be used as a prop in that kind of porn.

    But I do think that a lot of men are tremendously insecure about their sexual attractiveness, and for such men porn offers fantasies of acceptance as well as domination.

  43. Sara
    Sara May 24, 2006 at 2:28 pm |

    Jill, I think about the battle for acceptance of going down on women, though. It’s just as excretey and slimy as anything involving semen, but I don’t think feminists are about to tell guys that they can skip it because they think it’s icky.

  44. Thomas
    Thomas May 24, 2006 at 2:31 pm |

    Sara, I think Hugo is right about the breakdown (and I think you agree): it’s much more about degradation than radical acceptance. I think the way to handle it is neither to make any activity “off-limits” nor to simply wave away the intentions and try to change the culture. I think the answer is to address it. The readership here, at least, is a bunch of folks who like to analyze and hopefully can have frank discussions with sex partners about likes, dislikes and limits. If the intent matters, then the answer to “can I come on your face?” may be, “depends on why you want to.”

  45. Thomas
    Thomas May 24, 2006 at 2:41 pm |

    I think as feminists we have to critically evaluate sexual acts and the imaging of sexual acts, and we have to realize that as much as we might like sex, it’s not being had in a vacuum. Partiarchy influences it, and while I still think that it’s ok to enjoy patriarchy-approved and cock-centric sex acts, I’ll maintain that it’s necessary to constantly re-evaluate them through a feminist lens and ask, “What does this mean? What does it mean that I enjoy this?” I think that that’s good, so long as we can do it without judging each other, making ourselves feel guilty, or inferring that sex for pleasure is somehow “dirty” or wrong.

    That’s what I would have written if I were as eloquent as Jill.

  46. Sara
    Sara May 24, 2006 at 2:43 pm |

    Jill, I think I was getting at what Brooklynite said – there are other “privileged” bodily excretions that are involved in sex, one of which I think is often held sacrosanct by feminists being vaginal fluids.

    But to finish what I half-said before, I agree that the anti-semen attitude is obviously going to make the “facial” about humiliation, but I just don’t see how a healthy attitude toward male orgasm can be portrayed in porn with prevalent anti-semen feelings. If you can’t respect someone who will associate themself with your semen, but you can’t have an orgasm without creating semen, you’re going to be forced into these unhealthy virgin/whore dichotomies with routine parts of your sex life. In other words, we can’t up the respect quotient in porn by taking away semen, since it’s a necessary part of male sexuality, so the only thing we can really work on is the attitude toward it.

  47. Dianna
    Dianna May 24, 2006 at 2:44 pm |

    And I don’t suppose it’s occurred to any of these guys who never give the slightest thought to what a woman might really be feeling, that a giant dick might, you know, hurt?

    I’m fairly sure that’s part of the appeal, actually. Because how else does a big dick enable this absolute domination they’re talking about if not by inflicting pain?

    There’s some sneaky but interesting logic here: if you’re deliberately hurting your partner, then you’re open to accusations of abuse. But if you’re just so big that you can’t help but hurt her, obviously it’s not that you’re sadistic or cruel, you’re just so much man that it’s hard to control. The “big dick, can’t help it” rhetoric allows people (and I think this could apply to anyone, including the receiving partner) to plausibly deny that they’re thinking “oh, yeah, it would be hot if this was hurting her”. But, of course, it’s a bit transparent if you’re actively seeking that big dick so that you can say you just can’t help it.

  48. zuzu
    zuzu May 24, 2006 at 2:46 pm |

    Now, I do think Sara makes a great argument in pointing out that we attach a ridiculous ickiness factor to semen — but don’t we do that with most things our bodies excrete? Semen, menstrual blood, piss, shit, mucus… I don’t think that semen is perceived as “gross” because it’s sexual, but just because we think most things our bodies expel are gross (with the exception of babies).

    Let’s not forget, there is a reason to be a bit wary of semen, given that it can a) get you pregnant and b) transmit various diseases. I’m also not terribly fond of having people squirt things in my face or near my eyes.

    My issue with the whole “Can I come on your face?” phenomenon is that I’ve only been getting this question for a year or two. Ten years ago, or even five, nobody asked me to do this, and yet we had good sex. I don’t watch porn — it doesn’t interest me — so I hadn’t connected this to any sort of changes in adult entertainment.

  49. Hugo
    Hugo May 24, 2006 at 3:33 pm |

    Jill makes the case well, and zuzu’s recent experiences tend to validate that this is a new, porn-inspired phenomenon. If it were merely about a universal need for validation, we would have expected to see men asking to do this years ago.

    I won’t claim to be extraordinarily experienced, but I will say that through several marriages and numerous other short and long-term relationships with women, the thought of asking to come on a woman’s face never crossed my mind until I heard about it (2001?) from a friend who was really, really, really obsessed with porn. And what he showed me did involve groups of men showering a single woman with so much semen that she appeared unable to see. It was shocking to me because it was so absolutely new, so absolutely out of tune with anything I had ever considered or fantasized about. And so from the start, I connected it to degradation rather than acceptance.

    At the same time, I think we all do need to do more to work towards greater acceptance of our own bodies and the bodies of our partners, including what we excrete when we orgasm or are excited. But we ought to do so in a way that is sensitive to the reality that “marking territory” seems to be an increasingly central part of porn-inspired male fantasy.

  50. Tuomas
    Tuomas May 24, 2006 at 4:14 pm |

    Which is somewhat different than how women are advertised to, isn’t it? Notice how this ad doesn’t say, “Dick too small? Give this a try!” It just says, “Use this and fuck your lady like a pro!” Ads targeted at women similarly play on insecurities, and similarly offer fantasy solutions, but they do it by explicitly pointing out your hideous, unimaginable flaws first.

    They still play on male insecurity that his manhood just isn’t up to par, and they do it in completely dishonest ways, playing into thoroughly fucked assumptions of what sex is. Sex does not have to be the all-powerful male “dominating” and “over-powering” his docile female in a solely penetrative act. This sucks for women in all the obvious ways. But this also really sucks for men.

    Hmm, true.

    To generalize for a pattern:

    I think often ads directed at women play on insecurities directly, while promising power/influence indirectly.

    Ads directed to men play on insecurities indirectly, while promising power directly.

    Most advertisements for appearence/sex related stuff falls in that pattern.

    Broce:

    Ejaculate in enormous quantities?

    Great. Now couples can argue about who sleeps in the *huge* wet spot.

    Of course there will be no argument. Big penis and lots of semen will DOMINATE the woman. It must be true if e-mail spam promised it.

  51. r@d@r
    r@d@r May 24, 2006 at 4:31 pm |

    re:
    “Notice how this ad doesn’t say, “Dick too small? Give this a try!” It just says, “Use this and fuck your lady like a pro!” […]Guys get to skip the whole associating-with-small-dick-man thing when it comes to penis ads. Because advertisers wouldn’t want to insult you by insinuating that your penis — the root of all manhood and wordly importance — is on the small side. No, no, your penis is plenty big — it’s just not professional, porn-star big. Yet. “

    interestingly enough, i do find myself deleting dozens of spam emails per day with the exact subject line: “dick too small?” don’t know if it’s significant, but they all originate from “non-western” countries…maybe spammers are uniquely uncaring about insulting their prospective customers, since the market share of people who actually answer these ads is relatively narrow…but beyond that point i tend to agree with you, especially about the dubious eroticism of “bukkake”. it’s about eroticising the humiliation of the hated other, which every jungian knows is impossible without a hated shadow-self.

  52. Marksman2000
    Marksman2000 May 24, 2006 at 5:46 pm |

    I can GUARANTEE over 100 responses to this thread, Jill.

  53. Glaivester
    Glaivester May 24, 2006 at 7:17 pm |

    I find the very idea of oral sex gross (giving or receiving), so the idea of trying to ejaculate on a person’s face is – ew.

  54. Kyra
    Kyra May 24, 2006 at 7:48 pm |

    Every body is different, but IME, adult womens’ vaginas can stretch to accomodate girth far beyond any naturally occurring human penis (and I don’t mean birth, which is really at the limits of human capacity and quite dangerous). Given enough time, patience, sensitivity and lubrication. By contrast, Tab-A-In-Slot-B penetration can be miserable and painful (for most women, I suspect) with even a very modest penis.

    And the guys who are obsessed with and/or glorifying size are generally not the type to think of providing time, patience, sensitivity, and lubrication. Or anything else that’d interfere with their “hours of penetrating their partner.”

    Incidentally, while it’s true they stretch horizontally, they don’t exactly stretch vertically. Something banging on the cervix isn’t exactly a walk in the park. Heck, even putting in a tampon can hurt if you don’t aim correctly.

  55. evil_fizz
    evil_fizz May 24, 2006 at 7:53 pm |

    I just don’t see how a healthy attitude toward male orgasm can be portrayed in porn with prevalent anti-semen feelings.

    Well, my real question is why we have to see the proverbial money shot at all. Or I am mistaken in thinking that when most couples have P/V sex, the guy comes inside the woman? That, to me, is what makes it so bizaare. That the entire thing is so phallo-centric that the male orgasm must be highlighted in whatever (often degrading) way possible.

  56. Kyra
    Kyra May 24, 2006 at 8:11 pm |

    Oh, regarding all this discussion about “facials” (dumb name) and their comparison to oral sex, how often does a guy who’s giving oral sex to a woman rub his face over her to get the lubrication she produces smeared all over his face? (Or rather, how often does she rub herself over his face for that result, which is closer to the equivalent of it.)

    A mouth is sort of self-cleaning. Once it’s on your face it serves to simply create a mess. Without invitation, it’s sort of like pouring a drink over the floor of someone’s house rather than in the sink. And seeing as one gets the orgasm regardless of where one points when one ejaculates, I don’t see the point.

  57. zuzu
    zuzu May 24, 2006 at 8:25 pm |

    Also, how is it remotely “anti-semen” to not want to have someone spray semen on your face?

  58. nerdlet
    nerdlet May 24, 2006 at 8:45 pm |

    “But to finish what I half-said before, I agree that the anti-semen attitude is obviously going to make the “facial” about humiliation, but I just don’t see how a healthy attitude toward male orgasm can be portrayed in porn with prevalent anti-semen feelings. If you can’t respect someone who will associate themself with your semen, but you can’t have an orgasm without creating semen, you’re going to be forced into these unhealthy virgin/whore dichotomies with routine parts of your sex life. In other words, we can’t up the respect quotient in porn by taking away semen, since it’s a necessary part of male sexuality, so the only thing we can really work on is the attitude toward it.”

    There’s a difference between someone who says “ew, ew, ew gross, semen, get it off!” and someone who just doesn’t want it on them or to swallow it. I think porn is the biggest factor here, but even without the whole “marking your territory” attitude pushed by it, plenty of women are just going to be grossed out by the insistence that they swallow a big chunk of snot-like fluid or let a guy come on their face just to prove that they’re not repulsed by the guy’s body. And plenty aren’t grossed out by it, and I don’t see why such a male preference should be a requirement rather than a kink.

    Now, since this is the TMI thread, I’m fine with performing fellatio, but I’m grossed out by the taste and texture of semen. I don’t think it’s comparable to saliva and vaginal fluids because if you’re getting either of those in your mouth, you’re not getting them in such huge amounts unless something unusual is going on. I’d be just as grossed out if I was expected to swallow a teaspoon of spit or vaginal fluids, or have them sprayed on my face, as I am by semen – in fact, I’m more okay with having large quantities of semen on my body than I am spit.

    I do agree, though, that there are plenty of guys who are ashamed of their naked bodies, or basic, I don’t know, sexuality, and that’s not something that’s discussed often. Mostly I blame porn, too bad there’s nothing to be done about it.

  59. Marksman2000
    Marksman2000 May 24, 2006 at 8:52 pm |

    I find the very idea of oral sex gross (giving or receiving), so the idea of trying to ejaculate on a person’s face is – ew.

    So what’s your idea of kinky sex? Missionary with the lights off?

  60. sophonisba
    sophonisba May 25, 2006 at 12:02 am |

    I just don’t see how a healthy attitude toward male orgasm can be portrayed in porn with prevalent anti-semen feelings.

    I, for one, know that a man doesn’t really have a healthy attitude towards my kisses when he won’t let me spit on him. This anti-saliva attitude is a great barrier to acceptance and intimacy.

  61. Rad Geek
    Rad Geek May 25, 2006 at 12:25 am |

    Brooklynite:

    But I do think that a lot of men are tremendously insecure about their sexual attractiveness, and for such men porn offers fantasies of acceptance as well as domination.

    I’m not sure that this really addresses the question. For many men “sexual attractiveness” and “acceptance” (being sexually “liked,” etc.) are themselves cashed out in terms of domination. If these “fantasies” portray “attractiveness” as a sort of force that overwhelms initial reluctance or produces sexual frenzy out of nowhere then they are portraying “acceptance” as more about domination over a woman than they are about the woman’s autonomous desire. (And I think an awful lot of pornography does portray “acceptance” like that.) Indeed the whole scripting in terms of men “offering” and women either “accepting” or “rejecting” is itself part of the problem.

    Jill:

    The practice itself isn’t inherently demeaning or disgusting, but I think that reality of how it’s performed in the sex industry is troubling. That said, there’s obviously a distinction between what people see in the pornos they watch and what they actually do and feel. But the lines can get blurry.

    Right, and I think the reality of how it’s performed outside the sex industry (or, how men very often expect for it to be performed) is also pretty troubling. Those lines get especially blurry when what people (or specifically, men) do and feel, or what they “fantasize” about doing, is deeply influenced by what they see in the pornos they watch.

    Sara:

    I just don’t see how a healthy attitude toward male orgasm can be portrayed in porn with prevalent anti-semen feelings …

    It probably can’t. A healthy attitude toward male orgasm probably can’t be portrayed in porn at all, in a society where sexuality is so often laced with male manipulation and domination of women, whatever the feelings towards semen in particular. In point of fact, I’d say we should worry more about the former than the latter, since if you knock out the attitude that semen is dirty but don’t knock out the attitude that sex between men and women should be about the man dirtying and degrading the woman, then these kind of humiliation rituals will just be expressed in different ways, not involving the smearing of semen.

    … since it’s a necessary part of male sexuality, so the only thing we can really work on is the attitude toward it.

    But semen isn’t a necessary part of male sexuality. Satisfying and pleasurable sex may or may not have anything to do with a man ejaculating, let alone going to some special effort to ejaculate visibly on someone’s face or body.

    nerdlet:

    I do agree, though, that there are plenty of guys who are ashamed of their naked bodies, or basic, I don’t know, sexuality, and that’s not something that’s discussed often. Mostly I blame porn, too bad there’s nothing to be done about it.

    Well. The men in question could always stop watching porn, if it makes them feel bad about themselves.

    Marksman2000:

    So what’s your idea of kinky sex? Missionary with the lights off?

    Please let’s not go there. Neither Glaivester nor anybody else is under some kind of mandate to enjoy oral sex, or for that matter any kind of sex at all.

  62. Raging Moderate
    Raging Moderate May 25, 2006 at 1:25 am |

    Oh, regarding all this discussion about “facials” (dumb name) and their comparison to oral sex, how often does a guy who’s giving oral sex to a woman rub his face over her to get the lubrication she produces smeared all over his face?

    Since it’s the TMI thread, I once had a girlfriend who ejaculated when she orgasmed.

    So I’m a heterosexual man who has been “facialed” by a woman many times and never found it degrading. Was pretty hot, actually.

  63. Thomas
    Thomas May 25, 2006 at 5:33 am |

    And the guys who are obsessed with and/or glorifying size are generally not the type to think of providing time, patience, sensitivity, and lubrication. Or anything else that’d interfere with their “hours of penetrating their partner.”

    Agreed. For the patriarchal, lazy and selfish, a big penis is either an impediment or a tool for abuse. For guys with the willingness to communicate, it’s just a big penis.

    Incidentally, while it’s true they stretch horizontally, they don’t exactly stretch vertically. Something banging on the cervix isn’t exactly a walk in the park. Heck, even putting in a tampon can hurt if you don’t aim correctly.

    Certainly. After a certain point, length is wasted.

  64. nerdlet
    nerdlet May 25, 2006 at 8:48 am |

    Well. The men in question could always stop watching porn, if it makes them feel bad about themselves.

    I’d hope they would. But porn isn’t going away – it just keeps popping up in more and more places, and it keeps getting worse. Bleh.

  65. MissKate
    MissKate May 25, 2006 at 9:53 am |

    Okay, somebody needs to say this:

    A cock can be too big. Yes, the female sex organs can stretch a hell of a lot, but they come in a variety of sizes and capacities for stretching. And to get them to max stretch capacity, it can take quite a bit of effort.

    I’m built, how would one say it, ‘little on the inside”. I’ve been told so a few times. It’s supposedly a very, very good thing. I’ve also been in a long term relationship with a guy for whom Magnum XLs were a little small. Yes, sex was possible, but the sheer effort to make it so was insane, and even when I was all stretch out, I felt like my body was straining. The sex was great, sure, but the times when I didn’t have enough time to warm up… my body tore. Tore like cloth.

    I’m now in a long term relationship witha guy who is a bit smaller than the previously mentioned, probably a bit above average, and I am grateful beyond words. He’s packing plenty for me, and sex can actually be spontaneous, we can even have quickies (read: I don’t need half an hour of foreplay for sex to be physically possible). Having the equipment line up size-wise opens so many options — positions I couldn’t do before, things like that. It is so much better. And it doesn’t hurt.

    Bigger is DEFINITELY NOT always better.

  66. Thomas
    Thomas May 25, 2006 at 10:22 am |

    Kate, I guess needing a half-hour of warm-up has its downsides. It takes me that long to take the really, really big dildo, which is loads of fun, but we do not always have that kind of time either. Of course my wife and I can always just change equipment.

    Now there’s a project for cutting-edge biotech: variable girth penises, expandable and contractible at will to fit the available anatomy and the desired feel.

  67. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite May 25, 2006 at 10:31 am |

    Evil fizz:

    Well, my real question is why we have to see the proverbial money shot at all.

    The cumshot’s been around for a long time. I’ve always had the impression that it started out as a way of proving that the sex act was “real” — that it was carried through to completion. (With, yes, completion being defined as male orgasm. And yes, that’s messed up.)

    One thing I wonder — is the recent fad for facial cumshots contemporaneous with the introduction of condoms into het porn? Are condoms are used for vaginal and anal sex but not oral? If so, that may be part of what’s driving the trend.

    This gets at a larger issue: the ways in which the logistical imperatives of porn drive the content, which in turn shaper viewers’ sexual expectations and desires. It’s kind of like the old joke about the roast — I expect that there are a lot of people out there contorting themselves into uncomfortable positions because they saw them in porn, when the only reason they appeared in porn in the first place was that they made certain camera angles possible.

    Rad Geek:

    For many men “sexual attractiveness” and “acceptance” (being sexually “liked,” etc.) are themselves cashed out in terms of domination.

    Absolutely — and that’s an important point. Both/and.

  68. big annie
    big annie May 25, 2006 at 10:32 am |

    MissKate,
    Can you tell me where I can find your old boyfriend?

    Only kidding!

  69. Unwilling Self-Negation » On Adjectives and Rape

    […] d, Liberal, America — eteraz @ 1:41 pm The following post from Feministe is quite interesting (and it leads to […]

  70. Sara
    Sara May 25, 2006 at 2:06 pm |

    RadGeek, I think it’s really dismissive to say that semen isn’t an integral part of male sexuality. It may not be involved in 100% of sexual encounters, but I’d say that orgasm is pretty important to the sexual experience of most people.

    I also get a weird vibe from the way that “phallocentric” sex acts are being derided here. If you’re having sex with someone who has a phallus, there’s going to be a little bit of phallocentric activity going on. I’d say that a blow job is a pretty phallocentric act, but it can certainly have a comfortable place in an egalitarian relationship between a man and a woman. When everything a man and woman do in bed is phallocentric, she’s obviously getting a raw deal. A guy ejaculating on his partner’s face while she uses a vibrator to have an orgasm is – all partners willing – a good time for all.

    Ultimately, I think there is a clear double-standard being expressed here against semen. Comparing ejaculating to spitting is rather silly because most semen is expelled in a, well, ejaculatory manner. You don’t generally do a lot of spitting when you’re having sex, but ejaculating is something that is going to be a natural part of a male’s sex life.

    If a man can’t accept that your vagina is full of bacteria and gooshy and smooshy – and spend a significant amount of time face-down in it – he’s called a misogynist or at least a sexophobe. And I’m not the only one here expressing that the relative messiness of going down on any gender is pretty equal. Here many are saying they’re not grossed out by semen, but only semen when it’s not in their vagina, or semen when it exists in a certain quantity. I don’t know how different that is than a guy saying he likes a wet pussy as long as it’s freshly douched.

    I realize we don’t live in a vacuum, and I’m not trying to accuse anyone of being a square or a prude or anything. Whether you don’t want to perform a sexual act out of concern for your own safety, or if you just feel that anal sex is yucky, your sex life exists for you to enjoy so there’s no use pressuring anyone to do anything. You don’t have to have a logical reason to back up your preferences, since “I like it” or “I don’t like it” are all that needs to be known when communicating about these kinds of things with a partner. Still, if you can examine your assumptions and come to appreciate new things that you and your partner can try, that’s always fun too. The nasty patriarchal misogynist things that obviously show through in things like bukkake are there, but that doesn’t mean that other currents of thought about acceptance and celebration of orgasm can’t also be there. And, given a good relationship or a great porn director (or an especially hot homemade porno), it might be that the bad things aren’t there at all.

  71. Tammy
    Tammy May 25, 2006 at 2:24 pm |

    But to finish what I half-said before, I agree that the anti-semen attitude is obviously going to make the “facial” about humiliation, but I just don’t see how a healthy attitude toward male orgasm can be portrayed in porn with prevalent anti-semen feelings. If you can’t respect someone who will associate themself with your semen, but you can’t have an orgasm without creating semen, you’re going to be forced into these unhealthy virgin/whore dichotomies with routine parts of your sex life. In other words, we can’t up the respect quotient in porn by taking away semen, since it’s a necessary part of male sexuality, so the only thing we can really work on is the attitude toward it.

    I find it simplistic and untrue to assume that not wanting a shot to the face indicates a dislike of semen. Rest assured, plenty of women happily swallow it, let a guy come on their stomach, whatever. But trying to get it in someone’s eyes or nose is hostile.

  72. Sara
    Sara May 25, 2006 at 2:37 pm |

    Tammy, I didn’t mean to imply that was the case. And yeah, having anything in your nose is uncomfortable when you’re trying to breathe. There are the scenes that are hostile (most), but they’re not all that way. For instance, what I think of is the fact that when performing oral sex, it’s not impossible that semen might get on your face, and that doesn’t seem especially malicious to me. All I mean to say is that spooge on a woman’s cheek isn’t inherently degrading, unless you think semen is a sort of ritually impure fluid to begin with.

  73. Marksman2000
    Marksman2000 May 25, 2006 at 2:41 pm |

    I’ve also been in a long term relationship with a guy for whom Magnum XLs were a little small. Yes, sex was possible, but the sheer effort to make it so was insane, and even when I was all stretch out, I felt like my body was straining. The sex was great, sure, but the times when I didn’t have enough time to warm up… my body tore. Tore like cloth.

    You might want to be careful about that.

    You can compare it to eating too much fried food in your 20’s and 30’s, only to end up having a heart attack when you’re in your 40’s or 50’s. Enjoy it now, but pay for it later.

    I went out with a couple girls who must have dated your ex. Intercourse was like sitting in the nosebleed section of the Super Dome and throwing a Tic-Tac at the 50-yard line. Like parking a bicycle in an airplane hangar. I mean it looked like hand grenade went off inside of them. No kiddin’, yo.

    One of these days you might meet your dream guy, Mr. Right, or whatever you’ll want to call him. You’ll embrace, stare into one another’s eyes, caress, kiss, and begin to make love. Then, next thing he knows, it’s like bangin’ a mud puddle. Zoom. He’s gone–and I don’t mean he falls in either.

    Sumptin’ to think about.

  74. zuzu
    zuzu May 25, 2006 at 2:58 pm |

    That’s really disgusting, Marksman.

    Because it can’t be about the pain and the tearing for the woman, it has to be about her later boyfriends’ sexual pleasure.

    Christ.

    For instance, what I think of is the fact that when performing oral sex, it’s not impossible that semen might get on your face, and that doesn’t seem especially malicious to me.

    “Getting some on your face incidentally during a blowjob” is not the same thing as “having someone pull his dick out of your pussy just before ejaculating and spraying it in your eyes and nose.” Which is also pretty much why discussions of men getting vaginal fluid on their faces during cunnilingus is irrelevant to a discussion of why facials can be seen as a hostile act.

  75. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite May 25, 2006 at 3:10 pm |

    “Getting some on your face incidentally during a blowjob” is not the same thing as “having someone pull his dick out of your pussy just before ejaculating and spraying it in your eyes and nose.” Which is also pretty much why discussions of men getting vaginal fluid on their faces during cunnilingus is irrelevant to a discussion of why facials can be seen as a hostile act.

    I don’t think anyone’s disputing that facials can be seen as a hostile act. And without re-reading the thread, I don’t think anyone’s disputing that “having someone pull his dick out of your pussy just before ejaculating and spraying it in your eyes and nose” is a hostile act, either.

    But what about a blowjob scene in which a woman, when a guy gets close to coming, jerks him off to orgasm and directs his come toward her mouth? Isn’t that at least a little more ambiguous?

  76. evil_fizz
    evil_fizz May 25, 2006 at 3:10 pm |

    Marksman, that’s revolting beyond measure. And if you try and follow it up with, “But it’s true!”, I decline to be responsible for what follows.

  77. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite May 25, 2006 at 3:18 pm |

    Oh, and buzz off, Marksman. Nobody thinks you’re funny.

  78. evil_fizz
    evil_fizz May 25, 2006 at 3:19 pm |

    If a man can’t accept that your vagina is full of bacteria and gooshy and smooshy – and spend a significant amount of time face-down in it- he’s called a misogynist or at least a sexophobe. And I’m not the only one here expressing that the relative messiness of going down on any gender is pretty equal. Here many are saying they’re not grossed out by semen, but only semen when it’s not in their vagina, or semen when it exists in a certain quantity. I don’t know how different that is than a guy saying he likes a wet pussy as long as it’s freshly douched.

    First, gooshy and smooshy? Are you serious? Second, I don’t think your analogy holds. There’s a marked difference between “I don’t want semen up my nose” and “You must meet precisely these conditions before I put my mouth there.”

  79. zuzu
    zuzu May 25, 2006 at 3:24 pm |

    But what about a blowjob scene in which a woman, when a guy gets close to coming, jerks him off to orgasm and directs his come toward her mouth? Isn’t that at least a little more ambiguous?

    Blowjob scene, or blowjob?

    Plus, if she’s holding the cock, she’s directing where the semen goes.

  80. Thomas
    Thomas May 25, 2006 at 3:35 pm |

    Marksman, if that’s the line you have to sling to overcome your own insecurity about your penis size, I can’t even be mad at you. You are living proof of the post above: damaged by patriarchy. I feel for you.

  81. Dustin
    Dustin May 25, 2006 at 3:42 pm |

    I don’t think anyone’s disputing that facials can be seen as a hostile act.

    Boy Feministe’s come a long way from talking about cute stuff Lauren’s kid does!

    Anyway, does it have to be pointed out that any sexual act can be a hostile act? Just holding someone’s hand can be a hostile act. I don’t think it’s inherent to any particular sex act in and of itself — hostility is a matter of intention and emotional context, not where and how you come. There are people who create incredibly intimite and respectful situations together while one is tied up and the other is urinating or defecating on them — certainly we can recognize the possibility of a pleasant facial.

    There’s something missing from — or maybe just silently implied by — the comments in this thread. Hostile sexual acts really aren’t directed towards dominating a women, or women in general — women are already dominated (or she wouldn’t be on her knees begging for that facial now, would she?). Women are only objects in hostile sexual relations; they are used by men for men. The point is not to make her feel dirty or worthless (this is a patriarchy — she’s already dirty and worthless) but in doing so to show other men that one is a man, that one is committed to the patriarchal arrangement from which one’s privileges flow. Look at that spam again — it’s written man-to-man (as are most of them). “She” is the third person (the non-subject, non-person, in one school of linguistics) — one isn’t having sex with a woman but with “your partner” (emphasis on the possesive, I think).

    I try to imagine a similar ad written in a woman’s voice:

    Hey, guy, you have a tiny penis. There’s no way you could satisfy me with that thing. I need something I can feel down there. Get that tiny thing out of my face. Or, you could try this amazing miracle patch! Then you could actually get me off!

    Well, it doesn’t really come off — I almost can’t imagine it. The point is, having a big penis, keeping it up all night long, tearing her up inside, dominating her, all that stuff — that’s bragging rights. It has nothing at all to do with whether a woman is satisfied, except inasmuch as it looks good if you can keep a woman. But that can be done just as easily with violence and threats as with orgasms — and, frankly, it doesn’t look so bad to bang ‘em and drop ‘em, either. Especially if she left you because she just couldn’t take your giant, always erect penis.

  82. Anne
    Anne May 25, 2006 at 3:44 pm |

    Assuming Marksman isn’t kidding: the popular notion that women can be permanently “stretched out” by lots of sex or by sex with men with large penises is a myth, and it’s not too hard to guess why the myth is so popular, is it?

  83. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite May 25, 2006 at 3:46 pm |

    Blowjob scene, or blowjob?

    Either. Both.

    I don’t get the whole external-ejaculation fetish, myself. And I’m hesitant to pass judgment on fetishes that don’t get me going.

    But yeah, a facial cumshot makes more sense to me as a cinematic convention than as a real-life practice, and yeah, I guess I agree that, as a request, it’s a bit squicky.

    Plus, if she’s holding the cock, she’s directing where the semen goes.

    As a matter of fluid dynamics, yes. As a matter of interpersonal dynamics, maybe not. But it’s a facial either way, right?

  84. nerdlet
    nerdlet May 25, 2006 at 3:49 pm |

    I don’t know how different that is than a guy saying he likes a wet pussy as long as it’s freshly douched.

    Douching is gross and bad for women, but freshly showered – what’s wrong with that? Some people sweat more than others, some people have naturally stronger odors, some people are more sensitive to such odors. I don’t think it’s a big deal to shower or wipe down a few hours before sex if it bothers your partner. I say this as a woman who eats a lot of red onions.

    The only direct comparison that could be made here would be a guy being grossed out by swallowing/getting covered in a woman’s ejaculate. I’d think he has every right to not want to do that, but it’s not a great comparison because most women don’t ejaculate when they orgasm (and as far as I know, there’s still a debate about whether they actually ejaculate or just pee).

    The second-closest would be a guy not wanting to finger or go down a woman when she’s on her period, and again, I don’t see anything wrong with that: menstrual fluid is messy and smells bad if you’re close-up. Some women are particularly horny during their periods, so it sucks if guys don’t want to do anything sexual, and yes, it means that the guys are not fully accepting their bodies – menstruation is as natural as semen. But it’s still an imperfect comparison, because that’s a steady, uh, dose of fluids rather than a sudden two-teaspoon shot. I don’t think pre-cum squicks many women out, though, and it tends to come in fairly steady doses.

    If a guy thinks vaginas are gross, sex with women probably isn’t for him (though I wouldn’t automatically call every guy who dislikes performing oral sex on women a misogynist, just as I wouldn’t say every woman who dislikes fellatio isn’t doing her proper duty). If he can’t handle vaginas when they’re not completely sterilized and shaved, he probably has a problem. But if he just prefers that a woman shower an hour before he goes down on her or if he doesn’t want to have to *gulp* down any of her juices, no, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with him.

  85. Dustin
    Dustin May 25, 2006 at 3:53 pm |

    As long as we’re not holding back, I may as well address Marksman’s big vaginas. I very, very much doubt that our big ol’ boy-penii are really stretching women out. Sorry, Marksman, you have a small penis. We all do, relative to an organ that’s made to pass a baby’s head through. While we may bang a cervix once in a while (and if you’re like me, once you’ve done that once, you’re going to be very aware of the internal geography of your female partners from then on!) we’re really not built to cause permanent damage. If you’re talking about women in their 40s and 50s, you’re talking about a) women that have likely had babies, and that causes all sorts of bodily changes, not just in the vagina, and b) women whose skin has started to lose its elasticity. Unless your penis is as big around as your fist (or, what it sounds like Marksman is complaining about, his women’s last partners’ penii were), you can rest assured that you’re not leaving any permanent traces.

    Or so you think those crows’ feet and forehead wrinkles are also caused by our giant man-things? You think there’s a lot of eye-sex going on?

  86. Thomas
    Thomas May 25, 2006 at 3:54 pm |

    There are people who create incredibly intimite and respectful situations together while one is tied up and the other is urinating or defecating on them

    Second.

  87. Thomas
    Thomas May 25, 2006 at 3:58 pm |

    I know, there’s still a debate about whether they actually ejaculate or just pee

    AFAIK, there’s not a debate about people who know the field either technically or practically. I’ve had both in my mouth, and they are easily distinguishable.

  88. Thomas
    Thomas May 25, 2006 at 4:02 pm |

    once you’ve done that once, you’re going to be very aware of the internal geography of your female partners from then on

    Depends on the partner. Some women like that “bottoming out” feeling during vigorous intercourse. (I have no perspective on what it feels like, so I just have to trust what I’m told on that one.)

  89. evil_fizz
    evil_fizz May 25, 2006 at 4:12 pm |

    There are people who create incredibly intimite and respectful situations together while one is tied up and the other is urinating or defecating on them

    Second.

    Isn’t the point still to degrade and debase, though? I ask this seriously. It’s been my understanding that the point of such activities is pleasure though debasement, but Thomas, maybe you could speak to this issue a bit more?

  90. Shannon W.
    Shannon W. May 25, 2006 at 4:17 pm |

    Yea, it’s like how I really would prefer a man eat a healthy diet, unless he wants me not to swallow* because he tastes like shrimp. I think men who think a vagina has to be ‘shaved and sterilized’ may be suffering from too much porn but I’m not an expert

    *tested partners only

  91. Hugo
    Hugo May 25, 2006 at 4:35 pm |

    Wow. Let me take a small amount of credit for bringing up facials in comment #5.

    I’ve been wondering about the word “facial” itself. It’s the deliberate appropriation of a word that normally applies to a beauty procedure that women give themselves (or have a cosmetologist give them). It’s nt necessarily the only term to use for ejaculating on a woman’s face, but it seems to be the only one folks use these days.

  92. Dustin
    Dustin May 25, 2006 at 4:44 pm |

    Isn’t the point still to degrade and debase, though? I ask this seriously. It’s been my understanding that the point of such activities is pleasure though debasement, but Thomas, maybe you could speak to this issue a bit more?

    Well, I’m not Thomas, and he (or she, how would I know?) may have different thoughts on the matter, but if I may?

    Here’s what I think. Pleasure comes from all sorts of different places. There’s bodily pleasure — the feeling of something warm on or against you, the soft touch, the rough touch, the smack across the bottom or the face or in the balls (not for everyone, that one!) — and there’s let’s call it psychological pleasure — the feeling of being safe in your lover’s arms, the feeling of being lost in wild abandon, the feeling of giving over control to a partner. And, yes, the feeling of being humilated and degraded. Of course, the bodily and the psychological intersect so completely that sorting them out like this is really artificial, but setting that aside, it remains that there’s a whole lot of range within which pleasure can be (not to say “must be” or even necessarily “should be”) achieved. Now, in my experience, people bring all sorts of things into the bed (or kitchen counter, or car, or public restroom, or…) with them. That “stuff” informs and shapes our experience of sex, and it should not be surprising that often we work a lot of that “stuff” out through sex. And we work different stuff out through the same acts, and the same stuff out through different acts. I have met women for whom the submissive role was very enjoyable because their day-to-day lives did not allow them a moment’s softness or hesitation — submission in bed helped balance a dominant day-to-day demeanor. I’ve met women, too, for whom the submissive role was enjoyable because of overpowering parents or ex-lovers, or because their mothers (or fathers) were submissive, or because that’s their idea of what a woman is or should be. And I’ve met women for whom the submissive role was enjoyable because it was hot — and next time they might just as well be the dominant one. (I should note that I’ve slept with very few of these women, as whatever their reasons, I don’t find submissiveness appealing at all.) And about all the same reasons apply to women who enjoy being dominant.

    So, yes, being bound and defecated on may well be about humiliation and degradation — which tells us nothing about the character of the people engaging in it (except, again, that they aren’t me). Or it may be about learning — as some have insisted above in relation to semen and vaginal fluids and menstural blood and spit and female ejaculate (and nobody’s mentioned sweat, but that’s in there too!) — to accept all the parts of one’s lover, or to reject artificial cultural boundaries between “clean” and “dirty”. It may just be because it’s a taboo, and some people like breaking taboos. Until you’ve walked a mile in another man’s diaper or another woman’s barbed-wire bra, it’s impossible to say what motivates their sexual proclivities.

    The question isn’t so much what does a particular act “have to” mean or be about, but how does the particular act in a particular context have to tell us about day-to-day oppression or domination? One woman’s submission may well be a surrender to 10,000 years of patriarchy (as may another woman’s dominance); another woman’s submission (or dominance) may well be the rejection of same.

  93. Thomas
    Thomas May 26, 2006 at 9:23 am |

    I think there’s a spectrum that runs from (as Hugo put it) “radical acceptance” or another’s body to degradation. We all live with the socialization in our heads, and we adopt it or tune it out to varying degrees. Someone who takes in bodily fluids in an erotic context has a point in that spectrum in his or her head. When I started drinking piss, it was farther towards the degradation end of the spectrum; but in my very settled relationship and scene dynamics with my wife, I find that the predominant dynamic when I do those scenes as a submissive is the shared violation of social norms. There is a taboo against peeing in someone else’s presence (more for women than men) so strong that some women cannot pee if they are too aware of a presence in the next stall. There’s also, obviously, a taboo against touching or ingesting bodily fluids, stronger for some than others. The shared experience of deviance and bodily outlawry (to maybe coin a phrase) is very intimate.

    That’s not to say that there is no power dynamic at work. There is a very strong power dynamic. But just because I do something in a scene as a submissive, and even that doing it makes me feel submissive, does not mean that I’m disgusted by it or even that I don’t like it.

  94. dee
    dee May 26, 2006 at 5:09 pm |

    the word perma-bonner is forever engraved on my mind, least for the next 5 minutes.

    this article is right on. ending male domination requires (on top of many other things) deconstructing the myth of the penis.

    i dont think most penis bearing individuals know much about our anatomy beyond an erection. i mean… i learned enough in middle school sex ed to make me feel bad and/or scared to masterbate.
    did you know the sperms ‘tail’ operates like a propellar? wow amazing!

    this article subtly points out that there arent many sex toys out there aimed at the penis, well besides super objectifying blow up dolls and other degrading things.
    where are the empowering sex toys for the men, womyn, trannies with dicks?
    if you know of any let me know.

  95. NuggetMaven
    NuggetMaven May 26, 2006 at 6:47 pm |

    Excuse me if I missed something whilst doing my Evelyn Wood speed reading…

    But has anyone actually used the correct term for this phenomena, aka the facials?

    “Bukkake.” Google it. You just increased your word power by one.

    However, instead of making me horny or disgusted, the word bukkake makes me think of “cake.” Kind of ironic if one were to view semen as icing…

    On a personal note, and tho I don’t participate in this practice, I’d say that oppression/domination is in the eye of the receiver and the owner of the semen-filled-shlong in question.

    I “do” believe that bukkake scenes in porn IS for the shock value, that, “Look at what that bitch just took.” (Another phenomenon I’ve noticed lately are videos where men are screwing women, and spontaneously vomit on them… Actually I find this more disgusting and disrespectful of women).
    Regarding the mythology of the power of the dong… does anyone remember that Indiana Jones flick, “The Temple of Doom?” The holy stone which was the focus of that movie was known as a “Shiva Lingam.” A somewhat crudely phallic stone with three horizontal stripes.

    Quite literally, “Shiva Lingam” means, “(Lord) Shiva’s penis.” This is a commonplace statue one might encounter in a Hindu temple, as a statue for devotionals for Shivaite Hindus. The idea is to “pierce” the subconscious.

    Interesting but true… and even more interesting when you consider my husband is a “cradle Hindu,” and he never knew that a Shiva Lingam was literally Shiva’s penis until he met me.

    This next nugget might intrigue the feminists in this forum, that in Hinduism, the deity just as powerful if not MORE powerful than Shiva (Shiva is the destroyer of obstacles), is Kali-Ma (if you remember, the line in the Temple of Doom “Kali-ma! Shakti devi!” (Kali-ma! Give me strength!), the powerful female counterpoint to Shiva.

    If you were to Google “Goddess Kali ma” you will find all sorts of imagery, mostly of a black (or blue) Kali-ma, stomping on Shiva, her red tongue flicking in rage, and a belt of skulls around her waist.

    IMHO, the true myth about the power of the pecker is all a jedi mindtrick, and one that countless women have indulged men in for centuries.

    Post Script:

    [Totally tongue in cheek]

    Joke:
    Why are woman so poor at math?

    Punchline:
    Because all their lives they are told this (and THIS is defined by a hand jesture where the teller of the joke puts their index finger about an inch from their thumb) is eight inches.

  96. NuggetMaven
    NuggetMaven May 26, 2006 at 6:54 pm |

    PS:

    What concerns me most of all, and this is proof positive of what I referred to as the “Pornification of America,” is once folks have become blasse about bukkake, WHAT else will come down the pike to offend or shock?

    One thing I noticed when I was single after leaving my WASband was the propensity of men to ask me lewd, crude and socially unacceptable, what I thought was UNSPEAKABLE sexual favors on a first date, meet-and-greet. One man even revealed to me during our date, that the thing that compelled him to go out and meet me were my large feet, how they reminded him of his mother’s, and after we ordered our lunch, but before it arrived at our table, he let it be known he wanted to ejaculate on my feet.

    To me, the bukkake phenom, is indicative of not just the continued objectivication of women as sex objects, but also part and parcel of a greater social-communication breakdown between the genders.

  97. zuzu
    zuzu May 26, 2006 at 6:57 pm |

    That joke works just as well with “parallel parking” instead of “math.”

  98. Lynn Gazis-Sax
    Lynn Gazis-Sax May 26, 2006 at 9:01 pm |

    and spontaneously vomit

    Oh, yuck! Not only disgusting and disrespectful of women, but, for the men – having a job where you’re required to vomit to get paid? Please let it be fake vomiting. But even then, yuck!

    what I thought was UNSPEAKABLE sexual favors on a first date, meet-and-greet

    Eep! It’s been almost twenty years since I was available, and I remember getting sexual propositions in general terms on very short acquaintance, but nothing like that.

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.