For a while I've been intrigued by what goes on in the brain during sexual dreams. It seems like somehow, the usual connection between physical stimulation, erection, ejaculation, and the feeling of orgasm comes undone, in a way that is hard to predict. Clearly guys can have wet dreams without physically stimulating themselves, so in that sense it's possible to "think off" in your sleep. Last night I had an interesting alternative to that experience. I dreamed that I had two utterly authentic, wow-that-felt-great, honest-to-goodness orgasms, in rapid succession. But I didn't ejaculate. As I woke up afterwards I was certain I was going to find a puddle in my bed, but no, nothing. Just a nice firm erection. Which I proceeded to stimulate in the more usual manner, with the usual results :-)
Clearly the part of my brain that feels the pleasure of an orgasm was firing off without my body reacting in the usual way, and going into a refractory period afterwards. I wonder if there is some way to do that while awake.
Has anyone else had an equivalent experience?
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Buns of Iron!
Well, I went and saw Iron Man recently, and I just have to say "Purrrrrr" :-)
I mean, cool movie, lots of fun. And we already knew that Hollywood has no respect at all for the laws of physics, so no surprises there, but the two things that really stuck in my mind were Gwyneth Paltrow's hair, and Iron Man's bum.
I've wondered for a long time what Gwyneth Paltrow would look like as a redhead. Answer; quite yummy. I do find it amusing though that these movies cast blondes and dye their hair red (see also Kirsten Dunst in Spiderman) when there are plenty of talented and attractive redheaded actresses out there.
As for the Buns of Iron, I liked the first version of the high-tech suit. The shiny silver one, before it got the red-and-gold makeover. There was one all-too-brief glimpse of the titanium derriere which made me descend into a puddle of chrome-loving drool. Verily, it was a Hajime Sorayama wet dream come to life. I want one of those suits!
I mean, cool movie, lots of fun. And we already knew that Hollywood has no respect at all for the laws of physics, so no surprises there, but the two things that really stuck in my mind were Gwyneth Paltrow's hair, and Iron Man's bum.
I've wondered for a long time what Gwyneth Paltrow would look like as a redhead. Answer; quite yummy. I do find it amusing though that these movies cast blondes and dye their hair red (see also Kirsten Dunst in Spiderman) when there are plenty of talented and attractive redheaded actresses out there.
As for the Buns of Iron, I liked the first version of the high-tech suit. The shiny silver one, before it got the red-and-gold makeover. There was one all-too-brief glimpse of the titanium derriere which made me descend into a puddle of chrome-loving drool. Verily, it was a Hajime Sorayama wet dream come to life. I want one of those suits!
Saturday, May 3, 2008
More thoughts on open-source boobs
Well, this blog is all about my random thoughts, especially when I don't have salacious stories to share, so here's a few more random thoughts...
I've been musing off-and-on about the so-called Open Source Boob Project. As someone rightly pointed out, the name's a real misnomer, since the people who started it aren't contributing boobs, and in fact there is very little similarity at all to the open-source software (umm, no pun intended, for once) movement. But I digress...
So on the one hand, I think people are judging it too harshly. It doesn't seem like it was about a bunch of guys believing that they are entitled to sex, as some people have claimed. It seems more like they just wanted to cut out the awkwardness and embarassment of the normal courting process, and be able to ask women, directly, if some sexual interaction was okay. The women were always intended to be able to say "no".
On the other hand, I can see that the default option should be "no, it's not okay", and women don't want to have to live their lives constantly being asked if someone can cop a feel of their tits. Nor do they want to live in an environment where there's an chance of peer-pressure making them feel like they have to go along with something they don't really want to.
But what strikes me on further reflection here is that the folks whose brainchild this was were trying to solve what they perceived to be a problem. You can condemn them for their solution, but you can't fault them for trying. However, nobody who's been really critical of them has, to my knowledge, tried to do the same thing - identify a problem and find a solution for it. They've just indulged in name-calling, labelling these people "creeps", "nerds", or whatever.
I really feel that it's better to nurture than to punish, to educate rather than insult. So here's the problem I think needs to be solved - how do you educate the people who feel the need for an open-source boob project, so that they have a better chance of respecting women, and feeling fulfilled as men? If you could do that, you will have achieved a whole lot more than the
proposed open-source-knuckle-sandwich project ever could. Because let's face it, society does have some pretty fucked-up attitudes to sex. And while a lot of people have treated the women as victims of society's rediculous pressure to conform to stupid body-images, et cetera, men are often victims too. Victims of society's tendency to make women look unattainable and impossibly perfect. And that leads to a lot of insecurity on the part of men, which in turn leads a lot of men to act really badly around women, because they simply don't know what else to do. Hurling invective at such men is not going to rectify the problem, one little bit...
I've been musing off-and-on about the so-called Open Source Boob Project. As someone rightly pointed out, the name's a real misnomer, since the people who started it aren't contributing boobs, and in fact there is very little similarity at all to the open-source software (umm, no pun intended, for once) movement. But I digress...
So on the one hand, I think people are judging it too harshly. It doesn't seem like it was about a bunch of guys believing that they are entitled to sex, as some people have claimed. It seems more like they just wanted to cut out the awkwardness and embarassment of the normal courting process, and be able to ask women, directly, if some sexual interaction was okay. The women were always intended to be able to say "no".
On the other hand, I can see that the default option should be "no, it's not okay", and women don't want to have to live their lives constantly being asked if someone can cop a feel of their tits. Nor do they want to live in an environment where there's an chance of peer-pressure making them feel like they have to go along with something they don't really want to.
But what strikes me on further reflection here is that the folks whose brainchild this was were trying to solve what they perceived to be a problem. You can condemn them for their solution, but you can't fault them for trying. However, nobody who's been really critical of them has, to my knowledge, tried to do the same thing - identify a problem and find a solution for it. They've just indulged in name-calling, labelling these people "creeps", "nerds", or whatever.
I really feel that it's better to nurture than to punish, to educate rather than insult. So here's the problem I think needs to be solved - how do you educate the people who feel the need for an open-source boob project, so that they have a better chance of respecting women, and feeling fulfilled as men? If you could do that, you will have achieved a whole lot more than the
proposed open-source-knuckle-sandwich project ever could. Because let's face it, society does have some pretty fucked-up attitudes to sex. And while a lot of people have treated the women as victims of society's rediculous pressure to conform to stupid body-images, et cetera, men are often victims too. Victims of society's tendency to make women look unattainable and impossibly perfect. And that leads to a lot of insecurity on the part of men, which in turn leads a lot of men to act really badly around women, because they simply don't know what else to do. Hurling invective at such men is not going to rectify the problem, one little bit...
Friday, April 25, 2008
The Body Politic
Queenie and I recently became aware of the Open Source Boob Project, and the reaction to it, including this extraordinary outpouring of vitriol.
The short version, for those who can't be bothered following the links, is this; a group of guys were voicing the opinion that it'd be nice to be able to say "I want to touch your boobs" to a girl, rather than go through all the business of dating and whatever. One of their female companions volunteered her boobs. So did several others.
It's late, I can't be bothered writing a huge blog entry, I'd rather be curled up in bed, but I just had to voice some kind of opinion about this whole matter, and it's the following; Leaving aside the question of whether the guys involved were malicious or misguided, why are people unwilling to accept that the women involved were anything other than victims?
Yes, there are instances in which women get pressured into doing things they don't want to. That's undeniable, and wrong. But it annoys me immensely that some women simply cannot accept that sometimes this doesn't happen, sometimes it really is voluntary. They cannot seem to allow other women to be comfortable with sex. They have to condemn anyone who is comfortable with sex, as if doing something that makes men happy automatically makes you a weak, unwitting victim of the patriarchy.
It's closed-minded, it's messianic, and dammit, it's misogynistic. The assumption that men make all the rules and women are all automatically victims is inherently misogynistic. And the only women who aren't weak, deluded victims are, of course, the ones who agree with The High Priestesses, and have chosen to follow only the One True Path laid down by them!
Now I don't know if the Open Source Boob Project was a good idea, or a bad idea. I'm not about to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do with their bodies. It is, after all, their body, not mine. I think that's what called "respect". It'd be nice to see a bit more respect for the idea that some women are confident enough and smart enough and independent enough to choose what they allow to be done to their bodies. That not all women make their bodies sexually available because they are weak and need validation provided by men.
Some things really aren't a matter of gender politics. They're just choices.
There, that ought to get a few comments...
The short version, for those who can't be bothered following the links, is this; a group of guys were voicing the opinion that it'd be nice to be able to say "I want to touch your boobs" to a girl, rather than go through all the business of dating and whatever. One of their female companions volunteered her boobs. So did several others.
It's late, I can't be bothered writing a huge blog entry, I'd rather be curled up in bed, but I just had to voice some kind of opinion about this whole matter, and it's the following; Leaving aside the question of whether the guys involved were malicious or misguided, why are people unwilling to accept that the women involved were anything other than victims?
Yes, there are instances in which women get pressured into doing things they don't want to. That's undeniable, and wrong. But it annoys me immensely that some women simply cannot accept that sometimes this doesn't happen, sometimes it really is voluntary. They cannot seem to allow other women to be comfortable with sex. They have to condemn anyone who is comfortable with sex, as if doing something that makes men happy automatically makes you a weak, unwitting victim of the patriarchy.
It's closed-minded, it's messianic, and dammit, it's misogynistic. The assumption that men make all the rules and women are all automatically victims is inherently misogynistic. And the only women who aren't weak, deluded victims are, of course, the ones who agree with The High Priestesses, and have chosen to follow only the One True Path laid down by them!
Now I don't know if the Open Source Boob Project was a good idea, or a bad idea. I'm not about to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do with their bodies. It is, after all, their body, not mine. I think that's what called "respect". It'd be nice to see a bit more respect for the idea that some women are confident enough and smart enough and independent enough to choose what they allow to be done to their bodies. That not all women make their bodies sexually available because they are weak and need validation provided by men.
Some things really aren't a matter of gender politics. They're just choices.
There, that ought to get a few comments...
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Free-huggin' hippies!
It's completely non-sexual, and hence somewhat outside the scope of this blog, but yesterday I had a wonderul experience. I was eating lunch, sitting under a tree, when a group of girls walked by - one of them wearing a Free Hugs t-shirt. I ran up to her, asked if she really was one of those free hugs people, she said yep, and we threw ourselves into each other for a huge, shake-up-and-down, wag-your-legs-all-over-the-place kind of hug. And then we disengaged, exchanged huge smiles, and went our seperate ways.
It felt really good.
It felt really good.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Man delights me not (?)
Today I want to air a few thoughts that have been rattling around in my head for a while. These are related to the acceptability, or otherwise, of male bisexuality/bicuriousity.
Unless you've been living in another star system, where TV signals from the mid-1990s have yet to reach, you're undoubtedly aware that girls snogging each other is not really a bit taboo anymore. Thanks to everything from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine to The L Word, the media has become quite comfortable with straight women indulging in a little sapphic experimentation.
The result seems to be that female bisexuality/bicuriousity has become destigmatised in society. Of course there are still people who disapprove, but I get the feeling (from talking with friends and reading those sex surveys that pop up in independent newspapers and magazines every valentine's day) that a lot of straight girls are interested in trying an encounter with another girl.
For guys, on the other hand, there still seems to be a stigma. The media hasn't been flooded with male characters tongue-wrestling, the way girls did on Ally McBeal and whatever-else. Yet interestingly, if the sex surveys are to be believed, the number of bicurious guys is definitely on the increase.
So what's holding the guys back from going mainstream? I wonder if girls feel more comfortable experimenting with each other because the don't find each other threatening. Girls can snog on the dancefloor in a nightclub and write it off as a bit of fun. I wonder why guys can't. Maybe the difference lies partly in the fact that the gay male culture is well-established and visible, while the lesbian community is not so much so. Perhaps this makes guys feel more like they'll be perceived as joining the gay community, rather than just having a bit of fun and experimenting (which would make male bicuriousity feel like a more serious commitment than female bicuriousity).
Well, that's my random thought for the day. Comments?
Unless you've been living in another star system, where TV signals from the mid-1990s have yet to reach, you're undoubtedly aware that girls snogging each other is not really a bit taboo anymore. Thanks to everything from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine to The L Word, the media has become quite comfortable with straight women indulging in a little sapphic experimentation.
The result seems to be that female bisexuality/bicuriousity has become destigmatised in society. Of course there are still people who disapprove, but I get the feeling (from talking with friends and reading those sex surveys that pop up in independent newspapers and magazines every valentine's day) that a lot of straight girls are interested in trying an encounter with another girl.
For guys, on the other hand, there still seems to be a stigma. The media hasn't been flooded with male characters tongue-wrestling, the way girls did on Ally McBeal and whatever-else. Yet interestingly, if the sex surveys are to be believed, the number of bicurious guys is definitely on the increase.
So what's holding the guys back from going mainstream? I wonder if girls feel more comfortable experimenting with each other because the don't find each other threatening. Girls can snog on the dancefloor in a nightclub and write it off as a bit of fun. I wonder why guys can't. Maybe the difference lies partly in the fact that the gay male culture is well-established and visible, while the lesbian community is not so much so. Perhaps this makes guys feel more like they'll be perceived as joining the gay community, rather than just having a bit of fun and experimenting (which would make male bicuriousity feel like a more serious commitment than female bicuriousity).
Well, that's my random thought for the day. Comments?
Friday, March 14, 2008
Yup! Still here!
Well, it has been a while, but here's a quick update to say "we're still here". We've been travelling interstate catching up with our families, which has limited the sex-blogging opportunities. Hopefully we'll rectify that soon.
Also, I've decided to stop putting an "orgasms since last entry" count at the top of each post. It was starting to feel a bit too much like I was putting pressure on myself to perform. Shall be keeping the running total for the year, though.
And both Queenie and I were flattered to see comments on our blogs asking where we'd disappeared to. It gave us a big warm fuzzy feeling. Thanks :-)
Also, I've decided to stop putting an "orgasms since last entry" count at the top of each post. It was starting to feel a bit too much like I was putting pressure on myself to perform. Shall be keeping the running total for the year, though.
And both Queenie and I were flattered to see comments on our blogs asking where we'd disappeared to. It gave us a big warm fuzzy feeling. Thanks :-)
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Thanks for the memories
Yesterday's orgasm count: Seven
Well, yesterday was downright epic. I've really been enjoying the opportunity to dine at the Y, and Queenie hasn't been complaining. And besides that there's been the mutual, multiple orgasms as we strive to meld our bodies into one. I'd been overseas for so long, away from her, I'd almost forgotten what it felt like to hold the person you love, have sex, cuddle and stroke and hold each other, go back for a second helping, and collapse completely exhausted and completely satisfied, then fall asleep together.
I expect to be restoring that memory many times in the near future.
Well, yesterday was downright epic. I've really been enjoying the opportunity to dine at the Y, and Queenie hasn't been complaining. And besides that there's been the mutual, multiple orgasms as we strive to meld our bodies into one. I'd been overseas for so long, away from her, I'd almost forgotten what it felt like to hold the person you love, have sex, cuddle and stroke and hold each other, go back for a second helping, and collapse completely exhausted and completely satisfied, then fall asleep together.
I expect to be restoring that memory many times in the near future.
Homecumming
Orgams since last entry: Two. Not self-inflicted. At long bloody last!
If there's one thing that can make an intercontinental flight bearable it's not the inflight entertainment system. It's not those nifty little navigation displays that show you which miniscule soon-to-be-wiped-out-by-rising-sealevels island you're currently flying over, and it's certainly not the food. It's the knowledge that the person you love, whom you haven't set eyes on in too many months, will be waiting at the end of your journey.
Yesterday Queenie and I were reunited. I can't begin to tell you how happy, and how whole I feel. Words just aren't adequate, so I'm not even going to bother, other than to say that I shed tears of genki joy. And besides, you probably want to hear the juicy stuff!
I'm glad to say that jetlag is no match for our combined libidos. After refamiliarising myself with my home, and Queenie's wonderful, wonderful pheromones, I gleefully got busy with my tongue and worshipped her pussy. Considering how fond she is of penetration, it was extremely satisfying to see and hear her cum as a result of my tongue efforts. And after donning an appropriate layer of protective latex, she rode me. Slowly and firmly and sweetly and hard. And we screamed, hard. I had almost forgotten how close I come to permanently losing my voice when we cum together. Sex really is better when you say "stuff the neighbours, I don't care if they know I'm having a good time". The fact that her peaks set me off, so I get to share in the multiple orgasm experience, was just icing on the cake.
Hooray! :-)
If there's one thing that can make an intercontinental flight bearable it's not the inflight entertainment system. It's not those nifty little navigation displays that show you which miniscule soon-to-be-wiped-out-by-rising-sealevels island you're currently flying over, and it's certainly not the food. It's the knowledge that the person you love, whom you haven't set eyes on in too many months, will be waiting at the end of your journey.
Yesterday Queenie and I were reunited. I can't begin to tell you how happy, and how whole I feel. Words just aren't adequate, so I'm not even going to bother, other than to say that I shed tears of genki joy. And besides, you probably want to hear the juicy stuff!
I'm glad to say that jetlag is no match for our combined libidos. After refamiliarising myself with my home, and Queenie's wonderful, wonderful pheromones, I gleefully got busy with my tongue and worshipped her pussy. Considering how fond she is of penetration, it was extremely satisfying to see and hear her cum as a result of my tongue efforts. And after donning an appropriate layer of protective latex, she rode me. Slowly and firmly and sweetly and hard. And we screamed, hard. I had almost forgotten how close I come to permanently losing my voice when we cum together. Sex really is better when you say "stuff the neighbours, I don't care if they know I'm having a good time". The fact that her peaks set me off, so I get to share in the multiple orgasm experience, was just icing on the cake.
Hooray! :-)
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Anticipation
Orgasms since last entry: Five
At long last work is sending me back home for a while :-) I don't have much to say about it, except that today I climb on a plane, and soon will be in Queenie's arms again. And not a nanosecond too soon. If you feel Earth moving, it's just us!
That prospect makes me happy, beyond any words. I hope everyone reading this blog is happy too. The very best to all of you. And for the next little while, not all of the orgasms I keep track of here will be self-inflicted. So the stuff you get to read on this blog should become more interesting soon! :-)
At long last work is sending me back home for a while :-) I don't have much to say about it, except that today I climb on a plane, and soon will be in Queenie's arms again. And not a nanosecond too soon. If you feel Earth moving, it's just us!
That prospect makes me happy, beyond any words. I hope everyone reading this blog is happy too. The very best to all of you. And for the next little while, not all of the orgasms I keep track of here will be self-inflicted. So the stuff you get to read on this blog should become more interesting soon! :-)
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
I hadn't thought of that
Orgasms since last entry: Two
Just a quickie today. I stumbled across an interesting invention yesterday while browsing the web. The strap-on vagina. I have to say I'm impressed by any sex toy that makes you wonder how it works when you hear what it is, and continues to make you wonder even after you've seen explanatory pictures and a full description.
It's kinda nice to know there's still sex toys out there that can surprise me. I'm not sure that I agree with the "ultra-realistic" description, though.
Just a quickie today. I stumbled across an interesting invention yesterday while browsing the web. The strap-on vagina. I have to say I'm impressed by any sex toy that makes you wonder how it works when you hear what it is, and continues to make you wonder even after you've seen explanatory pictures and a full description.
It's kinda nice to know there's still sex toys out there that can surprise me. I'm not sure that I agree with the "ultra-realistic" description, though.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Enlightenment
Orgasms since last entry: Nine
It must be time for me to check in again, several days having slipped past since my previous post. Today seems like a good occasion to do so, since I figured out something interesting (well, interesting to me).
Al right, let me back up. Over at Todger Talk, I came across a post about the dreaded phenomenon of frienditis - that is, the tendency for well-intentioned guys to get classified as non-sexual friends by women, even though the guy wants more than just Platonic friendship. And thus he winds up being the shoulder she cries on as she bemoans all the disastrous dates she goes on, and all the lousy guys with nothing to recommend them (whom she sleeps with none-the-less), and he misses out on getting the chance to be the perfect partner she says she's looking for (a lover and a friend). The author of this post was basically wondering whether to admit that he found the lady in question sexy, and risk rejection and the loss of the friendship, or keep his mouth shut and be condemned to the status quo.
If this sounds familiar, it's because this post is turning into a sequel to my previous one, about why nice men can't get nice girls, and why girl run off with bad boys.
So here's the secret, the point of enlightenment. The reason men and women have these problems boils down, once again, to evolutionary biology. Despite the fact that women are more orgasmic than men, men can make babies a lot faster. There's no reason, in principle, that a virile man can't make anywhere from one to a dozen offspring a day. Women, on the other hand, take nine months to make a baby (or a few, in rare cases). Men need to keep an eye out for partners who look attractive (for attractive read "young and healthy", or "carrying good genes") while women need to keep an eye out for partners who will be sexually successful (so that their offspring are also sexually successful), and also for a partner who will be able to take care of the children they have invested so many months in producing. So the bottom line is this; males have one scale of attractiveness, females have two seperate scales. Let's call these the 'sexual' scale, and the 'provider' scale.
The reason for frienditis becomes clear. Everyone is unconsciously rating the members of their social circle against these scales. While the males are rating women in terms of how fuckable they are, and expecting women to treat them the same, the women are rating males against both scales and categorising them accordingly. Hence the males usually don't understand that their attempts to be polite, attentive, courteous, and so on, increase their ranking on the 'provider' scale, but not the 'sexual' scale. In fact, if you think about it, all the ideas of what consitutes polite gentlemanly behaviour arose several hundred years ago when western civilisation was declaring sex to be unseemly, and placing great emphasis on marrying and establishing a family, so it makes sense that the way men were trained to behave was the way that increased their ranking on the 'partner' scale. Likewise, women inherently expect men to segregate long-term partners and sexual interests.
As we all know, confusion and misery tend to arise when the world does not function as our mental paradigms would lead us to expect. When men rank women according to their sex appeal, women get annoyed at being treated like pieces of meat. When women classify men as friends, guys get frustrated that their efforts to be polite and courteous are not getting them any closer to the object of their devotion's bed. Women often condemn men for thinking with their genitals, but when you look at it this way it's clear that men and women are equally acting according to their reproductive desires - women's behaviour is just more difficult to see through because they're grading everyone on two scales instead of one.
So what does all this have to do with me? Well, it clears up a long-standing issue about the breakup with my previous girlfriend (prior to Queenie). For a long time I beat myself up trying to understand what I did wrong to make the relationship fall apart, how much of it was my fault, how much of it was her, and all the usual issues that crop up a surrounding such events. Well, the backstory is that we were in an open relationship. She slept with other guys, I... tried to sleep with other women. Truth be told, I didn't have much success. The motivation for this blog is to document my path from being the kind of guy who only has long-term relationships, to someone who can have just as much casual sex as my female partners seem to manage so effortlessly (yes, it really is easier for women to pick-up than for guys!). But in any case, the guys she would sleep with tended to be older than me, less good-looking than me, and fairly high-ranking at work. We often joked that her priorities were backwards - she'd chosen me, young, fit and good-looking (clearly someone with good genes) as the long-term partner, and was sleeping around with the old, senior, rich "providers". But in fact I realise now that I was the provider, I was the guy who was being nice enough to stay around for the long haul, and she was sleeping with guys who had high status (they'd proven themselves to be successful, and hence, they must have good genes). Things went sour when two things happened - I started seeing Queenie, and my career started to develop and I began to get better work than I had when we first started dating. I suspect that what these two events did was show that I was successful, and that other people considered me fuckable. This had the effect of pushing me off the 'partner' scale, and onto the 'sexual' scale, until I was dumped from the role of prospective father for her children.
In summary, it looks like humans naturally partner up, into pseudo-monogamous pairings. But we're not truly monogamous. The interesting thing is that women and men have different ways of being non-monogamous. Men tend to seek lots of casual encounters. Women tend to pick a stable long-term partner, and then "cheat" on them. Or to put it another way, women want to cuckold their husbands - men just don't want to get married. I'm a big believer in open/polyamorous relationships, and I expect this has interesting consequences for the way such relationships function.
Of course, just because a certain type of behaviour is "natural" doesn't make it right. You could argue that rape and infanticide are "natural". It's up to all of us to decide what we consider ethically acceptable, and to act accordingly.
Of course, much of what I said here is a simplification, but hey, it's a blog entry, not a psychology PhD thesis!
It must be time for me to check in again, several days having slipped past since my previous post. Today seems like a good occasion to do so, since I figured out something interesting (well, interesting to me).
Al right, let me back up. Over at Todger Talk, I came across a post about the dreaded phenomenon of frienditis - that is, the tendency for well-intentioned guys to get classified as non-sexual friends by women, even though the guy wants more than just Platonic friendship. And thus he winds up being the shoulder she cries on as she bemoans all the disastrous dates she goes on, and all the lousy guys with nothing to recommend them (whom she sleeps with none-the-less), and he misses out on getting the chance to be the perfect partner she says she's looking for (a lover and a friend). The author of this post was basically wondering whether to admit that he found the lady in question sexy, and risk rejection and the loss of the friendship, or keep his mouth shut and be condemned to the status quo.
If this sounds familiar, it's because this post is turning into a sequel to my previous one, about why nice men can't get nice girls, and why girl run off with bad boys.
So here's the secret, the point of enlightenment. The reason men and women have these problems boils down, once again, to evolutionary biology. Despite the fact that women are more orgasmic than men, men can make babies a lot faster. There's no reason, in principle, that a virile man can't make anywhere from one to a dozen offspring a day. Women, on the other hand, take nine months to make a baby (or a few, in rare cases). Men need to keep an eye out for partners who look attractive (for attractive read "young and healthy", or "carrying good genes") while women need to keep an eye out for partners who will be sexually successful (so that their offspring are also sexually successful), and also for a partner who will be able to take care of the children they have invested so many months in producing. So the bottom line is this; males have one scale of attractiveness, females have two seperate scales. Let's call these the 'sexual' scale, and the 'provider' scale.
The reason for frienditis becomes clear. Everyone is unconsciously rating the members of their social circle against these scales. While the males are rating women in terms of how fuckable they are, and expecting women to treat them the same, the women are rating males against both scales and categorising them accordingly. Hence the males usually don't understand that their attempts to be polite, attentive, courteous, and so on, increase their ranking on the 'provider' scale, but not the 'sexual' scale. In fact, if you think about it, all the ideas of what consitutes polite gentlemanly behaviour arose several hundred years ago when western civilisation was declaring sex to be unseemly, and placing great emphasis on marrying and establishing a family, so it makes sense that the way men were trained to behave was the way that increased their ranking on the 'partner' scale. Likewise, women inherently expect men to segregate long-term partners and sexual interests.
As we all know, confusion and misery tend to arise when the world does not function as our mental paradigms would lead us to expect. When men rank women according to their sex appeal, women get annoyed at being treated like pieces of meat. When women classify men as friends, guys get frustrated that their efforts to be polite and courteous are not getting them any closer to the object of their devotion's bed. Women often condemn men for thinking with their genitals, but when you look at it this way it's clear that men and women are equally acting according to their reproductive desires - women's behaviour is just more difficult to see through because they're grading everyone on two scales instead of one.
So what does all this have to do with me? Well, it clears up a long-standing issue about the breakup with my previous girlfriend (prior to Queenie). For a long time I beat myself up trying to understand what I did wrong to make the relationship fall apart, how much of it was my fault, how much of it was her, and all the usual issues that crop up a surrounding such events. Well, the backstory is that we were in an open relationship. She slept with other guys, I... tried to sleep with other women. Truth be told, I didn't have much success. The motivation for this blog is to document my path from being the kind of guy who only has long-term relationships, to someone who can have just as much casual sex as my female partners seem to manage so effortlessly (yes, it really is easier for women to pick-up than for guys!). But in any case, the guys she would sleep with tended to be older than me, less good-looking than me, and fairly high-ranking at work. We often joked that her priorities were backwards - she'd chosen me, young, fit and good-looking (clearly someone with good genes) as the long-term partner, and was sleeping around with the old, senior, rich "providers". But in fact I realise now that I was the provider, I was the guy who was being nice enough to stay around for the long haul, and she was sleeping with guys who had high status (they'd proven themselves to be successful, and hence, they must have good genes). Things went sour when two things happened - I started seeing Queenie, and my career started to develop and I began to get better work than I had when we first started dating. I suspect that what these two events did was show that I was successful, and that other people considered me fuckable. This had the effect of pushing me off the 'partner' scale, and onto the 'sexual' scale, until I was dumped from the role of prospective father for her children.
In summary, it looks like humans naturally partner up, into pseudo-monogamous pairings. But we're not truly monogamous. The interesting thing is that women and men have different ways of being non-monogamous. Men tend to seek lots of casual encounters. Women tend to pick a stable long-term partner, and then "cheat" on them. Or to put it another way, women want to cuckold their husbands - men just don't want to get married. I'm a big believer in open/polyamorous relationships, and I expect this has interesting consequences for the way such relationships function.
Of course, just because a certain type of behaviour is "natural" doesn't make it right. You could argue that rape and infanticide are "natural". It's up to all of us to decide what we consider ethically acceptable, and to act accordingly.
Of course, much of what I said here is a simplification, but hey, it's a blog entry, not a psychology PhD thesis!
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Another reason to avoid the wet spot
Orgasms since last entry: Four
Well, today I wanted to share some thoughts inspired by a website (entitled The Wet Spot) I ran across a little while ago, purporting to offer sex and relationship advice (mostly sex advice). Among various posts about how it's a good idea to not be overweight if you want to have good sex (Duh!), and so on, was this hum-dinger on the topic of why women don't date nice guys. Apparently it's all the man's fault...
Sounds reasonable, right? Except for the fact that it puts the blame for relationship problems exclusively on the man (as always), and it displays a complete and utter ignorance of the role of evolutionary biology in shaping our reproductive strategies.
Let's get this straight. Women are attracted to men of high social status. Men who act like they can provide genetic material that will make their offsping survive. Nice guys do not convey this image - especially nice guys who try not to be pushy, who back out when the girl they're talking to shows any sign of reluctance, who try to provide the girl with a comfortable environment, to show that they are a friend, who's willing to stick around and help out with housework, raising children, and so on. Nope, the reason women run off with bad boys is because they're more fun, convey a sense of high social status related to their genetic fitness (they must have high-quality genes if they can afford to display risky behaviour, and still survive), and because they won't always be around to breed with - so if you want their genes you'd better get them NOW! By contrast the nice guys create the impression that they'll hang around forever hoping to "get lucky", so girls can afford to keep them waiting - often for years, or forever.
You'd get a much better sense of how males and females choose their partners (and usually it is the female who chooses the male, not vice versa) by avoiding The Wet Spot and listening to the advice of Dr Tatiana (which in itself is thoroughly educational, and could provide enough trivia to make you the centre of attention at the next party you attend. How's that for a pickup routine?).
I really have to feel sorry for the guy who posed the question that elicited this response. The poor fellow has probably gone away not only upset that he keeps losing girls to the bad boys, but thinking that it's all his fault.
Of course, men are attracted to women who convey a sense of excitement, mystery, and risk. But women are also attracted to men with the same characteristics. Putting the blame exclusively on the man is just unfair. And there's another thing women do which makes life hard for the nice guys. I was in a nightclub the other week and started chatting to a girl dancing in the corner behind me. Before I'd managed to get out three sentences, her friend started pulling the old "We're lesbians, stop chatting up my girlfriend" routine. I can only gather that she had no idea how ineffective these things are - and in fact counterproductive, because the very first group of men who are going to be put off by any form of resistence are... you guessed it, the non-pushy, non-threatening, nice guys! The very guys women say they want to meet, are the very first set of guys their "group defence" tactics drive away, leaving the field open for the pushy, arrogant bad-boys.
Well, today I wanted to share some thoughts inspired by a website (entitled The Wet Spot) I ran across a little while ago, purporting to offer sex and relationship advice (mostly sex advice). Among various posts about how it's a good idea to not be overweight if you want to have good sex (Duh!), and so on, was this hum-dinger on the topic of why women don't date nice guys. Apparently it's all the man's fault...
Why indeed. I'm going to suggest that the problem here is not the women... You may not want to hear this my friend, but the real question here is why are you attracted to women who leave you for bad boys?
You'd get a much better sense of how males and females choose their partners (and usually it is the female who chooses the male, not vice versa) by avoiding The Wet Spot and listening to the advice of Dr Tatiana (which in itself is thoroughly educational, and could provide enough trivia to make you the centre of attention at the next party you attend. How's that for a pickup routine?).
I really have to feel sorry for the guy who posed the question that elicited this response. The poor fellow has probably gone away not only upset that he keeps losing girls to the bad boys, but thinking that it's all his fault.
Of course, men are attracted to women who convey a sense of excitement, mystery, and risk. But women are also attracted to men with the same characteristics. Putting the blame exclusively on the man is just unfair. And there's another thing women do which makes life hard for the nice guys. I was in a nightclub the other week and started chatting to a girl dancing in the corner behind me. Before I'd managed to get out three sentences, her friend started pulling the old "We're lesbians, stop chatting up my girlfriend" routine. I can only gather that she had no idea how ineffective these things are - and in fact counterproductive, because the very first group of men who are going to be put off by any form of resistence are... you guessed it, the non-pushy, non-threatening, nice guys! The very guys women say they want to meet, are the very first set of guys their "group defence" tactics drive away, leaving the field open for the pushy, arrogant bad-boys.
Monday, February 4, 2008
One for the shoe-fetishists...
Orgasm count since last entry: Three
My cold of several weeks back is reasserting itself. Urghh. Makes it difficult to get in a horny mood.
Anyway, I spotted an amusing piece of research on the BBC news website today - after all the reports of causing bad posture and ankle injuries, apparently wearing high-heels strengthens your pelvic floor muscles, ladies! Is that convenient or what? Not only does wearing high heels make you look sexier, so you get more action, it also gives you more pleasurable orgasms! Maybe it's time to change the definition of "sensible shoes" :-)
It should be noted that this result was only applicable to two-inch heels, so maybe it's not an argument in favour of racing out and grabbing a pair of thigh-high, five-inch-heeled rubber boots. But it's a start!
My cold of several weeks back is reasserting itself. Urghh. Makes it difficult to get in a horny mood.
Anyway, I spotted an amusing piece of research on the BBC news website today - after all the reports of causing bad posture and ankle injuries, apparently wearing high-heels strengthens your pelvic floor muscles, ladies! Is that convenient or what? Not only does wearing high heels make you look sexier, so you get more action, it also gives you more pleasurable orgasms! Maybe it's time to change the definition of "sensible shoes" :-)
It should be noted that this result was only applicable to two-inch heels, so maybe it's not an argument in favour of racing out and grabbing a pair of thigh-high, five-inch-heeled rubber boots. But it's a start!
Friday, February 1, 2008
Orgasm total for January, and how to exceed it next month...
Orgasms since last entry: Seven
Well, that brings us to the end of January folks. My grand orgasm total is 38 - all self-inflicted, regretably. Still, considering the whole "male=no multiple orgasms" issue that has been brought up in previous posts, perhaps exceeding one-third of my beloved's tally of wank-gasms isn't such a bad effort.
And that brings us to a nice little segue, regarding male multi-orgasmicness. As I've mentioned before, I find it disturbing that the state-of-the-art in the study of male multi-orgasmic capability is dominated by several-thousand-year-old tantric mumbo-jumbo, which seems to be focussed on teaching men how not to orgasm, and then claiming that this is superior to a normal orgasm because it conserves your spiritual energy, or whatever. Wouldn't it be much, much better if we could learn to orgasm, ejaculate, and not lose our erections and arousal? That's basically what women do when they are multi-orgasmic (minus the ejaculation bit, for the most part). Well, that's what I've been trying to figure out how to do. And I think I've discovered another piece of the puzzle...
It seems to me that one huge advantage girls have over guys is that they have a whole lot more nerve endings to play with. Not only are there twice as many nerves endings in the clitoris as there are in the entire penis, but there's all those nerves inside the vagina, too. It's true that the penis and the clitoris develop from equivalent bits of tissue in the fetus, and behave much the same way (the clitoris becomes 'erect' when sexually aroused, and withdraws after orgasm). But vaginas don't have to become erect in order to experience stimulation (they're also self-lubricating, a handy trick to have). In any case, this leads me to expect that if you can stimulate the nerves buried away beneath the penis and scrotum, you have a much better chance of achieving multiple orgasms. No great surprises there, since the prostate is often regarded as "the other white meat" of male sexual stimulation.
So yesterday I was merrily wanking away, building myself up, easing off, building up again, getting more and more worked up, when I noticed that I could make my cock harden to a greater or lesser extent by tightening a certain set of muscles. In particular it felt like I was pushing (not pulling) my testicles back into my body. After a while I allowed myself to slip over the edge and have a small, but not insignificant, orgasm, and ejaculate. But the cool thing was that when I held these muscles tight immediately afterwards, I realised that I wasn't experiencing the usual "that was nice, now I feel like a rest" sensation. I actually felt like I wanted to keep going and my cock felt the way it does when it's excited and eager to go hard. A little bit of stroking later and I knew I could get another orgasm out of him. It took another minute, but sure enough, I came - hard. Cum-flying-across-the-room hard. And afterwards, I felt really energised, rather than weary and ready for a nap. I found myself cleaning up under the shower thinking "so this is why women like multiple orgasms" - not only do you get to cum many times, but it gives you a fantastic endorphin buzz.
Now, I'll admit, the first orgasm was not a very intense one. I basically stopped stimulating myself as soon as I went over the edge, so it was almost a "ruined orgasm". But I did ejaculate. And if I have figured out how to get myself to recover rapidly and summon forth another ejaculatory orgasm, I think it was worth it. First figure out how to repeat the result. Then work on making the initial orgasm more intense without losing the second one. Then work on adding third, fourth, or more orgasms.
Has anyone out there reading this blog had experience, and particularly success, at this kind of thing already? If so, please share your experiences by posting a comment. Men the world over would surely rejoice if we could figure out how to teach any man to be truly multi-orgasmic, in the same way that women are. I suspect there's a lot of women who would be happy about it too!
Well, that brings us to the end of January folks. My grand orgasm total is 38 - all self-inflicted, regretably. Still, considering the whole "male=no multiple orgasms" issue that has been brought up in previous posts, perhaps exceeding one-third of my beloved's tally of wank-gasms isn't such a bad effort.
And that brings us to a nice little segue, regarding male multi-orgasmicness. As I've mentioned before, I find it disturbing that the state-of-the-art in the study of male multi-orgasmic capability is dominated by several-thousand-year-old tantric mumbo-jumbo, which seems to be focussed on teaching men how not to orgasm, and then claiming that this is superior to a normal orgasm because it conserves your spiritual energy, or whatever. Wouldn't it be much, much better if we could learn to orgasm, ejaculate, and not lose our erections and arousal? That's basically what women do when they are multi-orgasmic (minus the ejaculation bit, for the most part). Well, that's what I've been trying to figure out how to do. And I think I've discovered another piece of the puzzle...
It seems to me that one huge advantage girls have over guys is that they have a whole lot more nerve endings to play with. Not only are there twice as many nerves endings in the clitoris as there are in the entire penis, but there's all those nerves inside the vagina, too. It's true that the penis and the clitoris develop from equivalent bits of tissue in the fetus, and behave much the same way (the clitoris becomes 'erect' when sexually aroused, and withdraws after orgasm). But vaginas don't have to become erect in order to experience stimulation (they're also self-lubricating, a handy trick to have). In any case, this leads me to expect that if you can stimulate the nerves buried away beneath the penis and scrotum, you have a much better chance of achieving multiple orgasms. No great surprises there, since the prostate is often regarded as "the other white meat" of male sexual stimulation.
So yesterday I was merrily wanking away, building myself up, easing off, building up again, getting more and more worked up, when I noticed that I could make my cock harden to a greater or lesser extent by tightening a certain set of muscles. In particular it felt like I was pushing (not pulling) my testicles back into my body. After a while I allowed myself to slip over the edge and have a small, but not insignificant, orgasm, and ejaculate. But the cool thing was that when I held these muscles tight immediately afterwards, I realised that I wasn't experiencing the usual "that was nice, now I feel like a rest" sensation. I actually felt like I wanted to keep going and my cock felt the way it does when it's excited and eager to go hard. A little bit of stroking later and I knew I could get another orgasm out of him. It took another minute, but sure enough, I came - hard. Cum-flying-across-the-room hard. And afterwards, I felt really energised, rather than weary and ready for a nap. I found myself cleaning up under the shower thinking "so this is why women like multiple orgasms" - not only do you get to cum many times, but it gives you a fantastic endorphin buzz.
Now, I'll admit, the first orgasm was not a very intense one. I basically stopped stimulating myself as soon as I went over the edge, so it was almost a "ruined orgasm". But I did ejaculate. And if I have figured out how to get myself to recover rapidly and summon forth another ejaculatory orgasm, I think it was worth it. First figure out how to repeat the result. Then work on making the initial orgasm more intense without losing the second one. Then work on adding third, fourth, or more orgasms.
Has anyone out there reading this blog had experience, and particularly success, at this kind of thing already? If so, please share your experiences by posting a comment. Men the world over would surely rejoice if we could figure out how to teach any man to be truly multi-orgasmic, in the same way that women are. I suspect there's a lot of women who would be happy about it too!
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Damn horny...
Orgasms since last entry: Seven. That's better!
I had intended to make this a reasonably long entry, discussing differences in male and female attitudes to sex (or at least some of my thoughts on such things) - but I just concluded a three-hour instant-message-type chat to my beloved, and I'm horny!!!!! So the rest of you can just wait, I'm off to spend some quality time with a handful of something oil-based.
Oh, and in the meantime I've added a new window. The running orgasm total for this year. To be increasing very, very soon...
I had intended to make this a reasonably long entry, discussing differences in male and female attitudes to sex (or at least some of my thoughts on such things) - but I just concluded a three-hour instant-message-type chat to my beloved, and I'm horny!!!!! So the rest of you can just wait, I'm off to spend some quality time with a handful of something oil-based.
Oh, and in the meantime I've added a new window. The running orgasm total for this year. To be increasing very, very soon...
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Testing... testing... one, two, threesome
Orgasms since last entry: Zero (!) - I hate being ill... :-P
In any case, I finally got around to doing my purity score for the start of the year. Just like Queenie I'll be doing it again at the end of the year for a comparison. I do take slight issue with
the 'Sex drive' section, since many of the questions seem to be about how often your libido overrides your morality, rather than simply how often you libido asserts itself. But considering that I got below average purity in all categories, I can't really complain! :-)
So now we all know where I stand.
In any case, I finally got around to doing my purity score for the start of the year. Just like Queenie I'll be doing it again at the end of the year for a comparison. I do take slight issue with
the 'Sex drive' section, since many of the questions seem to be about how often your libido overrides your morality, rather than simply how often you libido asserts itself. But considering that I got below average purity in all categories, I can't really complain! :-)
| Your Ultimate Purity Test 2.0 Score Is... | ||||
| Your Score: | Average For All Users | Average For All Males (7632 total) | ||
| Dating | 15.38% | 34.13% | 29.17% | Gone steady |
| Self-Lovin' | 30.3% | 60.91% | 46.47% | When I think about you - or anyone - I touch myself |
| Shamelessness | 59.68% | 77.35% | 73.97% | It takes a couple of drinks |
| Sex Drive | 66.67% | 75.02% | 67.67% | A fool for love, but not always |
| Straightness | 3.7% | 39.25% | 32.72% | Knows the other body type like a map |
| Gayness | 55.56% | 78.15% | 74.79% | Had that experience at camp |
| Dominant | 58.33% | 86.7% | 81.54% | Not afraid to tie the knot |
| Submissive | 53.97% | 87.07% | 86.12% | Bound and gagged a few times |
| Fucking Sick | 65.31% | 89.83% | 87.35% | Dipped into depravity |
| Total Score | 48.48% | 73.74% | 68.51% | |
| Take The Ultimate Purity Test 2.0 and see how you match up! (By The Ferrett) | ||||
So now we all know where I stand.
Monday, January 21, 2008
The Phone-domme Menace
Orgasms since last entry: Two (more on that later)
"You totally manipulated me."
"Really? But I gave you a chance to get away."
"But think about what it said in The Game, about overcoming last-minute resistance. "
"Oh my... you're so right."
It was early morning. I'd been struck with a realisation while reading my lover's account of the first time she sucked me off, and couldn't wait to share it with her. Instinctively, it seemed, she had pulled off a trick that pick-up artists have had to work out slowly by experimentation and critical analysis; get someone worked up, present them with the promise of sex, then offer to stop, and their resistance will crumble. Knowing you can't have something - anything - just makes you want it more. I was just as succeptible to manipulation as the next person, and my lover had exploited that without even doing it consciously.
"The thing is, once I realised it, I also realised there's a bunch of other incidents where the same is true. Things I was reluctant to do at first, and you've just managed to override my hesitation. I am totally your bitch."
The voice on the other end of the phone giggled.
"No," I continued "it's wonderful. You've been dominating me for years, and it's such a gentle, smooth, subtle domination that I didn't even realise it. I'm your pussy-slave. And I really like it."
"Well, maybe that's the reason I've never felt the need to physically dominate you."
"Perhaps, although I hope we can do some of that sometime too." I replied, a distinct grin creeping into my voice.
"Sure, just as long as we get to swap roles from time to time."
My beloved and I have had this ongoing discussion about dominance and submission in our relationship for some time now. For the most part, our sex life is quite vanilla, leaving aside the amount of sex we have (when we're not seperated by work commitments) and the tendency to invent new sex toys and test them out on each other. We have an extensive wish-list of group encounters, voyeuristic acts, and locations to check off. But normally we're just too horny and too desperate to fuck each other to be bothered dressing up, setting a scene, or doing any other role-playing stuff. None-the-less we've been gradually working more domination and submission into our discussions lately. I think everyone has a passion for powerplay in sex - some of us just acknowledge it and embrace it more than others. I certainly do. Even though I like the idea of taking charge sometime, and have been known to subject my lover to some extremely restrictive (and orgasm-inducing) situations, the thought of a woman bending me to her will has always gotten my motor running. There's something about the idea of a beautiful woman making me want to do as she commands that drives me wild. So the realisation that I'm somewhat pussy-whipped was actually pretty satisfying.
It became even more satisfying later than day, when I rang my beloved again. This time, I had intended to have a platonic discussion, to balance out the sex-talk from earlier. It didn't last...
"You know I love it when you call me 'slave'," I whispered as my body arched with excitement.
"I know," she replied "I own you."
Once again my body writhed. Her words were a pavlovian stimulus, arousing me as much as the touch of her hands, or her tongue, in another time and place. My free hand rubbed across my crotch, unbidden.
"I want you to cum for me, slave."
I unzipped my trousers and pulled them down from my swelling cock. My fingers and thumb wrapped around the shaft and began stroking.
"Get yourself nice and hard, but don't cum until I tell you."
"Yes mistress, I understand!"
I continued to stroke myself, as we discussed my state of arousal. Every time she referred to me as her slave I felt my cock become a little harder. Truly the brain is the most erogenous organ... Before long I could feel the base of my cock pulsing, the premonitions of an impending orgasm. Again she ordered me not to go over the edge. I softened my touch. She described herself hovering over me, brushing her eager pussy lips against the head of my cock. I could imagine the wetness trickling over my shaft, like a bead of sweat, running down to tickle my scrotum. She described herself sliding the head of my cock into herself, then thrusting down all the way, taking me right in to the hilt. I hung on every word. She described herself clenching her muscles around me, sliding off again, until only my head was inside her, then thrusting back onto me. And then she ordered me to cum.
A spray of white liquid shot into the air, cascading back down over my thighs, my tummy, and my hand. I writhed and gasped as pulse after pulse of pleasure shot up through the length of my erection. On the other end of the phone, I could hear my lover's satisfaction at the sounds of my release. I hoped my mistress was pleased with my performance. Aftershocks racked my body as the nerve endings tried to fire again, to summon forth another orgasm, but I was too spent. My mind slipped into endorphin delirium, as I sagged into the chair.
Life has been interesting recently, discovering that I have this pavlovian reaction to a certain tone of voice, a certain choice of words, that my partner can conjure up so effortlessly. We chatted for a little while about how far we would like to take this aspect of our relationship. For certain, once work sends me back home and we can be together again, we will relish the chance to explore this face-to-face.
And then I noticed that my foreskin was stuck closed with dried cum, forming what looked for all the world like a muppet's mouth - in a state of irritation, no less! It was an amusing sight, and I wondered what had made him so annoyed, considering what a good time he'd just had. I peeled my foreskin back, exposing the head, like some enormous tongue or bloated pair of tonsils.
You know you've had a brain-frying orgasm when you sing ...
The singing penis song
Oh, I'm a singing penis,
I sing the whole day long.
Yes I'm a jolly singing penis,
and I sing the singing penis song.
I'm an opera-singing penis,
I can sing a very high note.
And when I open my mouth so wide,
my head comes outta my throat!
Women may have multiple orgasms, but their genitalia don't lend themselves to pantomime in quite the same way as men's!
"You totally manipulated me."
"Really? But I gave you a chance to get away."
"But think about what it said in The Game, about overcoming last-minute resistance. "
"Oh my... you're so right."
It was early morning. I'd been struck with a realisation while reading my lover's account of the first time she sucked me off, and couldn't wait to share it with her. Instinctively, it seemed, she had pulled off a trick that pick-up artists have had to work out slowly by experimentation and critical analysis; get someone worked up, present them with the promise of sex, then offer to stop, and their resistance will crumble. Knowing you can't have something - anything - just makes you want it more. I was just as succeptible to manipulation as the next person, and my lover had exploited that without even doing it consciously.
"The thing is, once I realised it, I also realised there's a bunch of other incidents where the same is true. Things I was reluctant to do at first, and you've just managed to override my hesitation. I am totally your bitch."
The voice on the other end of the phone giggled.
"No," I continued "it's wonderful. You've been dominating me for years, and it's such a gentle, smooth, subtle domination that I didn't even realise it. I'm your pussy-slave. And I really like it."
"Well, maybe that's the reason I've never felt the need to physically dominate you."
"Perhaps, although I hope we can do some of that sometime too." I replied, a distinct grin creeping into my voice.
"Sure, just as long as we get to swap roles from time to time."
My beloved and I have had this ongoing discussion about dominance and submission in our relationship for some time now. For the most part, our sex life is quite vanilla, leaving aside the amount of sex we have (when we're not seperated by work commitments) and the tendency to invent new sex toys and test them out on each other. We have an extensive wish-list of group encounters, voyeuristic acts, and locations to check off. But normally we're just too horny and too desperate to fuck each other to be bothered dressing up, setting a scene, or doing any other role-playing stuff. None-the-less we've been gradually working more domination and submission into our discussions lately. I think everyone has a passion for powerplay in sex - some of us just acknowledge it and embrace it more than others. I certainly do. Even though I like the idea of taking charge sometime, and have been known to subject my lover to some extremely restrictive (and orgasm-inducing) situations, the thought of a woman bending me to her will has always gotten my motor running. There's something about the idea of a beautiful woman making me want to do as she commands that drives me wild. So the realisation that I'm somewhat pussy-whipped was actually pretty satisfying.
It became even more satisfying later than day, when I rang my beloved again. This time, I had intended to have a platonic discussion, to balance out the sex-talk from earlier. It didn't last...
"You know I love it when you call me 'slave'," I whispered as my body arched with excitement.
"I know," she replied "I own you."
Once again my body writhed. Her words were a pavlovian stimulus, arousing me as much as the touch of her hands, or her tongue, in another time and place. My free hand rubbed across my crotch, unbidden.
"I want you to cum for me, slave."
I unzipped my trousers and pulled them down from my swelling cock. My fingers and thumb wrapped around the shaft and began stroking.
"Get yourself nice and hard, but don't cum until I tell you."
"Yes mistress, I understand!"
I continued to stroke myself, as we discussed my state of arousal. Every time she referred to me as her slave I felt my cock become a little harder. Truly the brain is the most erogenous organ... Before long I could feel the base of my cock pulsing, the premonitions of an impending orgasm. Again she ordered me not to go over the edge. I softened my touch. She described herself hovering over me, brushing her eager pussy lips against the head of my cock. I could imagine the wetness trickling over my shaft, like a bead of sweat, running down to tickle my scrotum. She described herself sliding the head of my cock into herself, then thrusting down all the way, taking me right in to the hilt. I hung on every word. She described herself clenching her muscles around me, sliding off again, until only my head was inside her, then thrusting back onto me. And then she ordered me to cum.
A spray of white liquid shot into the air, cascading back down over my thighs, my tummy, and my hand. I writhed and gasped as pulse after pulse of pleasure shot up through the length of my erection. On the other end of the phone, I could hear my lover's satisfaction at the sounds of my release. I hoped my mistress was pleased with my performance. Aftershocks racked my body as the nerve endings tried to fire again, to summon forth another orgasm, but I was too spent. My mind slipped into endorphin delirium, as I sagged into the chair.
Life has been interesting recently, discovering that I have this pavlovian reaction to a certain tone of voice, a certain choice of words, that my partner can conjure up so effortlessly. We chatted for a little while about how far we would like to take this aspect of our relationship. For certain, once work sends me back home and we can be together again, we will relish the chance to explore this face-to-face.
And then I noticed that my foreskin was stuck closed with dried cum, forming what looked for all the world like a muppet's mouth - in a state of irritation, no less! It was an amusing sight, and I wondered what had made him so annoyed, considering what a good time he'd just had. I peeled my foreskin back, exposing the head, like some enormous tongue or bloated pair of tonsils.
You know you've had a brain-frying orgasm when you sing ...
The singing penis song
Oh, I'm a singing penis,
I sing the whole day long.
Yes I'm a jolly singing penis,
and I sing the singing penis song.
I'm an opera-singing penis,
I can sing a very high note.
And when I open my mouth so wide,
my head comes outta my throat!
Women may have multiple orgasms, but their genitalia don't lend themselves to pantomime in quite the same way as men's!
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Keeping myself busy...
Orgasms since last entry: Six
Just a quick entry today. I've managed to catch up on the backlog of posts, and now can start posting here properly... Also managed to get a cold, after staying out too late on thursday night practicing pickup skills at a local club. With mixed success :-) I had been hoping to go out for more practice tonight, but I think an early night is in order instead. Oh well, having a runny nose does suppress the libido, unfortunately, but I still enjoyed myself earlier today looking at home videos of my beloved getting a good solid rodgering from a sex machine... I also got a kick out of Queenie's recounting of the famous suck-my-brains-out-through-my-cock incident, on her blog today.
Okay, next time I promise I'll have more to say about male multiple orgasms, and get around to posting my purity test results.
Just a quick entry today. I've managed to catch up on the backlog of posts, and now can start posting here properly... Also managed to get a cold, after staying out too late on thursday night practicing pickup skills at a local club. With mixed success :-) I had been hoping to go out for more practice tonight, but I think an early night is in order instead. Oh well, having a runny nose does suppress the libido, unfortunately, but I still enjoyed myself earlier today looking at home videos of my beloved getting a good solid rodgering from a sex machine... I also got a kick out of Queenie's recounting of the famous suck-my-brains-out-through-my-cock incident, on her blog today.
Okay, next time I promise I'll have more to say about male multiple orgasms, and get around to posting my purity test results.
(backlog: Jan 14th 2008) Opportunities lost and found
Orgasms since last entry: Eleven
Well, it's been a while since my last entry, as I've been travelling. On the plus side it's a lot of fun, but on the downside it can mean not getting enough sleep, which I find is a libido-killer.
Astute readers will note that my orgasm-count for the year is somewhat less than that of my beloved. This I ascribe to me being male, and her being female, and that whole "multiple orgasm" thing that women can do. So for this entry, I want to talk a bit about maleness and sex. And how we men seem to have wasted the chance to make the most of what we're born with.
Any guy who thinks about sex must, from time to time, have wondered why it is that women get the multiple orgasms but men don't. Certainly, and tragically, there are a number of women who'd be happy to just have AN orgasm, but the fact remains that multi-orgasmic women are achieving something that appears to be beyond the abilities of any man. And that seems a bit unfair, to anyone born with a Y-chromosome.
The really funny thing about this situation is that for decades, women have been taught to explore their sexuality, to learn about their bodies, to aim to achieve more sexual satisfaction. And they've succeeded. Women buy vibrators, they read magazine articles about how to have better orgasms, they experiment with bisexuality... according to More Hot Sex by Tracey Cox, the number of women who experience multiple orgasms is now approaching 50%, up from a mere 14% several decades ago when people like Masters and Johnson started paying attention.
But what about men?
Well, here's the point I'm getting at: we men have done a lousy job of keeping up with the women. We usually don't talk about sex with each other. We rarely discuss masturbation, or anything that may be perceived as an "inadequacy" in our sexual performance. And so we seem to have wasted the chance to figure out how to have more pleasure ourselves.
Case in point: Walk into a bookshop and search through the books about sexual health (NOT the porno magazines! Not that there's anything wrong with that, I'm just focussing on something else for a second...). The chances are good that if you find a book claiming to teach men to be multi-orgasmic, it'll be based on tantric mumbo-jumbo, and start carrying on about kundalini energy and chakras and who-knows-what-else.
Now just imagine the reaction if someone tried to publish a book about female sexuality that said something like "women bleed once a month because their bodies become infested by evil spirits, and they must be avoided at this time or else they will bring bad luck".
Superstitious clap-trap. Nonsense that has no place in the twenty-first century. So why are men allowing themselves to be peddled a bunch of bronze-age superstition, and where are the scientific studies into male sexual response, focussing on letting men accomplish what an ever-increasing number of women can?
Well, I'm glad to say there's some hope. According to wikipedia, there are indications that the refractory period (the period after orgasm when your dick goes floppy) can be reduced or eliminated by affecting the amount of the hormone prolactin in the bloodstream. And thankfully, some other men seem to be getting the idea that talking about your nether regions is a good idea. Earlier today I came across the titilatingly-titled Todger Talk.
However, leaving aside drug-based hormone manipulation, I've also heard tell of some guys who can avoid going floppy after orgasm, and continue having more sex and more orgasms. And not just 14-year-olds! Sometimes it's an ability they've always had. Sometimes they discover it by accident with the right partner. But either way it seems that the male genitalia has more tricks up its sleeve than we thought, and we have been missing out by letting the tantric mumbo-jumbo stand in the way of proper experimental investigation. And by not being frank and open with each other, and our partners, about how we men compare to each other in the bedroom.
And we men have nobody to blame for this but ourselves.
So let me start the ball rolling, by talking about what I experience in the potentially-more-than-one-orgasm department. From time to time I've had my penis remain hard for several minutes after orgasming and withdrawing. Unfortunately this business of changing condoms creates enough stress to kill the mood and make him go floppy. But I've decided to experiemnt with stimulation, fantasies, and whatever else I can manage to see if I can make this happen reliably, not just randomly.
This morning I brought myself to two fully ejaculatory orgasms, about five minutes apart, with partial (not total) loss of my erection in between. The second orgasm was definitely more pleasurable, producing the kind of buzz that women seem to report from the endorphin rush of multiple orgasms. That seems like a decent start to an ongoing project :-) I aim to get that partial loss of my erection reduced and eventually elimnated. And increase the number of orgasms beyond two. I'm not sure how yet, but I'll let you know how it progresses...
Well, it's been a while since my last entry, as I've been travelling. On the plus side it's a lot of fun, but on the downside it can mean not getting enough sleep, which I find is a libido-killer.
Astute readers will note that my orgasm-count for the year is somewhat less than that of my beloved. This I ascribe to me being male, and her being female, and that whole "multiple orgasm" thing that women can do. So for this entry, I want to talk a bit about maleness and sex. And how we men seem to have wasted the chance to make the most of what we're born with.
Any guy who thinks about sex must, from time to time, have wondered why it is that women get the multiple orgasms but men don't. Certainly, and tragically, there are a number of women who'd be happy to just have AN orgasm, but the fact remains that multi-orgasmic women are achieving something that appears to be beyond the abilities of any man. And that seems a bit unfair, to anyone born with a Y-chromosome.
The really funny thing about this situation is that for decades, women have been taught to explore their sexuality, to learn about their bodies, to aim to achieve more sexual satisfaction. And they've succeeded. Women buy vibrators, they read magazine articles about how to have better orgasms, they experiment with bisexuality... according to More Hot Sex by Tracey Cox, the number of women who experience multiple orgasms is now approaching 50%, up from a mere 14% several decades ago when people like Masters and Johnson started paying attention.
But what about men?
Well, here's the point I'm getting at: we men have done a lousy job of keeping up with the women. We usually don't talk about sex with each other. We rarely discuss masturbation, or anything that may be perceived as an "inadequacy" in our sexual performance. And so we seem to have wasted the chance to figure out how to have more pleasure ourselves.
Case in point: Walk into a bookshop and search through the books about sexual health (NOT the porno magazines! Not that there's anything wrong with that, I'm just focussing on something else for a second...). The chances are good that if you find a book claiming to teach men to be multi-orgasmic, it'll be based on tantric mumbo-jumbo, and start carrying on about kundalini energy and chakras and who-knows-what-else.
Now just imagine the reaction if someone tried to publish a book about female sexuality that said something like "women bleed once a month because their bodies become infested by evil spirits, and they must be avoided at this time or else they will bring bad luck".
Superstitious clap-trap. Nonsense that has no place in the twenty-first century. So why are men allowing themselves to be peddled a bunch of bronze-age superstition, and where are the scientific studies into male sexual response, focussing on letting men accomplish what an ever-increasing number of women can?
Well, I'm glad to say there's some hope. According to wikipedia, there are indications that the refractory period (the period after orgasm when your dick goes floppy) can be reduced or eliminated by affecting the amount of the hormone prolactin in the bloodstream. And thankfully, some other men seem to be getting the idea that talking about your nether regions is a good idea. Earlier today I came across the titilatingly-titled T
However, leaving aside drug-based hormone manipulation, I've also heard tell of some guys who can avoid going floppy after orgasm, and continue having more sex and more orgasms. And not just 14-year-olds! Sometimes it's an ability they've always had. Sometimes they discover it by accident with the right partner. But either way it seems that the male genitalia has more tricks up its sleeve than we thought, and we have been missing out by letting the tantric mumbo-jumbo stand in the way of proper experimental investigation. And by not being frank and open with each other, and our partners, about how we men compare to each other in the bedroom.
And we men have nobody to blame for this but ourselves.
So let me start the ball rolling, by talking about what I experience in the potentially-more-than-one-orgasm department. From time to time I've had my penis remain hard for several minutes after orgasming and withdrawing. Unfortunately this business of changing condoms creates enough stress to kill the mood and make him go floppy. But I've decided to experiemnt with stimulation, fantasies, and whatever else I can manage to see if I can make this happen reliably, not just randomly.
This morning I brought myself to two fully ejaculatory orgasms, about five minutes apart, with partial (not total) loss of my erection in between. The second orgasm was definitely more pleasurable, producing the kind of buzz that women seem to report from the endorphin rush of multiple orgasms. That seems like a decent start to an ongoing project :-) I aim to get that partial loss of my erection reduced and eventually elimnated. And increase the number of orgasms beyond two. I'm not sure how yet, but I'll let you know how it progresses...
(backlog: Jan 5th 2008) The eyes have it...
Okay, here's the first real entry...
Orgasm count to date this year: 5
I was on a bus today and got talking to a guy. It took a while to sink in, but gradually I realised that he had incredibly appealing eyes. There was just something about them that got me going. And once that happened, I started noticing that he had quite a nice body.
I definitely go for girls more often, but it's good to know the man-love part of my libio hasn't faded away from lack of use :-)
But I think it may take a bit more practice before I have the guts to make a move on a guy I met on the bus. When he's with his girlfriend... Maybe I should add that to my list of goals for the year.
Orgasm count to date this year: 5
I was on a bus today and got talking to a guy. It took a while to sink in, but gradually I realised that he had incredibly appealing eyes. There was just something about them that got me going. And once that happened, I started noticing that he had quite a nice body.
I definitely go for girls more often, but it's good to know the man-love part of my libio hasn't faded away from lack of use :-)
But I think it may take a bit more practice before I have the guts to make a move on a guy I met on the bus. When he's with his girlfriend... Maybe I should add that to my list of goals for the year.
(backlog: Jan 4th 2008) You have to start somewhere...
I can't say I have a boring sex life. But I must admit that I've focussed on quality, and variety, rather than quantity. I have probably tried more experiemntal stuff, in terms of fetishes, bondage, pegging, and what have you, than quite a lot of people. I can't really complain.
Still, it came as a rude shock when my primary partner and I compared how many people we'd had it off with. In the time we've been together, she's acquired almost three times as many partners/fuckbuddies as I have in my whole adult life. And that makes me wonder, why?
For some time I've speculated that women have an easier time picking up than guys do. If a women propositions a guy for sex, the chances seem pretty good that he'll say yes, if he's not otherwise attached. A guy doing the same runs the risk of a facefull of mace and a restraining order - or at least, that's what the 1990s told us.
And yet, I wonder if that's right? Have I not had as many partners as Queenie because I thought I'd offend or upset women by being too forward? Did society and my natural tendency to be nice to others stand in the way of shagging everyone I want to?
Or am I just a big chicken?
Well, this year I'm going to find out. I recently read Neil Strauss' book The Game, and it was amazing how much struck a chord with me. I finally understood why all the guys like me got completely overlooked by all the beautiful girls in high school, who flocked around the guys with IQs that could be counted on the fingers of one foot!
So this year I'm going to find out what I have to change about myself in order to get laid as much as I want. And can I do it while still being a nice guy?
This journal will be a combination of sexual adventures (I hope), philosophising about the place of sex in society, and anything else that seems to fit in. Since it's a counterpart to Queenie's journal, it will follow a similar format, complete with orgasm count, my purity score, and explicit content (you have been warned). But I'm still learning how to let my inner slut out, so I'll probably be focussing more on idle thougts than field reports for a while.
A bit about me; I'm athletic and well-educated, people often tell me I'm attractive, and I'm in a polyamorous relationship. I'm interested in most things sexual, especially ways to make it better (like any other physical activity, exercise and practice make a big difference), and have a list of things to do this year. One of these is more experience with same-sex encounters. I've had a small amount of experience there, but I think it's time to get more. As the discussion above suggests, I'm also keen to have more sex with a wider range of partners, including more group encounters, rather than the comfort zone of long-term relationships (even though I find those I have had to be deeply fulfilling).
Okay, that's the introduction. More entries will come along in the near future. Hopefully they'll be interesting ;-)
Still, it came as a rude shock when my primary partner and I compared how many people we'd had it off with. In the time we've been together, she's acquired almost three times as many partners/fuckbuddies as I have in my whole adult life. And that makes me wonder, why?
For some time I've speculated that women have an easier time picking up than guys do. If a women propositions a guy for sex, the chances seem pretty good that he'll say yes, if he's not otherwise attached. A guy doing the same runs the risk of a facefull of mace and a restraining order - or at least, that's what the 1990s told us.
And yet, I wonder if that's right? Have I not had as many partners as Queenie because I thought I'd offend or upset women by being too forward? Did society and my natural tendency to be nice to others stand in the way of shagging everyone I want to?
Or am I just a big chicken?
Well, this year I'm going to find out. I recently read Neil Strauss' book The Game, and it was amazing how much struck a chord with me. I finally understood why all the guys like me got completely overlooked by all the beautiful girls in high school, who flocked around the guys with IQs that could be counted on the fingers of one foot!
So this year I'm going to find out what I have to change about myself in order to get laid as much as I want. And can I do it while still being a nice guy?
This journal will be a combination of sexual adventures (I hope), philosophising about the place of sex in society, and anything else that seems to fit in. Since it's a counterpart to Queenie's journal, it will follow a similar format, complete with orgasm count, my purity score, and explicit content (you have been warned). But I'm still learning how to let my inner slut out, so I'll probably be focussing more on idle thougts than field reports for a while.
A bit about me; I'm athletic and well-educated, people often tell me I'm attractive, and I'm in a polyamorous relationship. I'm interested in most things sexual, especially ways to make it better (like any other physical activity, exercise and practice make a big difference), and have a list of things to do this year. One of these is more experience with same-sex encounters. I've had a small amount of experience there, but I think it's time to get more. As the discussion above suggests, I'm also keen to have more sex with a wider range of partners, including more group encounters, rather than the comfort zone of long-term relationships (even though I find those I have had to be deeply fulfilling).
Okay, that's the introduction. More entries will come along in the near future. Hopefully they'll be interesting ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
