What pissed me off is that Filgate doesn’t seem to have done any research as to what erotic books are out there that would be of interest to someone who actually wanted to read Fifty Shades of Grey. Her list includes, by my reckoning, NOT A SINGLE BONA-FIDE EROTIC NOVEL. It’s a bunch of literary novels with sexual themes, plus a book of poetry, an ancient sex guide (to which she gives a backhanded slap) and a memoir. Nothing wrong with them, necessarily, but they aren’t erotic novels and they have nothing at all to do with Fifty Shades. Except that Michele Filgate approves of them….and she seems to approve of them because they’re not erotic novels.
Anyone else agree with me, or am I off my rocker on this one?
From my new article in Tiny Nibbles: Flip-flopper Mitt Romney demonstrates not only that he’s confused on the abortion issue, but on how babies are made; Rachel Maddow helps him sort it out.
But all major Republican candidates advocate a Constitutional Amendment that would eliminate all hormonal contraception, including The Pill. Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, and Herman Cain don’t seem all that clear on this. Ron Paul, at least, understands what he’s advocating, since as a physician he’s delivered 4,000 babies. But his opposition to Federal regulation of abortion is strictly on procedural and States’ Rights grounds.
Or maybe it’s that Bachmann, Pawlenty, Huntsman, Perry and Cain understand wanting to outlaw all forms of hormonal birth control will be poison to voters once they get past the hazardous-to-their-health Republican primary. No candidate can win the American Presidency by planning to change the Constitution to outlaw The Pill. Read all about it at Tiny Nibbles.
As many of you may know, I’ve been writing articles on sexual health, science and politics for my good friend Violet Blue’s blog, Tiny Nibbles, the second most-trafficked sex-related blog on the internet. This article on the Republican frontrunners’ stance on a life-begins-at-conception Amendment to the US Constitution is my latest article for Tiny Nibbles.
As the election heats up you can probably plan on seeing me getting more worked up over sexual health politics, so…get used to it. There will also be zombies…some day. Some day there will be zombies. Some day.
My article “Men Who ‘Buy Sex’ Commit More Crimes: Newsweek, Trafficking, and the Lie of Fabricated Sex Studies,” which first appeared at Tiny Nibbles, has been selected for inclusion in Best Sex Writing 2012 from Cleis Press.
A while back, CNN’s resident anti-porn commando Ian Kerner came up with the term SADD, or Sexual Attention Deficit Disorder, to describe what happens when a guy watches too much internet porn and then doesn’t care whether or not his lady-friend gets the attention she deserves.
Though Kerner has annoyed me with his sensitive new age guy anti-porn rhetoric for quite some time, this is where I, personally, have to get involved. What Kerner did in making up SADD is to cheapen and minimize a real disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD.
Though he’s got “PhD” after his name, Kerner doesn’t appear to be a clinical psychologist, and his bio is far from specific about what degrees he has in what subjects from where. All I can really say for sure is that Kerner has never claimed to be a clinical psychologist or a marriage and family therapist. But even if he was Freud, he wouldn’t get to revise the DSM willy-nilly. Cataloging new disorders is a serious process. This isn’t something you do just because you feel like it.
This past week, New Scientist reported that Restless Legs Syndrome may be improved by masturbation. But the science NS reports on is neither science nor new. That puts me in the truly bizarre position of having to hold down the anti-masturbation side of this debate — which, if you know me, is pretty freakin’ weird.
In case you’ve never heard of it, Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS), in its most common manifestation, is a jerky motion of the legs while one is in bed. In case you’ve never heard of it, masturbation, also known as wanking, self-abuse, self-help, relaxing with one’s thoughts, visiting with Rosy Palm and her five sisters, plus perhaps their friends the Tit Clamp Twins and Bucky Vibrator — well, you get the idea. If you’re reading Tiny Nibbles, I’m pretty sure you’ve heard of masturbation.
Like a hot mad scientist, masturbation pours a test tube or two of a thing called dopamine into that foamy skull cocktail percolating behind your gorgeous peepers. It does it by means of a curious and fairly well-documented but, I think most of us will agree, far too rare phenomenon known as teh orgasmz. Just for the record, not all masturbation leads to orgasm, but if you’re jonesing for dopamine, go for the O. And that’s why chickpea-choking, depression, technophobia, and me getting my ass kicked at 3 a.m. all coincide here.
From guerrilla gay marriages on the steps of City Hall to being the first city to ban plastic shopping bags and happy meals, my beloved San Francisco loves to push the envelope when it comes to progressive ordinances (including, by the way, banning ordnance).
But not all San Franciscans are so cheery about living in the lower-48′s leftmost city. In today’s SF Weekly, Joe Eskenazi rails against the attempt to gather signatures for an initiative banning infant circumcisions in San Francisco. This is all, of course, fantastically premature, since the initiative requires 7,000 signatures and nobody knows how many it has so far. But that hasn’t stopped Eskenazi from making fun of it.
I’ve started guest-blogging at my very good friend Violet Blue’s widely-read blog TinyNibbles.com. It’s NSFW — the site features lots of disrobed people, and lots of writing about sex. Be warned. Here’s a teaser to my first post:
My first piece of bad news is that if you’re male, web porn makes you impotent. This is courtesy of Faux News, which assures me that a presentation at the conference of the Italian Society of Andrology and Sexual Medicine (SIAM) proves it:
Researchers said Thursday that young men who indulge in “excessive consumption” of Internet porn gradually become immune to explicit images, the ANSA news agency reported.
Over time, this can lead to a loss of libido, impotence and a notion of sex that is totally divorced from real-life relations.
[This is] a perfect example of the kind of scientific information that gets turned into meaningless “proof” that porn is bad for you. In the absence of critical information, journalists, professionals and the general public point to studies like this as fact, rather than data. But the information delivered by Fox News doesn’t even qualify as an anecdote.