I know I have been dissing Jamie Bufalino before. I am certain I will again. I have no idea how this man landed the title “sex expert” or the gig in Time Out.
Gay Dan Savage (of the Village Voice) knows multiple times more about female sexuality than Bufalino the Buffalo. That says something, I guess.
From this week’s column:
Q: I’m a hetero woman, and in the past few years I have played with a lot of men, but never had a relationship that extended outside the bedroom. I recently met a drop-dead handsome man with a fantastic body—just looking at him sets my loins on fire. He is great with his mouth and hands, and is a considerate boyfriend outside the bedroom. However, he has the smallest penis I have ever encountered. His erection is barely enough to penetrate me, and then once he’s inside, it’s all over in a couple of minutes. Some women like oral or being fingered; I just love a lengthy pounding with a rock-hard cock…and I’m not getting it. But despite his inability to deliver, I get horny just thinking about him. He gets my juices flowing in a way that no other man has. Should I break up with him now before I get too emotionally involved? I don’t want to give up the boyfriend experience as well as the unbridled lust he stirs in me. Will I eventually lose interest in him because of the less-than-stellar sex? We’re both in our late thirties.
A: I always love it when a sentence like “He gets my juices flowing in a way that no other man has” is immediately followed by “Should I break up with him?” Why in the name of all that’s holy would you preemptively end a solid relationship (not perfect, but solid) just because there’s the possibility (not a guarantee) of feeling a little more intense emotional pain somewhere down the road? Furthermore, why isn’t your question, “What can I do to recalibrate my thinking so that I’m not so focused on his puny dick , while being overly dismissive of how well-meaning he is?” (It really barely penetrates? I have to admit it’s hard for me to even get a mental picture of such a travesty.) Answer: practice, practice, practice. Presumably you’ve had more than your share of rock-hard cock-poundings during your life, and they’ve still left you single and searching. Instead of doing and feeling the same things over and over again (and getting the same result), why don’t you just let this thing play out? Don’t forget: You’re actually into being with him. At least wait until he drives you up the fucking wall before you trash what seems to be a pretty good thing. (End of quote.)
My (Lady In Red's) advice to the same woman:
First of all, don’t ever write to a less-than-stellar sex columnist again.
Second, do your kegels. As many of them as you possibly can. And when he’s inside of you, get on top and do the same thing. You’ll both feel more. Any position where you can squeeze your legs tight will also help you. Tried reverse cowgirl with your legs in a crossed position? Tried doggy with your legs crossed?
Third: Buy a vibrator. A big one. If you think your boyfriend is willing to play with it with you, introduce it to him. Have him fuck you with it. And if he is as small as you say, the vibe and the man will fit inside of you at the same time, increasing your pleasure, and probably his, too.
If you don’t think he’ll be up for it, if you think it’ll make him insecure, play with it when you’re alone. It’s not the same, I know, but at least you’ll get the feeling of being filled up without having to cheat. Don’t dump the guy because of his short-comings, not as long as he makes you feel the way he does. In that, JB is right: Let the relationship run its course.
But do, by all means, try to make up for it with hands and mouth and toys. It’ll make your sex life more satisfactory, and that, my friend, makes your life with this guy more satisfactory.
Also: Do you think there’s a chance he’ll be up for threesomes? With other men, I mean? Or if he’ll be willing to open up your relationship, emotionally monogamous, sexually open? If he is, you’ll get the sex you want without having to give up on the emotions.
As for talking to him about this: He knows he is small. (That’s why he is so great with his hands and mouth.) Mocking it will make him feel insecure. Talking to him about how to compensate for it, in a matter-of-fact-manner, shouldn’t come as a surprise to him. “I wonder if you’ve ever tried having sex with a vibrator”, “I wonder what you think about this or that position”, “I’d like to try ---- to feel you better” – these sentences shouldn’t take his confidence away.
PS: You all may think I mock JB too easily. But listen to this line: “Presumably you’ve had more than your share of rock-hard cock-poundings during your life, and they’ve still left you single and searching”.
What the F has her experience got to do with anything????? She mentions it to show that she doesn't fall in love that easily, and that sex (intercourse) is important to her. But JB interprets it as if she has already had “more than her share” of good fucking, and doesn’t deserve to get any more of it? Go fuck yourself, JB, because YOU don’t deserve to get any from any other person for a long, long time.
A woman taking responsibility for her own pleasure does indeed deserve the pleasure she wants. A woman whose priorities include a good fuck will not be truly happy without a good fuck. As a socalled sex expert, your responsibility should be coming up with suggestions on how to get it. NOT to come up with half-chewed hints that women liking it are sluts and selfish bitches.
Showing posts with label SEXUAL POLITICS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SEXUAL POLITICS. Show all posts
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Monday, February 1, 2010
No sex, please, they’re English
Normally, I oppose stereotypes with all my might. But sometimes, people seem eager to confirm the most parodic of them. Like now, when some British and French scientists discuss whether the G-spot exists. Presumably male scientists, I should say.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jan/28/g-spot-france-sex-gynaecology
Hard as it is, I am going to let the Brit-French jokes lie for now. And the scientist jokes too. I find it a bit harder not to point out that The Guardian – a newspaper I normally consider to be brilliant – finds it appropriate to label this with the term “gynecology” (if you ask me, among the least sexy ten letters in the English dictionary, or eleven, as it’s apparently spelled in the Queen’s Country – with that A in it, it sounds even more medievally medical). But that wasn’t really what I was going to say either.
What I was going to say was this: How ON EARTH is it even possible to have this discussion? I understand how it’s possible to discuss whether God exists. Or Fate. Or love at first sight. Or Santa Claus, presuming you’re five years old. These are all abstracts. But how it’s possible to discuss whether the G-spot EXISTS, presuming you’re NOT five years old, I can’t for the life of me get a grasp on. How it’s NOT possible to find it?
I have often wondered, whenever overhearing this kind of discussion. There’s no doubt about where it is. I have never needed any kind of searching to find it. It’s just there. Exactly where it’s supposed to be. Working exactly the way it’s supposed to do. (And there’s another extra-sensitive spot in there too, more or less directly opposed to it, just a little further in. The latter, I think, is where squirting starts. Can’t really guarantee I am right about this – the liquid may come from even further within – but I think my theory is correct.) I don’t even need to be aroused to find it, though, of course, it’s more distinct when I am.
I may be a lucky woman. Men have told me I am. And certain Red-is-not-supposed-to-see-this-glance-exchanges between girlfriends tell me the same. But the girlfriends in question are mostly women whose self-images are not totally how they should be. These are women who’ve also told me, from time to time, that they feel uncomfortable naked. Who admit they’ve got troubles letting go and to be in the moment, when they have sex. I’ve always believed their troubles to be psychologically founded, and I have never for a second in my life imagined it to be physical. At least not in the have-or-have-not way of physical. (I admit that I have, from time to time, imagined it’s about the physics of their men.) But I mean, like one of the Guardian commenters say, if anyone had said that only some 60 % of women were in possession of other organs, like a liver or a heart or a set of lungs, they would have been ridiculed big time. It’s there. Just how it is. But still, apparently, there’s no “scientific” research concluding??? This baffles me. What does it say about science? And what does it say about everything we do not need science for? If a woman orgasms in the woods without a scientist to see, did the trees really move?
The abovementioned article, BTW, is not the only thing written in The Guardian about this. They’ve had a couple of more texts on the same subject. Among them, the following is actually quite sad, with this quote, unfortunately, coming from a woman: “I haven't a clue whether the G-spot exists, nor do I much care.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/05/g-spot-women-study
Really? REALLY? I mean: REALLY?
Can anyone even imagine a discussion on whether male ejaculation is real or a myth? Or whether it matters if it is?
I didn’t think so.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jan/28/g-spot-france-sex-gynaecology
Hard as it is, I am going to let the Brit-French jokes lie for now. And the scientist jokes too. I find it a bit harder not to point out that The Guardian – a newspaper I normally consider to be brilliant – finds it appropriate to label this with the term “gynecology” (if you ask me, among the least sexy ten letters in the English dictionary, or eleven, as it’s apparently spelled in the Queen’s Country – with that A in it, it sounds even more medievally medical). But that wasn’t really what I was going to say either.
What I was going to say was this: How ON EARTH is it even possible to have this discussion? I understand how it’s possible to discuss whether God exists. Or Fate. Or love at first sight. Or Santa Claus, presuming you’re five years old. These are all abstracts. But how it’s possible to discuss whether the G-spot EXISTS, presuming you’re NOT five years old, I can’t for the life of me get a grasp on. How it’s NOT possible to find it?
I have often wondered, whenever overhearing this kind of discussion. There’s no doubt about where it is. I have never needed any kind of searching to find it. It’s just there. Exactly where it’s supposed to be. Working exactly the way it’s supposed to do. (And there’s another extra-sensitive spot in there too, more or less directly opposed to it, just a little further in. The latter, I think, is where squirting starts. Can’t really guarantee I am right about this – the liquid may come from even further within – but I think my theory is correct.) I don’t even need to be aroused to find it, though, of course, it’s more distinct when I am.
I may be a lucky woman. Men have told me I am. And certain Red-is-not-supposed-to-see-this-glance-exchanges between girlfriends tell me the same. But the girlfriends in question are mostly women whose self-images are not totally how they should be. These are women who’ve also told me, from time to time, that they feel uncomfortable naked. Who admit they’ve got troubles letting go and to be in the moment, when they have sex. I’ve always believed their troubles to be psychologically founded, and I have never for a second in my life imagined it to be physical. At least not in the have-or-have-not way of physical. (I admit that I have, from time to time, imagined it’s about the physics of their men.) But I mean, like one of the Guardian commenters say, if anyone had said that only some 60 % of women were in possession of other organs, like a liver or a heart or a set of lungs, they would have been ridiculed big time. It’s there. Just how it is. But still, apparently, there’s no “scientific” research concluding??? This baffles me. What does it say about science? And what does it say about everything we do not need science for? If a woman orgasms in the woods without a scientist to see, did the trees really move?
The abovementioned article, BTW, is not the only thing written in The Guardian about this. They’ve had a couple of more texts on the same subject. Among them, the following is actually quite sad, with this quote, unfortunately, coming from a woman: “I haven't a clue whether the G-spot exists, nor do I much care.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/05/g-spot-women-study
Really? REALLY? I mean: REALLY?
Can anyone even imagine a discussion on whether male ejaculation is real or a myth? Or whether it matters if it is?
I didn’t think so.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Let’s (not) get married
NYTimes is doing another cockadoo story on men, women, dating, this time, even marriage. The conclusion is that more men marry educated women than in 1970 (that is, I can tell you, because more of us ARE educated today than women were in 1970, but that, of course, isn’t news).
But, according to the Times, this "trend" isn’t valid in New York, because it’s still very very hard for a very very smart woman in NYC to find a husband. Duh. Let me repeat that for my more stupid readers: Duh. Duh. Duh.
Let it lie that the article author isn’t educated enough to read statistics correctly. (Duh.)
Or that other statistics would tell them that there are in fact more women than men in NYC. (Duh.)
Or that the women interviewed are really poor examples of successful New York women. (Duh. Duh.) One of them is out of work, one is a German stylist, and one finds it genial to use the question "do you have a passport and a library card?" as some kind of litmus test to men she meets in bars. (Duuuuuuuh. And a well-meant note to everyone even considering for a second trying this: Not only do most people have this, not only will most people find it insulting that the other person presumes they don’t, but plenty of people would probably also take the passport question to mean that they’re sent packing. Alone. For a solo trip. To a galaxy far far away. Never to return.)
The interviewees seem to be chosen for one reason alone: They all seem to think of themselves as brilliant, and they all accept this for a reason why they can’t find a man. (I’m out of duhs.)
If anyone is interested: The real reason why it’s hard to find someone to marry in NYC, for men and women alike is this: There are so many other options out there, it’s hard to settle for just one. Plenty of us don’t even feel like trying.
Links are here, for the original article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/us/19marriage.html?em
And for the deserved ridicule committed by NYMag (“Ladies, it’s not that you’re too smart, it’s that you’re too freaking crazy”):
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/01/less_men_are_marrying_wealthie.html
But, according to the Times, this "trend" isn’t valid in New York, because it’s still very very hard for a very very smart woman in NYC to find a husband. Duh. Let me repeat that for my more stupid readers: Duh. Duh. Duh.
Let it lie that the article author isn’t educated enough to read statistics correctly. (Duh.)
Or that other statistics would tell them that there are in fact more women than men in NYC. (Duh.)
Or that the women interviewed are really poor examples of successful New York women. (Duh. Duh.) One of them is out of work, one is a German stylist, and one finds it genial to use the question "do you have a passport and a library card?" as some kind of litmus test to men she meets in bars. (Duuuuuuuh. And a well-meant note to everyone even considering for a second trying this: Not only do most people have this, not only will most people find it insulting that the other person presumes they don’t, but plenty of people would probably also take the passport question to mean that they’re sent packing. Alone. For a solo trip. To a galaxy far far away. Never to return.)
The interviewees seem to be chosen for one reason alone: They all seem to think of themselves as brilliant, and they all accept this for a reason why they can’t find a man. (I’m out of duhs.)
If anyone is interested: The real reason why it’s hard to find someone to marry in NYC, for men and women alike is this: There are so many other options out there, it’s hard to settle for just one. Plenty of us don’t even feel like trying.
Links are here, for the original article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/us/19marriage.html?em
And for the deserved ridicule committed by NYMag (“Ladies, it’s not that you’re too smart, it’s that you’re too freaking crazy”):
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/01/less_men_are_marrying_wealthie.html
Friday, August 21, 2009
Polluted
Time Out New York put out their annual sex poll this year. I won't link to it, it's not at all female sexuality-friendly. But here’s how I responded, plus what I would have responded, had Dan Savage made the poll and included answers for those of us who actually like sex. He may be gay, but he understands a woman way better than his competition.
This is the poll for straight women:
How old are you?
33
What neighborhood do you live in (at this point Time Out’s sex columnist Jamie Bufalino finds it necessary to define what a neighborhood is, “Chelsea, Williamsburg etc”):
Lower East Side
Question 1:
I wish every guy I date could...
a. do cunnilingus right
b. fuck with both our orgasms in mind
c. pick up the telephone on occasion
d. live life without porn
My comment: Where’s answer e. fuck me eagerly as often as I want to be fucked? In lack of it, I responded a. But truly, I can’t remember the last guy who didn’t know the art. Actually, I don’t remember a man who can’t do a, b and c with his hands tied and his eyes blindfolded. As for d, I don’t understand what that’s got to do with me. His choice how he spends his spare time, right?
Question 2:
I wish I could learn how to…
a. deep-throat
b. achieve orgasm
c. be more vocal in bed
d. take it up the ass
Well. Again, the answer is e. Seriously, what 33 year old New York woman does not know this stuff? (In lack of this alternative, I responded d. Because that is the least easy of four easy feats.)
Question 3:
The last thing I would ever do is…
a. swallow
b. give a one-night stand a rim job
c. fuck without protection
d. allow another woman in bed with a man
My comment: I’ve done all this stuff. But I did respond c., because that is what I usually do not do. One man only has gotten the honor. Yes, baby, I can hear your “damn” all the way to here, all the way from the West Coast. Don’t do b. very often either, though.
Question 4:
The genre of guys I find the hottest are:
a. hipsters
b. nerds
c. cocky banking types
d. artsy dudes
What??? Where are the athletes??? I want my gym addicts!!!! In lack of them, I responded “artsy guys”. Because well-built jazz musicians are kind of dude-y and kind of artsy, and I’ve been there... “Cocky” isn’t that dumb a word either, but what’s that got to do with finance, these days??? And why put “hipsters” and “nerds” into each their category, as they look the exact same??? Seriously. If this is a man's world, at least give me one that looks a man.
Question 5:
My main deal breaker is…
a. bad breath
b. a shithole of an apartment
c. a pencil dick
d. a guy who’s selfish in bed
Well, finally something one could respond to by using one of the responses suggested. The answer is c. But what on earth has a shitty apartment got to do with a SEX POLL?
Question 6:
I would have sex with another woman if…
a. my man asked me to
b. I was drunk enough
c. I found her irresistibly hot
d. she asked me (I’m easy!)
My comment: For the record, the “I’m easy” parenthesis belongs to Jamie the Buffalo, not to me. Here, the answer is a. rewritten: I had sex with another woman because my man asked me to. But I’d like to expand that: I had to know he was potent enough to take care of both women’s pleasure, and I had to know she really wanted to and knew what to do. What would it take for me to do it again? The answer is e. having at least one man there with us, knowing he was equally competent. And he should be so desirable I’d know in advance my juices would suffice for both of them.
Question 7:
As far as plastic surgery goes, I would be most interested in…
a. enlarging my tits
b. reducing my tits
c. liposuction
d. butt implants
The answer is e. None of the above, for Jesus F-ing Christ’s sake! My body looks great and there’s nothing wrong with my tits and my ass is nicely shaped as it is, and who the fuck needs liposuction when there is yoga???? And yet again, what the hell has this got to do with a sex poll? Oh, yeah, I know, shouldn’t have forgotten that for a second. Buffy the eternal buzz killer thinks the sexuality of a woman is all about being the object for a man’s eye, not the subject of her own desires. And of course, her abilities to attract are not about the way she feels about herself, but the way she looks. How could I have forgotten! Did he ask the males the same, by the way, gay or straight? And the lesbians? Or the bisexuals? NO, HE DID NOT! This question was, for some reason, only relevant for straight women!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Question 8:
Whenever I am looking to hook up, I…
a. wear a short skirt
b. show off the girls
c. don’t wear underwear
d. all of the above
Well, I responded b, in lack of e: the right kind of smile is all it takes, baby. Actually, walking towards a man and giving him your hand while saying "come here" is all it takes.
Question 9:
Which reality star would you most like to fuck?
a. Jon Gosselin from Jon & Kate Plus eight
b. That dude Sebastian from NYC Prep (as soon as he is of age, of course)
c. 12 Pack from Daisy of Love and I Love New York
d. One of the rich husbands in one of those Real Housewife nightmares
Who the fuck are these fellows? Ok. Answer is not a, because him, I know who is. Not a chance in hell. It’s not b, because a boy can never be more than half a man, and it’s not d, because I gather a husband with a housewife nightmare is not exactly a dream himself. So it must be c, I do not have the slightest idea who 12 Pack is, but I do love New York, and with that kind of nick, chances are he’s got to be black, or at least have a six-pack, right?
Question 10:
My tried-and-true-place to get lucky is…
a. a dive bar
b. a hotel bar
c. Chelsea Piers
d. Craigslist
Again, the lack of imagination! Enough said.
Question 11:
What’s your ultimate sex fantasy?
Finally a good question, and what makes it best is that I do not have to follow ANY suggestions from the Buffalo. So the answer is short and easy:
Two men (or more) and me.
Question 12:
Tell us (in lurid detail!) about your most shameful or embarrassing sexual encounter:
The “lurid” is Buffy’s, of course. Because, like I responded, I do not think of sex as shameful or embarrassing. But the closest I do get to embarrassing, was that one time a girlfriend of mine introduced her new boyfriend, and I was sure I had seen him someplace before. He denied knowing me. I asked him if he may know my brother, one of my exes or so on. I didn’t remember until she left the room and he hissed to me to drop the subject. Turned out I had slept with him. Whoops.
Question 13:
Where’s your favorite place (public or private) to get frisky?
The good old bed holds the most opportunities. But everywhere goes.
Question 14:
What’s the sexiest person, place or thing in New York?
THING???? Ok, let that one go. My response was that the entire city is sexy, but that certain Harlem jazz clubs are places I never leave alone.
Question 15:
What else should we know about your sex life in New York?
My response: Volumes. But a lady got to keep some of her secrets.
What should have been my response: Who, but a 14 year old virgin, is supposed to take this question, or 12 of the others in this poll, half seriously????? Jamie Bufalino, you wouldn’t know a woman’s sexuality if it bit you in the ass. And if you’re half as ignorant to women in real life as in your column, I bet not many of them do bite your ass.
This is the poll for straight women:
How old are you?
33
What neighborhood do you live in (at this point Time Out’s sex columnist Jamie Bufalino finds it necessary to define what a neighborhood is, “Chelsea, Williamsburg etc”):
Lower East Side
Question 1:
I wish every guy I date could...
a. do cunnilingus right
b. fuck with both our orgasms in mind
c. pick up the telephone on occasion
d. live life without porn
My comment: Where’s answer e. fuck me eagerly as often as I want to be fucked? In lack of it, I responded a. But truly, I can’t remember the last guy who didn’t know the art. Actually, I don’t remember a man who can’t do a, b and c with his hands tied and his eyes blindfolded. As for d, I don’t understand what that’s got to do with me. His choice how he spends his spare time, right?
Question 2:
I wish I could learn how to…
a. deep-throat
b. achieve orgasm
c. be more vocal in bed
d. take it up the ass
Well. Again, the answer is e. Seriously, what 33 year old New York woman does not know this stuff? (In lack of this alternative, I responded d. Because that is the least easy of four easy feats.)
Question 3:
The last thing I would ever do is…
a. swallow
b. give a one-night stand a rim job
c. fuck without protection
d. allow another woman in bed with a man
My comment: I’ve done all this stuff. But I did respond c., because that is what I usually do not do. One man only has gotten the honor. Yes, baby, I can hear your “damn” all the way to here, all the way from the West Coast. Don’t do b. very often either, though.
Question 4:
The genre of guys I find the hottest are:
a. hipsters
b. nerds
c. cocky banking types
d. artsy dudes
What??? Where are the athletes??? I want my gym addicts!!!! In lack of them, I responded “artsy guys”. Because well-built jazz musicians are kind of dude-y and kind of artsy, and I’ve been there... “Cocky” isn’t that dumb a word either, but what’s that got to do with finance, these days??? And why put “hipsters” and “nerds” into each their category, as they look the exact same??? Seriously. If this is a man's world, at least give me one that looks a man.
Question 5:
My main deal breaker is…
a. bad breath
b. a shithole of an apartment
c. a pencil dick
d. a guy who’s selfish in bed
Well, finally something one could respond to by using one of the responses suggested. The answer is c. But what on earth has a shitty apartment got to do with a SEX POLL?
Question 6:
I would have sex with another woman if…
a. my man asked me to
b. I was drunk enough
c. I found her irresistibly hot
d. she asked me (I’m easy!)
My comment: For the record, the “I’m easy” parenthesis belongs to Jamie the Buffalo, not to me. Here, the answer is a. rewritten: I had sex with another woman because my man asked me to. But I’d like to expand that: I had to know he was potent enough to take care of both women’s pleasure, and I had to know she really wanted to and knew what to do. What would it take for me to do it again? The answer is e. having at least one man there with us, knowing he was equally competent. And he should be so desirable I’d know in advance my juices would suffice for both of them.
Question 7:
As far as plastic surgery goes, I would be most interested in…
a. enlarging my tits
b. reducing my tits
c. liposuction
d. butt implants
The answer is e. None of the above, for Jesus F-ing Christ’s sake! My body looks great and there’s nothing wrong with my tits and my ass is nicely shaped as it is, and who the fuck needs liposuction when there is yoga???? And yet again, what the hell has this got to do with a sex poll? Oh, yeah, I know, shouldn’t have forgotten that for a second. Buffy the eternal buzz killer thinks the sexuality of a woman is all about being the object for a man’s eye, not the subject of her own desires. And of course, her abilities to attract are not about the way she feels about herself, but the way she looks. How could I have forgotten! Did he ask the males the same, by the way, gay or straight? And the lesbians? Or the bisexuals? NO, HE DID NOT! This question was, for some reason, only relevant for straight women!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Question 8:
Whenever I am looking to hook up, I…
a. wear a short skirt
b. show off the girls
c. don’t wear underwear
d. all of the above
Well, I responded b, in lack of e: the right kind of smile is all it takes, baby. Actually, walking towards a man and giving him your hand while saying "come here" is all it takes.
Question 9:
Which reality star would you most like to fuck?
a. Jon Gosselin from Jon & Kate Plus eight
b. That dude Sebastian from NYC Prep (as soon as he is of age, of course)
c. 12 Pack from Daisy of Love and I Love New York
d. One of the rich husbands in one of those Real Housewife nightmares
Who the fuck are these fellows? Ok. Answer is not a, because him, I know who is. Not a chance in hell. It’s not b, because a boy can never be more than half a man, and it’s not d, because I gather a husband with a housewife nightmare is not exactly a dream himself. So it must be c, I do not have the slightest idea who 12 Pack is, but I do love New York, and with that kind of nick, chances are he’s got to be black, or at least have a six-pack, right?
Question 10:
My tried-and-true-place to get lucky is…
a. a dive bar
b. a hotel bar
c. Chelsea Piers
d. Craigslist
Again, the lack of imagination! Enough said.
Question 11:
What’s your ultimate sex fantasy?
Finally a good question, and what makes it best is that I do not have to follow ANY suggestions from the Buffalo. So the answer is short and easy:
Two men (or more) and me.
Question 12:
Tell us (in lurid detail!) about your most shameful or embarrassing sexual encounter:
The “lurid” is Buffy’s, of course. Because, like I responded, I do not think of sex as shameful or embarrassing. But the closest I do get to embarrassing, was that one time a girlfriend of mine introduced her new boyfriend, and I was sure I had seen him someplace before. He denied knowing me. I asked him if he may know my brother, one of my exes or so on. I didn’t remember until she left the room and he hissed to me to drop the subject. Turned out I had slept with him. Whoops.
Question 13:
Where’s your favorite place (public or private) to get frisky?
The good old bed holds the most opportunities. But everywhere goes.
Question 14:
What’s the sexiest person, place or thing in New York?
THING???? Ok, let that one go. My response was that the entire city is sexy, but that certain Harlem jazz clubs are places I never leave alone.
Question 15:
What else should we know about your sex life in New York?
My response: Volumes. But a lady got to keep some of her secrets.
What should have been my response: Who, but a 14 year old virgin, is supposed to take this question, or 12 of the others in this poll, half seriously????? Jamie Bufalino, you wouldn’t know a woman’s sexuality if it bit you in the ass. And if you’re half as ignorant to women in real life as in your column, I bet not many of them do bite your ass.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Truth in numbers
I don’t think I have EVER been with a man who has not asked me how many men I’ve been with before him. I can’t remember one. Even the one night stands want to know, and though I have a couple of theories why, I don’t understand why this should be SO incredibly important they all HAVE TO ask it.
If the motive is to prevent jealousy or to reduce the “risk” I have had lovers better than the one sharing the bed with me at the second the question is asked, I can assure you: The answer will not lessen any anxieties.
If you want to enter a relationship with me, and fear I am going to stray, knowing my number will hardly calm your feelings.
If you have a need to judge and/or to feel morally superior, you should not and are not likely to share my bed to begin with.
If you want to feel like a stud and/or to brag you are experienced to an extreme degree, well, then again, there is a risk you’ll be disappointed.
If you’re simply curious, ok. But please say so, when I ask why you want to know. Don’t go all quiet. This particular silence is speaking volumes. More often than not, it’s the kind of silence that tells me I’ll meet another kind of silence after.
Men who can’t bear this one specific number tend not to dial my other specific number later on. I know it in advance. They, I suppose, know it in advance. But they still ask. Whereas to me, the following numbers matter way more than the one you all seem to think is so important:
The number of years since I was a virgin: Seventeen.
The number of other serious, monogamous relationships I have had: Seven, including one marriage.
The number of years my serious relationships have all in all lasted: Nine, or close to ten.
The number of years I have been a single, adult and sexually active woman: That leaves seven to eight, doesn’t it?
The frequency of which I want sex when in a relationship: At least ten times a week.
The frequency of which I want sex when I am not in a relationship: At least ten times a week.
The frequency of which my wishes are fulfilled: Well, lately, answer is “all the time”. But if I see my life as a whole and include the times when I have not been neither as fit nor as socially active as I am now, a more honest response will be “mostly, but from time to time, not”. Life doesn’t give you everything you want unasked for. Most of the time, you have to make some kind of effort.
The number of times I have cheated on a boyfriend: Zero. No effort.
The number of times I have lied to a boyfriend: Zero, or zero that I know of/can think of. I have no qualms in not volunteering things I do not feel like telling. But if you ask me a question, I don’t lie to you. If you don’t want an honest answer, ask another woman.
The total number of women I have had sex with: One.
The total number of men I have had sex with: Ok, there we go... I can only guess. I can give you an approximate. But I don’t write a diary. And I have long ago gotten beyond the point where I can even try to make some sort of list. I am no good at remembering names, dates or years. I am no good at remembering faces. Also, I think the following facts matter and should matter more than any grand total measured in numbers:
*I know how many men I have loved.
*I know how many men I have had long term relationships to.
*I know how long these relationships have lasted and I know how many years of my adult, sexually active life I have single.
The truth come to numbers, is that morals, opportunity, looks, gender, sexual competence and social skills have less to say than most people think.
What really decides your grand total is how lucky you’ve been in love. You found the love of your life at the first try, you were only ever with him or her, you have never felt a need to be with any other? Ok. Your number is one. You may lose out on something, but you're still a lucky bastard. Yet, there is no reason in the world you should feel morally superior to me or anyone else.
Most people need more attempts. Some of us need many. And to stop trying? If you ask me, being a coward was never brave, honest, responsible, kind nor heroic.
If the motive is to prevent jealousy or to reduce the “risk” I have had lovers better than the one sharing the bed with me at the second the question is asked, I can assure you: The answer will not lessen any anxieties.
If you want to enter a relationship with me, and fear I am going to stray, knowing my number will hardly calm your feelings.
If you have a need to judge and/or to feel morally superior, you should not and are not likely to share my bed to begin with.
If you want to feel like a stud and/or to brag you are experienced to an extreme degree, well, then again, there is a risk you’ll be disappointed.
If you’re simply curious, ok. But please say so, when I ask why you want to know. Don’t go all quiet. This particular silence is speaking volumes. More often than not, it’s the kind of silence that tells me I’ll meet another kind of silence after.
Men who can’t bear this one specific number tend not to dial my other specific number later on. I know it in advance. They, I suppose, know it in advance. But they still ask. Whereas to me, the following numbers matter way more than the one you all seem to think is so important:
The number of years since I was a virgin: Seventeen.
The number of other serious, monogamous relationships I have had: Seven, including one marriage.
The number of years my serious relationships have all in all lasted: Nine, or close to ten.
The number of years I have been a single, adult and sexually active woman: That leaves seven to eight, doesn’t it?
The frequency of which I want sex when in a relationship: At least ten times a week.
The frequency of which I want sex when I am not in a relationship: At least ten times a week.
The frequency of which my wishes are fulfilled: Well, lately, answer is “all the time”. But if I see my life as a whole and include the times when I have not been neither as fit nor as socially active as I am now, a more honest response will be “mostly, but from time to time, not”. Life doesn’t give you everything you want unasked for. Most of the time, you have to make some kind of effort.
The number of times I have cheated on a boyfriend: Zero. No effort.
The number of times I have lied to a boyfriend: Zero, or zero that I know of/can think of. I have no qualms in not volunteering things I do not feel like telling. But if you ask me a question, I don’t lie to you. If you don’t want an honest answer, ask another woman.
The total number of women I have had sex with: One.
The total number of men I have had sex with: Ok, there we go... I can only guess. I can give you an approximate. But I don’t write a diary. And I have long ago gotten beyond the point where I can even try to make some sort of list. I am no good at remembering names, dates or years. I am no good at remembering faces. Also, I think the following facts matter and should matter more than any grand total measured in numbers:
*I know how many men I have loved.
*I know how many men I have had long term relationships to.
*I know how long these relationships have lasted and I know how many years of my adult, sexually active life I have single.
The truth come to numbers, is that morals, opportunity, looks, gender, sexual competence and social skills have less to say than most people think.
What really decides your grand total is how lucky you’ve been in love. You found the love of your life at the first try, you were only ever with him or her, you have never felt a need to be with any other? Ok. Your number is one. You may lose out on something, but you're still a lucky bastard. Yet, there is no reason in the world you should feel morally superior to me or anyone else.
Most people need more attempts. Some of us need many. And to stop trying? If you ask me, being a coward was never brave, honest, responsible, kind nor heroic.
Hot, smart & homo
Rupert Everett is way smarter than anyone has ever given him credit for. Read this interview, and you'll understand what I mean:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jul/17/g2-interview-rupert-everett
After reading the interview, you may also agree with my claim that Everett indeed seems smarter than the journalist interviewing him, and to understand my following statement:
Some people are very concerned with the labels "homosexual", "heterosexual" and "bisexual". Most people are very clearly defined as one or the other or the third, and some people seem to think that these labels also define the rest of your personality. That they define what you can do as an actor. Or what kind of ideas you can understand. Or what kind of ways you relate or are able to relate to other people.
What the most-preoccupied-with-labels-type of people tend to forget are that there are so many things not defined by a label. Individual features always matter more than group identities. There are the people who are simply sexual. There are the people who are simply people. And then, of course, there are the people who do not know what they are, sexually or personally, and who prefer to use their identity labels as identities. It's easier. It's a great deal easier, because if you do, you don't have to define or to front a real personality. And to define and to front a real personality? Well. Even if you do, you will sometimes be seen as one of the group more than one of your own.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jul/17/g2-interview-rupert-everett
After reading the interview, you may also agree with my claim that Everett indeed seems smarter than the journalist interviewing him, and to understand my following statement:
Some people are very concerned with the labels "homosexual", "heterosexual" and "bisexual". Most people are very clearly defined as one or the other or the third, and some people seem to think that these labels also define the rest of your personality. That they define what you can do as an actor. Or what kind of ideas you can understand. Or what kind of ways you relate or are able to relate to other people.
What the most-preoccupied-with-labels-type of people tend to forget are that there are so many things not defined by a label. Individual features always matter more than group identities. There are the people who are simply sexual. There are the people who are simply people. And then, of course, there are the people who do not know what they are, sexually or personally, and who prefer to use their identity labels as identities. It's easier. It's a great deal easier, because if you do, you don't have to define or to front a real personality. And to define and to front a real personality? Well. Even if you do, you will sometimes be seen as one of the group more than one of your own.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
I am a moralist
I am a woman fucking around. I am also a sexual moralist.
Despite the fact that I am this very moment located on the Other Side of the Atlantic, I can hear my regular readers rolling on the floor laughing right now. But you will understand what I mean once I say what I am now about to say:
My sexual morals is not about a having a double set of moral standards. Nothing is as dishonest as a double set of standards, and one should always apply the same rules to sex as to the rest of one's life.
Read this week’s Sex Diary in NYMag, and you will see an example of a person who does not:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/07/the_small_business_owner_with.html
My comment to her, posted on NYMag already, shortened down for my blog readers (full comment on page 5 of NYMag comments:
I get the impression she sticks to this BF for two reasons: She doesn't think she'll find anyone better than him (because she has herpes), and she realizes he is after all a good man (he stuck to her despite her disease and cares enough to argue with her).
But she takes advantage of him and she does not respect him, and she shows him CLEARLY she doesn't, by visiting dating sites AND telling him she does, by leaving him alone on the phone when they're having a serious convo/quarrel AND by writing a Sex Diary based on their relationship despite his expressed dislike that she does.
What will kill this relationship is a STD more lethal to relationships than Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Sexually Transmitted Dishonesty & Sexually Transmitted Disrespect both kill faster and are more infective than the STDs one can actually live with.
--
My PS, only posted here:
Why on earth should another set of moral standards apply to your sex life than the rest of your life?
Why on earth should you pretend to be another person as a sexual being than who you are as a human being?
And why on earth wouldn't you be a whole person, the same person wherever you are and whatever you do, rather than a compartilized person acting a different role for every part of your life?
Personally and professionally, psychologically and physically you are ONE.
With my clothes on, I believe in honesty, integrity, respect & freedom. I believe in enjoyment and generosity.
Without my clothes on, I believe in honesty, integrity, respect & freedom. I believe in enjoyment and generosity.
Despite the fact that I am this very moment located on the Other Side of the Atlantic, I can hear my regular readers rolling on the floor laughing right now. But you will understand what I mean once I say what I am now about to say:
My sexual morals is not about a having a double set of moral standards. Nothing is as dishonest as a double set of standards, and one should always apply the same rules to sex as to the rest of one's life.
Read this week’s Sex Diary in NYMag, and you will see an example of a person who does not:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/07/the_small_business_owner_with.html
My comment to her, posted on NYMag already, shortened down for my blog readers (full comment on page 5 of NYMag comments:
I get the impression she sticks to this BF for two reasons: She doesn't think she'll find anyone better than him (because she has herpes), and she realizes he is after all a good man (he stuck to her despite her disease and cares enough to argue with her).
But she takes advantage of him and she does not respect him, and she shows him CLEARLY she doesn't, by visiting dating sites AND telling him she does, by leaving him alone on the phone when they're having a serious convo/quarrel AND by writing a Sex Diary based on their relationship despite his expressed dislike that she does.
What will kill this relationship is a STD more lethal to relationships than Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Sexually Transmitted Dishonesty & Sexually Transmitted Disrespect both kill faster and are more infective than the STDs one can actually live with.
--
My PS, only posted here:
Why on earth should another set of moral standards apply to your sex life than the rest of your life?
Why on earth should you pretend to be another person as a sexual being than who you are as a human being?
And why on earth wouldn't you be a whole person, the same person wherever you are and whatever you do, rather than a compartilized person acting a different role for every part of your life?
Personally and professionally, psychologically and physically you are ONE.
With my clothes on, I believe in honesty, integrity, respect & freedom. I believe in enjoyment and generosity.
Without my clothes on, I believe in honesty, integrity, respect & freedom. I believe in enjoyment and generosity.
Monday, July 6, 2009
On bullshit & being a woman
Sometimes, when I listen to male friends tell me about the bullshit some women put them through, I am wondering if we do indeed live in the same world.
There are the women who insist on a certain number of dates before they let themselves be kissed or touched or fucked. And there are women who “has to” be treated to this or that, shall they find a man “interesting”. Women demanding flowers or a certain amount of compliments or a certain number of phone calls or attention this way or the other before they even accept dates. The women “punishing” a man if he forgets to text or call when she finds it appropriate, most often without having told that man when those times are. There are women who tell a man to “forget about it” when all he’s done is asking if the chair next to her is taken or when he is actually just paying her a compliment on her haircut. And then there are the women who spend the time they spend with a man looking disinterested and acting disinterested just so that he will not find her “desperate”. And there are women actually really aching to go to bed with a man (these are who I find the silliest and did believe to be rarities, but my male friends insist there are many of them) but still deny themselves to go for it, because their girlfriends think one way or the other less about the fellow. And yeah, this is even worse, there are the women “accepting” to go to bed with a man, but COMPLAINING about it, in terms of sacrifice – to the guy or to her girlfriends after! Even worse than all of this: These women seem to think of themselves and talk about themselves as “class acts” because of their impoliteness. Not paying genuine attention to whoever you spend time with IS and WILL ALWAYS BE impolite, whatever your motives. And LYING on what you think about someone is and will always be a stupid, dishonest, childish thing to do.
Advice to guys: Never go out with a woman telling you she doesn’t “put out” without this or that happening first. A woman talking about getting down’n’dirty in terms of “putting out” does not get down and dirty. And if she does, you can be sure she expects some special treatment after, probably also without giving you some special treatment during. That kind of woman is high maintenance, whether she’s worth it or not. Unless you do already find her special to begin with, and there’s something about her intriguing you, you’re most likely to find her not worth it.
Likewise, advice to girls & women: If you like a man and enjoy his company, and are willing to show him you do by paying him the same attention you expect him to pay you, you’re likely to have fun with him. If you have fun with him, he’s likely to have fun with you. And that sex you’ll be having, when you’ll be having it, will be way better than it had been, had you put him through a number of tests and he’d been feeling he has to jump through hoops to please you. You will feel more relaxed, he will feel more relaxed. Most likely, you’d both be more playful and you may even feel ready for it sooner. And if the bed is the only place you leave it to him to please you, I can almost guarantee you he will.
Ok, enough on the world some people I know live in. I realize the truth in all of the above, though I do still from time to time think there cannot be THAT many people living in that world. But I have heard the same stories from too many men to deny it does exist as some kind of parallel universe, and I’ve heard the woman’s version of the story too many times to think that only those men live in that world. I have thought of that as a possibility, can’t deny that – suggesting that the men complaining about this kind of women are really men who do not relax with women themselves and/or men who think sex is their birth right, needing to cut some women some slack and realize that they are not interested in fucking every woman there is, either, and that women have the same right to be selective and to expect a man to raise to her “level” as he has for her. I have sometimes, too, told men that they do not notice the more subtle signs a woman has interest in a man and that they have to listen to what she’s not saying as much as to what she’s saying. I think that’s partly correct. But I do realize that it is not the full picture, because I’ve heard women tell me about this world too, realizing they (some of them) are finding it somewhat normal.
Her side of the story, for those of you interested, most often goes like this: She wants him to show her she is “special” to him, because she wants to BE special to him, and she wants to be “special” just by “being herself” and being appreciated for it – from the “beginning” on. So she sees nothing wrong in “testing” if she is. That she should put down some effort for his sake too, she thinks she does: She painted her nails before the date, right? She spent an hour getting ready, doing her hair this way and that, waxing her legs only yesterday, I know how much that hurts, don’t I, please keep that in mind, and she gave her outfit great thought, trying things over and over. She listened to his stories about his boring job, no complaint, even asked him some questions and let him dominate the conversation, though he didn’t ask once about her day. And she was “polite”, like her mama told her, she did say “thank you” when he paid for the drinks and asked her if she’d like some more, sure. That doesn’t mean she’s “obliged” to “go to bed with him, he should know that, and if he doesn’t, she’s willing to “teach” him. When I ask her if she doesn’t want to go to bed with him for HER OWN SAKE, answer too often is this: Sure, that would be nice, he’s looking good and smelling great, but she isn’t ready for it YET. And she doesn’t want him to think she does it with “everyone”.
Seriously, women: No one thinks you do it with everyone. No one even thinks I am doing it with everyone. If you only accept dates from men you actually like and only fuck men you actually want, you’ll enjoy it AND have that air of exclusivity without trying so freaking hard for it. He’ll feel special enough by seeing and feeling you enjoy it to the core. No man thinks every man can do that for you. They all think they do it like no other…
Me, I feel lucky, cutting myself some slack, being as honest as I feel like being. The men I like, I like, the men I don’t like, I don’t bother with. Why should I pretend otherwise? Wouldn’t improve anything for anyone, just a waste of time. And what’s so complicated about understanding that? Nothing! Sometimes, like when reading today’s Sex Diary in NYMag (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/07/the_gay_commodities_trader.html) I think my life is more similar to the lives of the gay men I know, than to some of the straight women who share my status as a 30-something single.
Example: I just had a fuck date, a few hours ago. Man whose last name I didn’t think of asking about. That little fact leaves me feel a bit silly, but it doesn’t matter, really, I’ll find it if I want it. He is a friend of a friend, and it was our fellow friend who linked us, telling me he knew someone I should meet, considering my “lifestyle” and my “fitness fetish”, he was sure we’d “like” one another “very much”. And yeah, we did, though I can’t say we talked much. Man in question called me an hour or so before we met, just having gotten my number from our fellow friend some minutes before that. We hit it off, sending each other pics while still talking on the phone, both telling the other we liked what we saw. Neither of us having THAT fixed plans for the hours to come. It developed rather quickly, you can say, and when we discovered we were only a ten minute walk apart, he came over. He was hard as he came in the door, I was wet as well, and within seconds, we were both naked. And I am now just the right amount of tired and just the right amount of satisfied, and the man has left to do what he had to do for the rest of the day, not quite done working yet. I am free to spend my time how I want to, too, having just finished my work day before he called.
Maybe he’ll call me later, maybe we’ll repeat it later, and maybe we won’t. Either way, it was the nicest way to spend an afternoon. And though he was not quite my preferred size and not quite my preferred thickness, he was close enough, and he knew how to swing it. I liked that, I enjoyed it, and I sure wouldn’t mind doing it again. The simplicity of it all didn’t lessen the pleasure, rather the opposite.
Will I put this man through tests? No, why the hell would I bother with that? Will I give him hell if he doesn’t call me and I meet him again via our fellow friend? Seriously! He is not in any way obliged to. We spent an afternoon together, we did not enter a relationship. We enjoyed each other’s company, but we did not give each other promises. He’s got my number, and he’s allowed to use it if he wants to. If he doesn’t, there are other men who have the same number. And I am not incapable of dialing a phone number myself, if I want to. Women have phones too. Some of us even pay our own bills for it.
So sometimes I just thank my destiny I was born a woman. I suppose you’re right, guys, when you tell me we have it easier.
There are the women who insist on a certain number of dates before they let themselves be kissed or touched or fucked. And there are women who “has to” be treated to this or that, shall they find a man “interesting”. Women demanding flowers or a certain amount of compliments or a certain number of phone calls or attention this way or the other before they even accept dates. The women “punishing” a man if he forgets to text or call when she finds it appropriate, most often without having told that man when those times are. There are women who tell a man to “forget about it” when all he’s done is asking if the chair next to her is taken or when he is actually just paying her a compliment on her haircut. And then there are the women who spend the time they spend with a man looking disinterested and acting disinterested just so that he will not find her “desperate”. And there are women actually really aching to go to bed with a man (these are who I find the silliest and did believe to be rarities, but my male friends insist there are many of them) but still deny themselves to go for it, because their girlfriends think one way or the other less about the fellow. And yeah, this is even worse, there are the women “accepting” to go to bed with a man, but COMPLAINING about it, in terms of sacrifice – to the guy or to her girlfriends after! Even worse than all of this: These women seem to think of themselves and talk about themselves as “class acts” because of their impoliteness. Not paying genuine attention to whoever you spend time with IS and WILL ALWAYS BE impolite, whatever your motives. And LYING on what you think about someone is and will always be a stupid, dishonest, childish thing to do.
Advice to guys: Never go out with a woman telling you she doesn’t “put out” without this or that happening first. A woman talking about getting down’n’dirty in terms of “putting out” does not get down and dirty. And if she does, you can be sure she expects some special treatment after, probably also without giving you some special treatment during. That kind of woman is high maintenance, whether she’s worth it or not. Unless you do already find her special to begin with, and there’s something about her intriguing you, you’re most likely to find her not worth it.
Likewise, advice to girls & women: If you like a man and enjoy his company, and are willing to show him you do by paying him the same attention you expect him to pay you, you’re likely to have fun with him. If you have fun with him, he’s likely to have fun with you. And that sex you’ll be having, when you’ll be having it, will be way better than it had been, had you put him through a number of tests and he’d been feeling he has to jump through hoops to please you. You will feel more relaxed, he will feel more relaxed. Most likely, you’d both be more playful and you may even feel ready for it sooner. And if the bed is the only place you leave it to him to please you, I can almost guarantee you he will.
Ok, enough on the world some people I know live in. I realize the truth in all of the above, though I do still from time to time think there cannot be THAT many people living in that world. But I have heard the same stories from too many men to deny it does exist as some kind of parallel universe, and I’ve heard the woman’s version of the story too many times to think that only those men live in that world. I have thought of that as a possibility, can’t deny that – suggesting that the men complaining about this kind of women are really men who do not relax with women themselves and/or men who think sex is their birth right, needing to cut some women some slack and realize that they are not interested in fucking every woman there is, either, and that women have the same right to be selective and to expect a man to raise to her “level” as he has for her. I have sometimes, too, told men that they do not notice the more subtle signs a woman has interest in a man and that they have to listen to what she’s not saying as much as to what she’s saying. I think that’s partly correct. But I do realize that it is not the full picture, because I’ve heard women tell me about this world too, realizing they (some of them) are finding it somewhat normal.
Her side of the story, for those of you interested, most often goes like this: She wants him to show her she is “special” to him, because she wants to BE special to him, and she wants to be “special” just by “being herself” and being appreciated for it – from the “beginning” on. So she sees nothing wrong in “testing” if she is. That she should put down some effort for his sake too, she thinks she does: She painted her nails before the date, right? She spent an hour getting ready, doing her hair this way and that, waxing her legs only yesterday, I know how much that hurts, don’t I, please keep that in mind, and she gave her outfit great thought, trying things over and over. She listened to his stories about his boring job, no complaint, even asked him some questions and let him dominate the conversation, though he didn’t ask once about her day. And she was “polite”, like her mama told her, she did say “thank you” when he paid for the drinks and asked her if she’d like some more, sure. That doesn’t mean she’s “obliged” to “go to bed with him, he should know that, and if he doesn’t, she’s willing to “teach” him. When I ask her if she doesn’t want to go to bed with him for HER OWN SAKE, answer too often is this: Sure, that would be nice, he’s looking good and smelling great, but she isn’t ready for it YET. And she doesn’t want him to think she does it with “everyone”.
Seriously, women: No one thinks you do it with everyone. No one even thinks I am doing it with everyone. If you only accept dates from men you actually like and only fuck men you actually want, you’ll enjoy it AND have that air of exclusivity without trying so freaking hard for it. He’ll feel special enough by seeing and feeling you enjoy it to the core. No man thinks every man can do that for you. They all think they do it like no other…
Me, I feel lucky, cutting myself some slack, being as honest as I feel like being. The men I like, I like, the men I don’t like, I don’t bother with. Why should I pretend otherwise? Wouldn’t improve anything for anyone, just a waste of time. And what’s so complicated about understanding that? Nothing! Sometimes, like when reading today’s Sex Diary in NYMag (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/07/the_gay_commodities_trader.html) I think my life is more similar to the lives of the gay men I know, than to some of the straight women who share my status as a 30-something single.
Example: I just had a fuck date, a few hours ago. Man whose last name I didn’t think of asking about. That little fact leaves me feel a bit silly, but it doesn’t matter, really, I’ll find it if I want it. He is a friend of a friend, and it was our fellow friend who linked us, telling me he knew someone I should meet, considering my “lifestyle” and my “fitness fetish”, he was sure we’d “like” one another “very much”. And yeah, we did, though I can’t say we talked much. Man in question called me an hour or so before we met, just having gotten my number from our fellow friend some minutes before that. We hit it off, sending each other pics while still talking on the phone, both telling the other we liked what we saw. Neither of us having THAT fixed plans for the hours to come. It developed rather quickly, you can say, and when we discovered we were only a ten minute walk apart, he came over. He was hard as he came in the door, I was wet as well, and within seconds, we were both naked. And I am now just the right amount of tired and just the right amount of satisfied, and the man has left to do what he had to do for the rest of the day, not quite done working yet. I am free to spend my time how I want to, too, having just finished my work day before he called.
Maybe he’ll call me later, maybe we’ll repeat it later, and maybe we won’t. Either way, it was the nicest way to spend an afternoon. And though he was not quite my preferred size and not quite my preferred thickness, he was close enough, and he knew how to swing it. I liked that, I enjoyed it, and I sure wouldn’t mind doing it again. The simplicity of it all didn’t lessen the pleasure, rather the opposite.
Will I put this man through tests? No, why the hell would I bother with that? Will I give him hell if he doesn’t call me and I meet him again via our fellow friend? Seriously! He is not in any way obliged to. We spent an afternoon together, we did not enter a relationship. We enjoyed each other’s company, but we did not give each other promises. He’s got my number, and he’s allowed to use it if he wants to. If he doesn’t, there are other men who have the same number. And I am not incapable of dialing a phone number myself, if I want to. Women have phones too. Some of us even pay our own bills for it.
So sometimes I just thank my destiny I was born a woman. I suppose you’re right, guys, when you tell me we have it easier.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Why can't the idiots leave NYC because of "the recession"????
Some women are idiots. Lots of men are idiots, too, but let me tear these women apart first, because today, they’re who provoke me the most. I read this article in NYMag’s Daily Intel just now. It annoyed me so much I temporarily lost the ability to spell.
It deals with dating during the recession. And ”deals” seems to be the word. Certain women are complaining men can’t afford to take them on dates. Certain men are complaining women won’t date them because they can’t afford "real" dates. All those ”best things in life are free” stuff aside (what’s WRONG with a walk on Brooklyn Bridge and/or some happy hour drinks?) what made me the most mad was not these people’s lack of creativity, but their stuffed up ideas on what a date should be AND what a man should pay for AND what a woman ”deserves” for accepting to give him a portion of her time (as if he doesn’t have to spend time with her and her fucked up ideas of the whole dating ”business” too). Of course, the real reason I’m really so freakin’ mad right now, is that this is too very telling of what they think about what kind of balance their (STILL POTENTIAL!) relationship should have later on. I know I’m not exactly at my most balanced myself for the time being, just having broken up with the love of my life for not wanting to give up my career, but still: WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? WHAT THE F ARE THEY THINKING?
Why, oh why, should the most important part of a date be to compare bank accounts? What happened to meeting people to get to know them, see if you feel attracted to them, see if you have fun with them, and, most importantly, see if you want to drag them somewhere private IMMEDIATELY RIGHT THIS SECOND and fuck them like crazy? Seriously – are you planning to be a stay-at-home-Mom before you even know if working-overtime-Dad can get it up???? These people sort of confirm the old idea that the most idiotic of women only want one thing for themselves: To bear so many children they can be sure to pass idiocy on to new generations.
One of the women in this article puts it this way: If he can't afford to take her to lunch (“nothing fancy, just a casual place to sit and get to know each other”) he probably shouldn't be dating. ”He shouldn't bring someone in his life if he can barely take care of himself," she said. SERIOUSLY: SHE should not be dating if finding a man TO TAKE CARE OF HER is her objective. A woman who goes on a first date to find a man rich enough to keep her at home painting her nails does not need a date, but a more fun job for herself.
What’s talking next may be my Scandinavian upbringing, but I’ll say it yet the same: A woman is not adult until she can pay for herself AND take care of herself. A woman who is not adult should NOT be dating. Sure, it’s nice being treated. Sure, it’s great to see that a man is eager enough to see you he wants to give you a present or take you somewhere special or do something special for you or with you. Yes, it’s great feeling important to a man, and a nice date can give you that feeling. But that should come from the way he pays attention to you, NOT how much he spends while doing it. YOU, sister, are responsible for your own economy and taking care of yourself, and that goes whether you’re dating or in an actual relationship. The man’s ONE AND ONLY responsibility is taking care of himself. OK, should you decide to get married and have kids and see it necessary that one of you stays at home, blahblahblah and so on, the other has to make enough money to support the whole family. But ONE LITTLE DATE? Screw the whole thing, if what he has in his back pocket is more important to you than what’s between his pockets in the front.
Rant over.
It deals with dating during the recession. And ”deals” seems to be the word. Certain women are complaining men can’t afford to take them on dates. Certain men are complaining women won’t date them because they can’t afford "real" dates. All those ”best things in life are free” stuff aside (what’s WRONG with a walk on Brooklyn Bridge and/or some happy hour drinks?) what made me the most mad was not these people’s lack of creativity, but their stuffed up ideas on what a date should be AND what a man should pay for AND what a woman ”deserves” for accepting to give him a portion of her time (as if he doesn’t have to spend time with her and her fucked up ideas of the whole dating ”business” too). Of course, the real reason I’m really so freakin’ mad right now, is that this is too very telling of what they think about what kind of balance their (STILL POTENTIAL!) relationship should have later on. I know I’m not exactly at my most balanced myself for the time being, just having broken up with the love of my life for not wanting to give up my career, but still: WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? WHAT THE F ARE THEY THINKING?
Why, oh why, should the most important part of a date be to compare bank accounts? What happened to meeting people to get to know them, see if you feel attracted to them, see if you have fun with them, and, most importantly, see if you want to drag them somewhere private IMMEDIATELY RIGHT THIS SECOND and fuck them like crazy? Seriously – are you planning to be a stay-at-home-Mom before you even know if working-overtime-Dad can get it up???? These people sort of confirm the old idea that the most idiotic of women only want one thing for themselves: To bear so many children they can be sure to pass idiocy on to new generations.
One of the women in this article puts it this way: If he can't afford to take her to lunch (“nothing fancy, just a casual place to sit and get to know each other”) he probably shouldn't be dating. ”He shouldn't bring someone in his life if he can barely take care of himself," she said. SERIOUSLY: SHE should not be dating if finding a man TO TAKE CARE OF HER is her objective. A woman who goes on a first date to find a man rich enough to keep her at home painting her nails does not need a date, but a more fun job for herself.
What’s talking next may be my Scandinavian upbringing, but I’ll say it yet the same: A woman is not adult until she can pay for herself AND take care of herself. A woman who is not adult should NOT be dating. Sure, it’s nice being treated. Sure, it’s great to see that a man is eager enough to see you he wants to give you a present or take you somewhere special or do something special for you or with you. Yes, it’s great feeling important to a man, and a nice date can give you that feeling. But that should come from the way he pays attention to you, NOT how much he spends while doing it. YOU, sister, are responsible for your own economy and taking care of yourself, and that goes whether you’re dating or in an actual relationship. The man’s ONE AND ONLY responsibility is taking care of himself. OK, should you decide to get married and have kids and see it necessary that one of you stays at home, blahblahblah and so on, the other has to make enough money to support the whole family. But ONE LITTLE DATE? Screw the whole thing, if what he has in his back pocket is more important to you than what’s between his pockets in the front.
Rant over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)