MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and
chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.
Am I reading the same article? The one I get is about some kooky political arguments posited by a pro-lifer. Nothing about orgasms. (Unless I'm meant to follow the logical train backwards....)
We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills, in the boudoirs and in the dorm rooms, we shall fight in the cold water flats and in tents in the mountains, we shall fight in the back of a cab and in the front of a church, we shall fight on the bonnets and in the back seats and even in the boots of automobiles, we shall fight in sleeping bags and sheets and in the great wide open, in dressing gowns and tuxedos and of course the altogether; we shall never surrender.
My wife is older and more successful than I am, but the bedroom has always been the arena in which I have brought her down to earth.
The female orgasm is the natural mechanism by which men assert dominion over women: a man who appreciates this can negotiate whatever difficulties arise in his relationships with them.
Last Christmas, my wife threw me out after discovering I'd been cheating on her. On the night we got back together, I made strong, passionate love to her. Unfaithful as I'd been, I was not going to let her have me over a barrel for the rest of our marriage. I needed to keep a sense of self and not allow her to mire me in guilt and a desperate quest of forgiveness.
I needed to let her know what she would be missing if we broke up for ever. I gave her a manful bravura performance that night, and at the height of her passion, I asked her: 'Who's the boss?'
The question threw her. Initially she wouldn't give me a reply, but I enticed it from her. 'You are,' she finally gasped. 'You are!'
I have to admit I didn't read the article, as Salon always crashes my browser. What I wrote above is in reaction to the battle plan, which is a good one. I dunno about the war, though (is there one?) If there was a war, who would actually want to win? I mean, after victory, would all "hostilities" cease? What a bummer that would be.
Given that the female orgasm has generally been seen as a symbol of liberation, I can just honestly say that this is the first time I've ever seen "Give her orgasms" as a way to shut up a woman. "Give her jewelry," sure. "Tell her to make you a sandwich," of course. "Slap her around" on rare occasions, and "Tell her to get on her knees and give you an orgasm" more commonly.
me no like brains - she should dump him for the dude who emailed SassHat:
Maybe you not look for brains. I dont have brains, I have dolars. Maybe you have brains. That's goood! I like the brains. You talk I listen good. Maybe you
not looking for deep man. You find me good.
Actually I'm totally full of it. If I've learned one thing over the years, it's that women control/determine their own orgasms. Either that, or my performance is wildly erratic, from dozens during foreplay to none for years at a time, partner to partner. I can't believe anything I'm doing is that inconsistent.
I wonder how a person who had an affair gets away with publishing an article where they say that the first time they made love to their spouse after reconciling, they made sure to let her know he's the dominant partner. Disgusting much? Emotionally abusive?
I don't disagree with occhiblu in theory: human relationships are good. But not with this person.
The desparate undertone of that, occhiblu, is "Men, fight back against feminazis by making sure they have really good sex -- which proves that we're necessary!"
*laughs, foils plan, flirts with a feminazi and displays mad lovin' skills*
Feminists can't get their own orgasms? HA HA HA HA HA.
A - what mudpuppie just said.
B - what scarabic said (if I understand him correctly and he means consistent with the same partner and not consistent across the board, because everyone is different) as there is always the DIY approach, with or without an audience.
Yeah I mean I have seen some degree of variance in orgasm frequency/intensitywith one partner over time. Sex gets better with time (if its good in the first place) in my experience. But I've seen a much greater variation in orgasm frequency and intensity between DIFFERENT partners. Everything from head blown off to not being sure what an orgasm is. It seems that their own comfort level and knowledge of their bodies and what they want out of sex has more to do with it than whatever fumblings I contribute.
Upon further reflection, I realized that there's a subtext to the author's column that I find particularly strange. Unlike this guy, I don't define myself or my behaviour based on what I believe women want, or how I want them to relate to me. In other words, sexual politics are not a part of my core identity, or really any part for that matter. My gender identity is not something that really crosses my mind very often. I think of myself as a human first, and as pi, second, with few if any categories mediating inbetween. Does this resonate with anybody else?
pi, there's a line of thought that would say that those in the dominant category don't need to define themselves by being part of that category -- men don't need to think about their gender, white people don't need to think about their race, straight people don't need to think about their heterosexuality, etc. When you're in those categories you're just considered "normal" or "default" so you have the luxury of not having to think about it.
let me put this another way: I haven't had sex in a couple years, and I've spent a total of 16 months out of 29 years in relationships. Also, my previous comment is referring to the fact that sexual politics is clearly very important to the man who wrote the article. I hear you regarding marked/unmarked sociolinguistic sets however.
Yeah, I was just responding to your last couple sentences, I guess. But yeah, the guy's assumption that everything in life is about power in a sexual relationship is annoying -- though I'm not sure it's particularly uncommon.
Isn't this just "womyn dig jerks" in a fancy suit? It makes about as much sense to me as ladder "theory". I'm in the kinda-offended-but-real-don't-care-enough camp.
when I lived in London and commuted on the Tube, I used to have to move away from people reading the Daily Mail - I can't help reading papers over people's shoulders, and the Mail makes me so horribly angry it would screw up my day if I read anything in it. Sometimes I read an article or two in a controlled manner, though, as it's not good to avoid these things (anti-immigrant rants, columns like this, etc) completely...
I'm just adopting Hugh's battle cry and taking to the streets.
Let us all, with our various genders and preferences, cease fighting amongst ourselves and unite against a common enemy: the absence of orgasms.
Let's replace the War on Terra with the War on Anorgasmia. Orgasms for all! The people, united, shall never be defeated! No climax, no peace! Be your own Boss!
photo by splunge
photo by TheophileEscargot
photo by Kronos_to_Earth
photo by ethylene
