Follow Dan

Facebook    Twitter    Instagram    YouTube
Savage Lovecast
Dan Savage's Hump
It Gets Better Project

Savage Love Podcast

Got a question for Dan Savage?
Call the Savage Love Podcast at 206-201-2720
or email Dan at mail@savagelove.net.

Savage Love Archives

More in the Archives »

More from Dan Savage

More in the Archives »

Books by Dan Savage

Want a Second Opinion?

Contact Dan Savage

Savage on YouTube

Loading...

Porno Convo

October 24, 2012

  • comments
  • Print

What the hell do I say to my straight 14-year-old son about porn? Should I say anything? My sister tells me that all the research shows my son has been looking at porn for three years already. Am I too late?

Distressed Anxious Dad

According to the Today show and the Boston Globe and the American Family Association and most of what pops up when you google "kids and porn," DAD, you're three years late to this pants-shitting party. "The average age a child first views internet pornography is 11," Matt Lauer warned parents on Today seven years ago. "And those kids don't look away."

But the alarming statistic Lauer cited—which was used to justify all sorts of proposed crackdowns on online porn—turned out to be total bullshit. Way, way back in 2005, Seth Lubove, a writer for Forbes, traced the stat back to its source. The Today show got it from the Boston Globe, the Boston Globe got it from Family Safe Media, "a small firm in Provo, Utah, [which] is in the business of scaring parents into buying software to protect their kids from internet smut." Family Safe Media got it from Internet Filter Review, a website that markets content-blocking software. Internet Filter Review got it from The Drug of the New Millennium, a self-published book about the dangers of porn addiction. Lubove tracked down the self-published author, and guess what? He couldn't recall where he got that stat. Somewhere along the line, Third Way, "a Washington think tank that helps Democrats grab on to red-state issues," was seriously pimping the bogus stat to credulous conservative Dems.

Lubove reviewed actual research done by legit social scientists—a real study! A statistically significant population sample! A random-sample survey!—and reported that most kids don't start actively seeking out online porn until age 14.

So you're not too late, DAD.

Now, here's what I think you should tell your son about porn: There's a lot of it out there, some of it's pretty fucked up, and he can get in huge and potentially life-derailing trouble if he gets caught watching or downloading the wrong kind of porn, e.g., underage, kiddie, etc. You should tell your son that the sex in porn bears about as much resemblance to real-life sex as action movies bear to real-life life. And warn him that a lot of porn is made by and for guys who have no other sexual outlets, i.e., guys who have no wives, no girlfriends, and no hope. Many of these guys—many, not most, but many—are angry and resentful, and their anger and resentment is a poison that creeps into a lot of porn; sometimes the poison is obvious, sometimes it's not. If you put it in your straight son's head that the poisonously misogynist shit he'll see in some porn is there to appeal to angry losers who can't get laid, DAD, your son will be less likely to internalize it—because your son doesn't want to see himself as an angry loser, right?

Finally, DAD, if your son is watching porn, he's masturbating. Tell him to vary his routine: left hand, right hand, a little lube, a lot of lube, firm grip, loose grip. You don't want your son to ruin himself for partnered sex by using the "death grip"—a fist clenched tighter than any human throat or pussy can clench—during solo sex. And send him to www.makelovenotporn.com for a brisk, sex-positive porn-versus-reality check.


A while ago,I broke up with my long-term boyfriend. A few months after the breakup, I met someone new and we started sleeping together. It was the best sex of my life. Wild, passionate, and unpredictable. New Guy wasn't looking for anything serious, and neither was I, so we kept things very casual. After a couple months of amazing sex with New Guy, my long-term boyfriend came back into the picture. I told him I'd been seeing other people, but that I missed him and wanted to make things work between us. All good, right? Wrong! I love him so much, and I think we could have a very happy life together, but when we have sex, it just seems so dull and average compared to the volcanic sex that I was having during our time apart. Do I sacrifice an amazing sex life for a happy life of decidedly average sex with the man I love? Help!

Missing Amazing Sex

You're not going to be happy having safe, boring, predictable sex with Mr. Long Term for the long term, right? Not after all that wild, passionate, unpredictable sex with Mr. New Guy. So if things don't improve, your relationship with Mr. Long Term is doomed. So you have nothing to lose by slapping your cards down on the table, MAS.

Tell Mr. Long Term the truth: The sex has to get better. Now, maybe Mr. Long Term is the problem (he could be lousy at sex) or maybe it's the combo of you and Mr. Long Term that's the problem (maybe you two just don't click sexually), and the relationship is doomed no matter what you do. But there's a chance your problem is a relatively common hang-up, MAS. It's possible that you, or Mr. Long Term, or you and Mr. Long Term feel inhibited during sex because you're in love, and people who are in love are supposed to have sex one way (you're supposed to make safe, boring, predictable love). But people who aren't in love—people like you and Mr. New Guy—are free to have sex another way (they're allowed to have wild, passionate, and unpredictable fucks).

Give Mr. Long Term permission to fuck you like he's never going to see you again. You should fuck him the same way. Fuck each other like the stakes are low—fuck like it's casual, fuck like it could end at any time. The "lovemaking" inhibition can be literally fucked to death, if it's indeed the problem here, and once you've fucked it good and dead, you'll see that you can have a happy life, a committed relationship, and wild, passionate, unpredictable sex—with the same person!

But you gotta want it bad enough to fuck for it.


I'm a straight woman in a monogamous, long-distance relationship with a straight man. Last weekend, I went out with my roommate (also a straight woman, also in a committed relationship). We went to a club, took some E, and did way too many tequila shots. We stumbled home and ended up fingerbanging each other in my bed. I have never had sexual feelings for my roommate, and she says she doesn't have them for me. Do I have to tell my boyfriend about this indiscretion? I know he would be confused and upset. It was a strange, one-time thing that I plan on never doing again.

Not A Lesbian I Think

If it was a one-time thing, if you learned your lesson, if you're sure it won't happen again, if you didn't contract anything, and if there are no fetuses gestating (which, barring a miracle, is not an issue for you), you don't need to disclose this indiscretion. Chalk it up to the E and the tequila, change your sheets, scrub under your fingernails, and spare your boyfriend the upsetting details.


Gay Republicans, Dan. Why? How?

Confused

Self-loathing, that's why. Homophobia, that's how.


Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.

mail@savagelove.net

@fakedansavage on Twitter

Share via

 

Comments (192) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Fred Casely 1
Top-notch advice; bottom-notch acronyms.
Posted by Fred Casely on October 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM · Report this
JerryBear 2
Am I the only one crept out by the blow-up doll picture?
Posted by JerryBear on October 23, 2012 at 6:47 PM · Report this
mydriasis 3
Dan is on it.
I'm not a fan of the lying, but other than that, thumbs up.
Posted by mydriasis on October 23, 2012 at 7:03 PM · Report this
4
No, JerryBear, you're not.
Posted by clashfan on October 23, 2012 at 7:08 PM · Report this
5
2 things Dan:

1. makelovenot porn.com is completely different from makelovenotporn.com. The former is the actual link that appears on the website, by the way.

Oh, and the latter appears to have been abandoned some time ago.

2. After a talk like that from DAD, I'm sure that will put Jr. off of watching porn and playing with himself for a while. Probably no more than a week or two though.
Posted by gromm on October 23, 2012 at 7:10 PM · Report this
6
You seem to have substituted "porn.com" for "makelovenotporn.com".

tee hee.
Posted by Lexy on October 23, 2012 at 7:11 PM · Report this
What It Feels Like For A Boy 7
Dan pretty much says the best things about everything. 80% of the time at least.

Best description of bad porn ever.
Posted by What It Feels Like For A Boy http://foraboy.wordpress.com/ on October 23, 2012 at 9:00 PM · Report this
8
@2 I'm guessing because of the sphincter-mouth effect? Yeah, it's a little creepy.
Posted by 5ht on October 23, 2012 at 9:08 PM · Report this
What It Feels Like For A Boy 9
And then his assessment of gay Republicans is the other 20%.

I'm pretty sure most gay Republicans are that way (Republican I mean, not gay) because they take the very sensible position of fiscal conservatism.

Calling them self-hating is the same type of obtuse garbage as the last two-weeks assumption that the only reason someone would be pro-life is because they want to control women.

Ya'll are just going to keep screaming in your own echo chamber if you don't make an actual effort to understand people who are different than you, rather than just resting on the assumptions that make your own position easiest to defend.
Posted by What It Feels Like For A Boy http://foraboy.wordpress.com/ on October 23, 2012 at 9:08 PM · Report this
10
It would be SO much more help if people actually did have names like "Mr. New Guy," "Mr. Long-Term" and whatnot. Even better would be extended versions "Mr. Nice Guy Who 'Gets' You and All That But Is Kind of Workmanlike In Bed."

Much easier to decide if you want to become MRS. Nice Guy Who...etc...

Loving the election tweets, btw,
jill
http://www.inbedwithmarriedwomen.com
Posted by inbed http://inbedwithmarriedwomen.blogspot.com on October 23, 2012 at 9:08 PM · Report this
11
Does Dan even remember that he used to be a gay Republican delegate?
Posted by For Shame on October 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM · Report this
12
Didn't any non-heterosexist father of a straight son write in with a similar question?

But I do thank Mr Savage for finding a non-heterosexist way to cover why it matters in the answer and not pandering to DAD's heterosexism. How safe is it, though, to presume non-misogyny on his part (or was the letter seriously shortened)?

I could ask whether sending an impressionable 14-year-old to that particular site won't turn him into cougar bait (or, along a parallel line, speculate about whosit's apartment really being all that fabulous after all), but I won't.

As for MAS, why set up a coin paradigm instead of a scale paradigm (and why such a sneering and denigrating tone towards those on the other side of the coin)? There are lovers and there are boinkers, and people far enough towards one end of the scale aren't going to be that good a match towards people far enough towards the other. That MAS' Inner Boinker suddenly put in an appearance during the split could lead to the same for the BF, or it could indicate that the pair just isn't a match, but average sex seems like thin grounds for throwing around insults at the non-consulting part of the pair. Some people just aren't cut out for a life of Wild Boinking, and some just will only get so far plumbing the depths of love. The idea presented inn the response was highly plausible; why poison it with all that venom except to help MAS feel oh so superiour to the BF, which I sense is what MAS really wants.

Posted by vennominon on October 23, 2012 at 9:15 PM · Report this
13
To MAS: yes, do it right now, what Dan says, before you end up married to the guy or entangled in more long-term commitment that will be painful to break off. If it's impossible for the sex to get any better with long-term boyfriend--and not because one of you has unusual needs that might be tricky to satisfy, like getting the timing right on the trapeze--it might be your body/brain's way of telling the conscious you that you're just not that into him.
Posted by Suzy on October 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM · Report this
14
@9: Except for the fact that Republicans are no longer fiscally responsible, I might actually agree with you. The last guy who had the presidency for a balanced budget (and the first guy for a long, long, long time) was a Democrat. The guy that threw it all away was a Republican. And all Republicans want to talk about is lowering taxes, regardless of the cost to the deficit. Then, through some kind of crazy magical thinking, this will somehow increase revenue. Enough to fund massive expansions in military budgets for wars that never end.

Well, it's never worked like that. Not once. Not even for the guy who invented this ponzi scheme.

This mental disease isn't even limited to American politics, either. The last time Canada's budget was in the black was when the Liberal party was in control. There hasn't been any sign of that since the Conservative party minority government, and it's no better with a Conservative party majority, either.

So I literally have no idea what the hell you're talking about. These days, it's the lefties that have naming rights to fiscal responsibilities, not the right-wingers.
Posted by gromm on October 23, 2012 at 9:38 PM · Report this
15
@9: Uh, what fiscally conservative Republicans?

Republicans are not fiscally conservative. Republicans are, in fact, even less fiscally conservative than Democrats, because at least Democrats will try and raise taxes to pay for their spending. Republicans spend just as much, although on different things, and cut taxes on top of it.

Remember, Republicans on the campaign trail want to cut spending. Republicans in office spend more money on corporate welfare, defense spending, and tax cuts targeted at the wealthy.
Posted by biggie on October 23, 2012 at 9:44 PM · Report this
16
If I had a kid I'd tell them about how to keep their porn-viewing habits private and hidden. I'd tell them about the consequences of illegal pornography, and the dangers of porn addiction.

I'd skip the politically-correct nonsense about porn being "misogynistic" and for "angry losers". And teaching them how to masturbate is just TMI... that's what books are for.

I know I'm weird but porn never really affected my expectations of real sex, and I was watching it from a young age. (My parents had a cable descrambler... 24 hour Spice channel!) Watching other people do it is so different from having a flesh-and-blood person in front of you to touch and smell and taste, to me anyway.

The way the question is worded shows what part of the problem is: thinking of their kid in terms of some random study they read, instead of actually talking to the kid.
Posted by a_little_perverted on October 23, 2012 at 9:46 PM · Report this
17
NALIT, if you and your roommate feel so horrible about what you did behind your boyfriends' backs, and really want to make it up to them, next time invite them both along.

(Okay, I kid. Sort of. If a foursome sounds like fun, why not? If it works out well, you can consider the first incident a test drive rather than a betrayal.)

Other than that, I agree with Dan: telling him now may unburden your guilt, but at a cost of burdening him with it. It's your transgression, and it's your duty to minimize the hurt you cause from it. Take it to your grave, and use the guilt not to rip your psyche to shreds, but to resolve to do better by him going forward.
Posted by avast2006 on October 23, 2012 at 11:56 PM · Report this
18
For MAS, my thought is she needs to think over what caused her to break up with him the first time, before putting a lot of energy into improving their sex life. There's a good chance there was some basic incompatibility there, and the bad sex was (and still is) a symptom, rather than a cause. I love him so much but he just doesn't make me spark would qualify as that. It's one thing to be frustrated because he doesn't know how to use his fingers or talk dirty the way you like; it's another entirely to simply not be excited by him.

The fact that you broke up with him once already is what makes me want to say, "Don't spend a lot of effort rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic."
Posted by avast2006 on October 24, 2012 at 12:07 AM · Report this
19
@17: if it was her bf who fooled around w his guy roomie, I bet people would be totally freaked. Not sure why two girls together is sexy and fun while two guys scares most people.
Posted by bookaday on October 24, 2012 at 3:34 AM · Report this
Lance Thrustwell 20
NALIT, I think the *real* reason not to tell your boyfriend is that instead of being "confused and upset," he's more likely to be "intrigued and aroused." And if you don't ever plan on repeating the experience, your story will end up being a pointless tease.

But if at some point you think you WOULD like to try it again - then you should tell him. You might be surprised (pleasantly) by his response.
Posted by Lance Thrustwell on October 24, 2012 at 4:18 AM · Report this
GymGoth 21
14/15: I'm glad to see you're such scholars on fiscal conservatism. Maybe you should have applied some to your hero who has racked up the largest deficits and most debt ever with no credible plan to address them.

As I've said countless times before, Dan is both a gay activist and a liberal Democrat activist. But he is unable to separate those roles and blurs the distinction every way he can. That is why he can't fathom a gay person being pro-life or conservative on economic/role of government issues.

But Dan also knows that many young people read his column. And he knows they can be quite impressionable. So he gladly blurs gay issues with liberal issues because he wants to churn out more low information voters for the Democratic Party. In that vein he is not much better than Joseph Goebbels.

Young gay people: it is perfectly okay to hold any political views you like. It's called freedom. Come to Dan for sex, ignore the political bullshit.
Posted by GymGoth on October 24, 2012 at 5:11 AM · Report this
22
9/21: preach on.

The second letter struck me a long-winded version of the following: "Dan, I broke up with a Mr. Steady Provider and had sex with a Wild Bad Boy. I am now back with Provider, but miss sex with Bad Boy. How long should I wait after I marry Provider, have a kid with him, and buy a house before I can cheat with Bad Boy and claim 'it just happened?!'"
Posted by Snowguy on October 24, 2012 at 5:51 AM · Report this
CharlesF 23
@21: Oh, really? Dan is a Nazi? @_@

@16: I think your post is generally a good critique of Dan's position. However, I would re-emphasize that technique does matter. For example, if you only do it when lying on your back, that ends up severely limiting your ability in positions other than lying on your back. And yes, the 'misogynist' type of prawn is not the majority, but it is very prominent and does come up quickly if you just do a basic google search ("Reality Kings/Bang Brothers" comes to mind). There are many, many types of prawn out there, and for example, in the niche community I'm in, misogyny is extremely rare.
Posted by CharlesF on October 24, 2012 at 5:56 AM · Report this
Lance Thrustwell 24
@21 - You write clearly, but your thinking is muddled. Dan - and any reasonable person - is quite able to "fathom" a gay person being conservative on economic issues. I recall him saying so at least once. But to be both gay and politically aligned with the current incarnation of the GOP is to be voting against one's self-interest in significant ways. That's just a fact, easily demonstrable and clear as day.

If Dan - or anyone - points this out, that doesn't make them comparable to the propaganda minister of the Third Reich. Engaging in that sort of hyperbole makes you look like a hysterical right-wing nutjob. You don't consider yourself to be one of those, do you?
Posted by Lance Thrustwell on October 24, 2012 at 6:05 AM · Report this
AFinch 25
Agree: good advice, all around. Yes, the picture is creepy - and in a way, plastic airbrush mainstream het porn is like that too - sadly, like sugar-coated cereal, we tend to go for the junk as kids.

@21 - Here's the thing: The current deficit blowup is the result of waging two wars (and well over doubling defense spending as a consequence) while simultaneously pressing large tax cuts; when the inevitable economic collapse results from these Republican Economic Policies, revenue falls off a cliff. Obama didn't create the wars; Obama didn't create the tax cuts, and Obama didn't create the financial collapse; therefore, Obama didn't create the deficit. QED. GOP Economic Policy did. I know the right favors faith-based reality over empirical reality, but that doesn't cancel gravity.

And here's the further thing: the deficit which as occurred under Obama happened when the economy and revenue collapsed; Reagan, Bush-I and Bush-II managed to blow them up when the economy was growing.

It's not that Republicans used to be fiscally responsible - they've never been fiscally responsible - at least not since Eisenhower. I do give Reagan props for backing away from full blown calamity when he realized GOP ideology - when completely implemented in his first round of tax cuts - was taking us off the cliff, and had the sense to raise taxes again.

Gay Republicans - the out ones - are real, and while Dan's answer tells us something about the closet cases (majority), his answer does not explain the mystery of the Log Cabin crew - who, much like Republican Women for Choice and Libertarians in general, seem to only care about personal freedom when it means low taxes and low financial regulation. Perhaps they feel they'll always be rich enough to buy the rest of their privacy and freedoms, which is more or less in line with the fundamental dogma of the right: "I've got mine, fuck you".
More...
Posted by AFinch on October 24, 2012 at 6:09 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 26
It amazes me that so many people can be so stupid to think that a current 15 Trillion debt means that Obama caused a 15 Trillion dollar debt.

Debt growth, borrowing, and federal spending all at record lows under Obama.

Deficit lowered .4 trillion dollars.

Meanwhile, Reagan and Bush tripled and doubled the debt respectively, while under Obama it has only grown about 50%.

But hey, why allow reality to spoil what you want to be true?
Posted by Theodore Gorath on October 24, 2012 at 6:20 AM · Report this
27
@21, so wow, it only took a few posts to make it to a Nazi reference which totally offends any sensible person. Let's be clear, making a reference to a Nazi automatically invalidates your arguments for several reasons: you clearly have no idea of what the Nazi's actually did or wouldn't be bringing them up; you do know and minimize because you lack any empathy; you have some weird anti semitic thinking that makes any atrocity suffered by jews as just minor incidents. And J.G.? Seriously? I can only thing of right wing fundamentalist christians who can compare with the amount of vehement hatred that they spew for anyone and everyone not connected with their delusional thinking especially the homosexual community.

Our current president inherited 2/3's of the deficit so your amnesia applies to current events as well as historical.

Being fiscally conservative was old school republican and they don't exist anymore, being homophobic creeps is current republican and those people do exist, it's spelled out in their platform and ratified at the RNC.

You make only one good point, political views are free but who you vote for has consequences. So kids, if you're gay and you vote republican, you are voting against yourself. It's really that simple.
Posted by deedee70 on October 24, 2012 at 6:24 AM · Report this
28
12-Ven-- Thanks for "coin paradigm/scale paradigm." It sums up in fewer words what I was going to say.

I wish MAS had told us how old she is and how she's enjoyed other sexual encounters with other men. If she's in her 20s and not sure about settling down yet anyway, I'd tell her to keep looking for the man who is exciting both in bed and out. If she's in her 20s, I'd wonder if her love for the man who isn't exciting to her is mixed up with guilt over thinking that she should be more excited by someone who has done nothing wrong, is trying to please, and who checks off every box in that list of what she thought she was looking for.

If she's in her 30s, has experience with more than these 2 men, and is thinking she really wants to settle down, then she's at the right time to be wondering if this is as good as it gets. Now she should be facing the fact that choosing Mr. Great-In-Bed isn't a real choice. He hasn't indicated that he wants to stay with her long-term. Her real choice is between trying to teach Mr. Solid-Boring to improve his skill (and possibly not succeeding) or possibly being lonely with no one.
Posted by Crinoline on October 24, 2012 at 6:51 AM · Report this
29
I'd like to ask the guys:
Would you have been (or were you) happy or creeped out to get fairly detailed masturbation advice from your father as suggested by Dan?

And the women:
What if you had gotten detailed masturbation advice from your mother?
Posted by migrationist on October 24, 2012 at 6:53 AM · Report this
30
I am puzzled as to why any sex-positive person who cares about civil liberties, whether gay or straight, would vote Republican. In the Republican Party there is a disturbing symbiosis between those who, in order to achieve Gordon Gekko's agenda, would also enact Jerry Falwell's agenda. And vice-versa.
Posted by Winston Smith on October 24, 2012 at 7:07 AM · Report this
31
For LW1: Really? Porn is for men who can't get laid? Some absurd percentage of men watch porn. Something like 90+%. Are you really saying that we (yes, include me) can't get laid?

Some of us (yes, include me) even watch porn with our wives.

For Gay Republicans: There are gay people who go into economics and finance and business, and they tend to be fiscally conservative. Are you seriously going to tell me that Log Cabin Republicans are self-hating homos?

Also, your impression that Republicans are all a bunch of bigots is ridiculous. Even on your current favorite issue, a Fox News poll from earlier this year showed that 57% of Republicans favor legalized same-sex unions. That is not a typo. Fifty-seven percent. A simple majority of Republicans.

You have my permission to stop reading Maggie Gallagher. She does not speak for the majority of the GOP.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interact…
Posted by lorcha on October 24, 2012 at 7:08 AM · Report this
32
Goebbels was the Nazi propaganda minister. #21 didn't say Dan's a Nazi, (s)he said Dan employs propaganda. Hyperbole yes.
Posted by repete on October 24, 2012 at 7:09 AM · Report this
33
There is a party for people that are fiscally conservative and gay. It's called the Libertarian Party
Posted by AbeFroman on October 24, 2012 at 7:13 AM · Report this
34
@28

Even if she is in her 20's, there's nothing wrong with laying her cards on the table and trying to improve the average sex she is currently having before looking around for the complete package guy. Certainly, things may not work out with the current bf and she should be prepared to look elsewhere, but I'd suggest that her first step be using Dan's advice.

I'm also curious if the bf had any action during their separation. Maybe they were both stuck in a rut sexually, and she got a palate cleanser allowing her to change but he didn't meaning he is still in the same rut/routine sexually.
Posted by pb1230 on October 24, 2012 at 7:19 AM · Report this
35
@31

While certainly many men watch porn, including those that get laid regularly, its the men that can't get laid that are the largest consumers and therefore drive the industry. Let's say as a conservative number 10% of men can't get laid (and this may include married men in sexless marriages). I wouldn't be surprised if this demographic accounted for over 50% of all porn consumption. So while there are certainly lots of people watching porn that aren't just men, that can get laid, that aren't misogynists, they aren't being catered to specifically by much of the porn industry.
Posted by pb1230 on October 24, 2012 at 7:30 AM · Report this
36
Totally agree with the advice to MAS - I left a bad-sex marriage, found a volcanic-sex partner I never planned on a relationship with, and guess what? We're married, happy, and still have volcanic sex. And a little of that lovemaking stuff thrown in too.

Go crazy. I'm sure he can handle it.
Posted by jenn-o on October 24, 2012 at 7:44 AM · Report this
37
1. It's amazing how many people are gullible enough to buy into alleged "statistics" without backup. I'm glad Dan exposes this folly, but it begs the question, where the hell did he come up with his claim that gay people make up only 2-5% of the population?

2. Isn't it likely that if NALIT were to tell her bf about the mildly lezbo experience he'd be quite turned on by it?

3. Isn't it unreasonable for anyone to be expected to remain celibate because of a "monogamous long-distance relationship"?

Just wondering!
Posted by wayne on October 24, 2012 at 7:59 AM · Report this
38
Why is it assumed that two women doing anything together is a turn on for all (straight) guys? I assure you this is not the case.
Posted by straightbutnotintolesbians on October 24, 2012 at 8:24 AM · Report this
39
I think one of the most important things a father can teach his son about porn is that while in movies you see a guy penetrating easily into a woman during anal sex, in real life though the actresses prepare several hours in advance most of the time by the use of butt plugs in order to stretch the muscles. In other words...just trying to stick it in will (or at least should) get him punched in the head
Posted by ZomBQueen on October 24, 2012 at 8:28 AM · Report this
40
@37

The 2-5% statistic comes from about every major study done since Kinsey came up with 10% including a recent Gallup survey which has done the most comprehensive study stating a 3.4% number (though closer to 6% for people under 30). Though there have only been a handful of these studies. While there are certainly probable flaws in these studies, the numbers are coming from known and reputable sources.
Posted by pb1230 on October 24, 2012 at 8:28 AM · Report this
41
I think one of the most important things a father can teach his son about porn is that while in movies you see a guy penetrating easily into a woman during anal sex, in real life though the actresses prepare several hours in advance most of the time by the use of butt plugs in order to stretch the muscles. In other words...just trying to stick it in will (or at least should) get him punched in the head....I point this out specificaly because I have discovered that a large number of young men are not getting guidence about porn and they seem to think that thats how things are...I've had to punch a few men in my time.
Posted by ZomBQueen on October 24, 2012 at 8:35 AM · Report this
42
35: "... its the men that can't get laid that are the largest consumers and therefore drive the industry..."

Citation please?
Posted by repete on October 24, 2012 at 8:38 AM · Report this
43
The timing of the Father & Son Porn discussion couldn't have been more perfect for me. I'm a single mom and my son turns 14 in a few days. He has an iPhone and I've been wondering if he's been using it to surf porn. I'm sure he has. while I'm not shy to talk to my kids about sex, love and life.. I didn't know how to address this particular topic and be gentle about it. Typically this is something a father and son discuss, but I have to also be the father in this family unit. Just wanted to say thanks!
Posted by Grandrea on October 24, 2012 at 8:38 AM · Report this
44
@21 - Thank you.
Posted by gibson99 on October 24, 2012 at 8:47 AM · Report this
45
I liked venomonion's post @12. In their middle paragraph, I hope you were joking, I had similar thoughts about not sending a 14 yr. old to her website. I liked the last paragraph too, although it was a little too cerebral and wordy.
Posted by scorpio of Id. on October 24, 2012 at 8:49 AM · Report this
46
@21/gymgoth: sex is political. Republicans have made it so.
Posted by gonzo on October 24, 2012 at 8:53 AM · Report this
Fortunate 47
@31: "For Gay Republicans: There are gay people who go into economics and finance and business, and they tend to be fiscally conservative. Are you seriously going to tell me that Log Cabin Republicans are self-hating homos?"

There is a difference between being a gay person who holds to ideas of fiscal responsibility, and who also believe (why I don't know, but lets go with this) that Republicans are actually the more fiscally responsible of the two main parties... and endorsing Romney.

Because there are two sides of this coin. Lets assume for a moment that Romney actually had an economic plan that we actually knew something about and that actually made sense.

He still wants to deny gay people equal rights.

If he were trying to ban Catholics from getting married, virtually anyone would suggest that any Catholic willing to vote for him because of his fiscal policy was nuts.

It makes no difference if Romney could piss a balanced budget and crap golden eggs, he wants to deny gay people equal rights and any gay person who votes for him has issues.

It would be different if the Republicans ran someone who didn't want to hurt gay people. If they had a candidate who held all the same positions as Romney, except didn't want to deny gay people equal rights, then it would be one thing.

When the guy you are endorsing and willing to vote for has stated, clearly and repeatedly, that he wants to harm you and you still want to endorse him or vote for him then you are a fool no matter what else he promises you.
Posted by Fortunate on October 24, 2012 at 9:02 AM · Report this
seandr 48
your son will be less likely to internalize it

Ah, so the wrong kind of porn can take a happy, sensitive, loving kid and turn him into an angry, hateful misogynist loser?

Either cite the scientific basis for this claim, Dan, or stop spreading bullshit.
Posted by seandr on October 24, 2012 at 9:19 AM · Report this
49
Heya, just wanted to mention that another option for MAS is to ask Long-Term Guy and Hot Sex Guy if they might be interested in a poly arrangement of some kind! That's what I did and it's PERFECT!!!
Posted by MellyBelly on October 24, 2012 at 9:33 AM · Report this
Tim Horton 50
@29 - I would have been seriously creeped out if my dad talked to me about masturbation techniques at that age. I think a simple talk - "porn is fantasy, most women aren't going to enjoy what you see" would be sufficient.

Not a Lesbian - pics or it didn't happen. Also, put me in the camp of "your boyfriend will love this disclosure." And while us sloggers are throwing around made-up stats, men who love lesbian sex are the true 99%
Posted by Tim Horton on October 24, 2012 at 9:35 AM · Report this
51
Why has no one questioned DAD's assertion that he has a "straight 14-year-old son"? At 14, I wasn't sure, and don't think any DAD knows their son that well to make that assumption, especially if he can't figure out if his "straight" son is watching porn.

Indeed, the type porn that attracts the son, might be a better indication of whether he really is straight or otherwise.
Posted by Cannuck on October 24, 2012 at 9:41 AM · Report this
The Max 52
Being artsy from the South, I know a LCR or two. The consensus I've heard tends to be along the lines of claims that the GOP has moved towards the light on gay issues since Stonewall. They're no longer openly for the summary execution of suspected gays. DADT, which was an important step forward at the time, had plenty of bipartisan support. They don't even advocate sticking gays in jail anymore. They say to think of how homophobic the GOP'd be if there weren't some out gay folks for them to pander to.

Made a lot more sense to me before the Dems went ahead and embraced equality.
Posted by The Max on October 24, 2012 at 10:00 AM · Report this
53
Gays are voting against their interests when they support Romney only if they think Romney's bigotry will have any consequences. If, however, they think that the recent decisions striking down DOMA, the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and the general tendency away from homophobia that has been gradually sweeping the nation are changes that will abide, and if they think that any president would essentially be powerless to stop the rise of gay rights, then they can safely ignore Romney's bigotry (electorally, if not personally), and hold their noses while they pull the lever for their otherwise-preferred candidate.
Posted by Neither gay nor republican on October 24, 2012 at 10:49 AM · Report this
54
@seandr

Its not that porn will turn the "happy, sensitive, loving kid and turn him into an angry, hateful misogynist loser," its that in the sexual information vacuum that is puberty/early adulthood, the kid might develop some serious misconceptions about sex.

It doesn't take much to prevent these misconceptions, but to assume that a teenager will automatically/instinctively know these things (although some can) is a bit off base.
Posted by pb1230 on October 24, 2012 at 10:57 AM · Report this
55
@29: That kind of detailed advice would have been very creepy coming from a parent. A pointer to an advice column like this wouldn't have been too bad, if there had been such a thing at the time.

I could have done without the shaming that came down when Mom found the Playboy under the bed, too. Seriously, a 13-year-old with a freshly acquired het libido discovering that he likes to look at pictures of tastefully posed naked women because it (who could have predicted?) produces some new and intriguing pleasures does not mean he is a woman-hating, objectifying misogynist.
Posted by avast2006 on October 24, 2012 at 11:02 AM · Report this
56
Ms Crinoline - Happy to oblige. But please complete your comment by appending your assessment of the situation should MAS turn out to be male.

It can be interesting sometimes how fatigue influences me, the weekly column being posted on my one evening of commuting. I recall getting an increasing feeling as I read and posted about MAS' feeling or wanting to feel superiour to BF on some level (and, plausibly, BF could certainly be "the problem", but tossing that out first just reinforced the impulse; I am starting to think that Mr Savage would have made a good Borgia) having very likely something to do with it, and that's the line I'd explore. It's a bit of a cross between Emma's reaction to Mr Dixon's musical tastes as related by Frank Churchill, that it must be the worst thing in the world always to have an intimate friend at hand who could do everything better than one did oneself, and Julius King's hypothesis (although advanced with ulteriour motives) in A Fairly Honourable Defeat that the inherent contempt of one human for any other could be worked upon to separate any couple in existence.

This leads me to wonder about the differences between couples who coexist happily with a major difference in sex skills and those for whom one being (or suddenly being found to be) considerably "better" at sex than the other wreaks havoc, but I've no time at the moment to follow this path.
Posted by vennominon on October 24, 2012 at 11:04 AM · Report this
57
I don't understand the taboo against gay republicans. I think to suggest that the dems are the only way to go because I like dick is to suggest that I should become a one-issue voter.

I don't think marriage rights for <10% of the population (including me) should trump the economic well-being of the country, and I'm personally inclined to think the Republican ticket would further that variegated interest. It has nothing to do with my internalizing homophobia or self-loathing.
Posted by ahammond on October 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM · Report this
58
I don't understand the taboo against gay Republicans. I think to suggest that the Dems are the only way to go because I like dick is to suggest that I should become a one-issue voter.

I don't think marriage rights for <10% of the population (including me) should trump the economic well-being of the country, and I'm personally inclined to think the Republican ticket would further that variegated interest. It has nothing to do with my internalizing homophobia or self-loathing.
Posted by ahammond on October 24, 2012 at 11:15 AM · Report this
59
@43: If you want to be gentle about it, structure the talk around the things that he is likely to encounter out there: the various ways in which those things are unrealistic depictions of real life.

Just don't make it about him and his libido. He is very new at this, it's way too early to draw any conclusions about what his preferences are, let alone kinks. It's entirely possible that he just stumbled across that site at random and stopped to watch because he saw naked people, and the fact that they are doing something controversial is actually a bit over his head. I'm reminded of the discussion here recently where someone found incest porn in their boyfriend's (father's? someone significant's) cache, and assumed the worst. Pragmatically, most porn that bothers to advertise a theme at all has the very thinnest veneer of plotline that allows them to move along to the humping.
Posted by avast2006 on October 24, 2012 at 11:18 AM · Report this
60
While this is absolute not an area in which I've any expertise or even experience, I can't resist:

I entirely agree that a 13-year-old fated to become a doer of women who finds new and intriguing pleasures in viewing posed photographs of such is not of necessity a woman-hating, objectifying misogynist. But, given what I've heard from reliable sources, the appearance of "Playboy" and "tasteful" in the same paragraph some decades after the first viewing must considerable increase the probability.

No slur intended on Mr Avast's character; I have no opinion whatsoever on how misogynist he is or isn't. The joke just struck me as too good to leave unposted.
Posted by vennominon on October 24, 2012 at 11:20 AM · Report this
61
Get in line, gay Republicans. What you think. What you believe. Your differences. None of them matter. Do what you're told. Act the way you're told.

You should be used to that. Being gay and all.
Posted by Cletus on October 24, 2012 at 11:25 AM · Report this
seandr 62
@pbl1230 "the kid might develop some serious misconceptions about sex"

Sure, I'll buy that, and I think Dan's analogy between porn and action movies is apt.

Some specific misconceptions you might get from porn:
- the average male penis size is 9 inches
- whenever people fuck they rotate through at least 10 positions
- when having sex, women instinctively screech trite cliches in ear-piercing Minnie Mouse voices that have you desperately reaching for the mute button

(I'd add that porn can also correct misconceptions, convey new information and ideas, and help a person discover turn-ons they never knew they had.)

But Dan is going further, here. He's suggesting that without the proper intervention, porn can "poison" young minds, turning nice normal kids into woman-hating sadists. I'm skeptical of that theory, and I'm surprised Dan's promoting it in the same letter he extols the virtues of science.
Posted by seandr on October 24, 2012 at 12:05 PM · Report this
63
women republicans. same thing
Posted by djinni on October 24, 2012 at 12:08 PM · Report this
64
I've always wondered about the Gay Republicans thing - made no sense to me.
Posted by A straight guy on October 24, 2012 at 12:17 PM · Report this
65
Four members of the Supreme Court are age 72 or older. The oldest justice--the most liberal member of the Court--is a two time cancer survivor. If the Log Quisling Republicans are indifferent about the prospect of Mitt Romney appointing the successor to Ruth Bader Ginsburg, then they deserve whatever they may get.

Unfortunately, those of us straights and gays who strongly believe that willing adults' sex lives are none of the federal government's damn business don't deserve the jurisprudence that would result from having one more black robed Republican wardheeler on the Supreme Court for the next 20+ years.
Posted by Winston Smith on October 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM · Report this
66
Winston, thank you for articulating your reasons for wanting Obama or any Democrat as president for years to come.

You have stated your reasoning and fears.

If I do not have those same fears or use my own reasoning and end up supporting a Republican presidential candidate I would prefer not to have that attributed to self-loathing or homophobia.

Only a dickhead would do that.
Posted by Cletus on October 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM · Report this
Auragasm 67
@20
It's probably a good idea for hetero couples to hash out wheather spontaneous lez sessions would be considered cheating before hand. I think most guys would want to give permission first (and permission to film it). Cheating is still cheating, and I think a lot of straight girls just assume it's ok because it wasn't another man.

@39, 41
Seconded! Dudes, the booty does NOT self-lubricate. I haven't checked out makelovenotporn.com yet, but it sounds like a nice resource for teenage boys. Action Film analogy is spot on.

@62
Some of us ladies can't help but be noisy, particularly from behind. Porn stars definitely overdo it, but being on the receiving end sometimes takes concentration that overrides vocal control. I've had some unbearably loud roommates/girlfriends of roommates. Sometimes you gotta bite a pillow.

That being said, men who grunt in the bedroom are sort of funny to me.
Posted by Auragasm on October 24, 2012 at 1:52 PM · Report this
68
@65: There is every reason to believe that, insofar as they are able, and despite what it may say about their impartiality, the justices will retire when a President of their preferred party is in power. We saw this with O'Connor, Souter, and Stevens--there is every reason to expect it with Ginsburg, Scalia, and Breyer.

(Counterpoint: Rhenquist died, Marshall and Brennan retired during Bush I--to Marshall's disappointment--and Douglas retired under Ford. However, unless you think a Romney win would usher in Republican hegemony for many terms to come, or unless you think Ginsburg's on death's door and just didn't get around to retiring last year, you shouldn't be too concerned about this.)
Posted by Neither gay nor republican on October 24, 2012 at 2:18 PM · Report this
69
The question isn't why there are gay Republicans. The question is why there are Republicans at all -- at least, why there are more than maybe a couple thousand Republicans. Of all the members of that party in this country, I imagine 90% of them are voting against their own self-interest -- economically and otherwise.
I believe people vote Republican partly because they wish they were rich and they vote as if they were living in that dream. And partly is has to do with personality. Republicans are known to be less open-minded than Dems, valuing loyalty over freedom, and (what they consider) tradition over innovation. And they are afraid -- they want their assault weapons, and for some reason think the Dems will take guns away from them. Finally, since radical fundamentalism has taken over the Republican party, freakish Christians are going to vote conservative even though, again, doing so goes against their own economic self-interest.
It's foolish to say that gay Republicans are self-loathing. Likely they are the opposite. They are just people like anyone else, and have the same reasons for doing stupid things as anyone else.
Posted by Drusilla on October 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM · Report this
Fortunate 70
Cletus, the thing is that I don't see many people arguing that a gay person can't support "a republican candidate" and not have issues.

People are talking about Romney, not some generic republican candidate. Forget the "republican" part. Pay attention to what he has said he would do.

Pass a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage.

Reverse the executive order that forces hospitals that receive federal money to allow same sex partners the right to hospital visitation.

Only appoint supreme court justices who will oppose gay rights.

That's not some generic "republican" candidate.

That's a candidate that wants to punish gay people and deny gay people basic rights and equality.

A gay person who voted for a democrat who promised those same things would have issues as well. It's not the party the person belongs to (although the official Republican platform is vehemently anti-gay), it is what the actual, individual candidate has promised to do.

Romney has promised to punish gay people for being gay. If you can't stand voting for a Democrat then find a Republican who holds to their fiscal ideas and foreign policy, but doesn't want to get the gays, and write them in.

But a gay person who votes for Romney is like a black person voting for David Duke. Duke ran as both a Democrat and a Republican. The party label he wore at different times didn't change the fact that he is a racist bigot.

Romney can call himself a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green, what ever. He wants to punish gay people for being gay, deny gay people equality, and put us in our place.

Vote republican if you want. But a wise person doesn't vote for an individual who wants to harm them.
More...
Posted by Fortunate on October 24, 2012 at 3:45 PM · Report this
71
the link is makelovenotporn.tv, it's not a .com.
Posted by NovaT19811 on October 24, 2012 at 4:55 PM · Report this
72
Dan--and everyone--the actual URL is makelovenotporn.tv. This is not a ".com" domain. I'm a beta user and it's a great site. Dan's regular podcast listeners will recognize this site from an episode posted a few weeks back.
Posted by NovaT19811 on October 24, 2012 at 4:59 PM · Report this
seandr 73
NALIT - There's only one way to make this situation right - drink a bunch of booze and take some E with your boyfriend.
Posted by seandr on October 24, 2012 at 5:29 PM · Report this
74
@29,
I talked (and still occasionally do talk) openly about all kinds of sex-related stuff with my mum in arbitrary levels of detail; same with my maternal grandpa in slightly less detail for a mainstream het-male perspective. Nothing awkward or embarrassing there -- though I guess it helped that in the maternal part of my family sex is seen as a fun adult activity instead of a yucky secret thing, and that our communication is quite open and trusting in general.
What is awkward is that my dad, who was brought up in a quite uptight and prudish way, still needs about 5 minutes to let go of his embarrassment at the start of discussions about sex.
Posted by Ysanne on October 24, 2012 at 6:42 PM · Report this
75
Let's just say that that Democrats are doing no better and all of us should vote Libertarian.
Posted by ForFun on October 24, 2012 at 7:28 PM · Report this
76
2 things from me as well - both are regarding DAD:

- I cannot fathom anyone actually has seen all kinds of porn out there, therefore it may be wrong (as well as it may be correct) to state "that a lot of porn is made by and for guys who have no other sexual outlets". There is quite some "decent" porn around that is like "fairy tales for adults". Which of course underlines that it may not be the right stuff for teenagers as it requires a certain set of imagination (experiences) to build upon. I may be wrong, just saying.

- The whole lube and death grip that comes up every once in a while refers mainly (only?) to circumcised guys.
I cannot relate to that at all ;-)
Ok, maybe a bit (spit) of saliva.
Thank whomsoever for having been born to parents who didn't bother too much with little boys' penises, let alone their sexuality.

I allowed myself to rephrase your own words to DAD - sorry for being so frank:

"Many of these parents — many, not most, but many — are indifferent or resentful, and their indifference and resentment is a poison that creeps into a lot of culture; sometimes the poison is obvious, sometimes it's not. If you put it in your son's head that the poisonously shit he'll see around is there to appeal to those who can't get over being circumcised, DAD, your son will be less likely to internalize it — because your son doesn't want to see himself as an angry (foreskin) loser, right?"
Posted by foreskin on October 24, 2012 at 7:56 PM · Report this
77
Dan has a 14-year-old son. I expect that his advice to parents on how to explain sex to a teenage boy has been field tested.
Posted by random_lez on October 24, 2012 at 8:25 PM · Report this
mydriasis 78
If fiscal conservatism is so "sensible" explain to me why Denmark is the happiest country in the world with a safe, stable, well-educated populace and America is... well... you know.

Bonus points if you can answer without being racist!
Posted by mydriasis on October 24, 2012 at 8:43 PM · Report this
79
I agree wholeheartedly with Dan's advice to MAS. I was in a similar situation a few years ago and after getting back together the sex was ten times more amazing. Granted, I was on the receiving end of the breakup. But I'm pretty sure it's because I said something and we tried some new things that I'm much happier now with our sex life than before. Just be careful not to make it obvious that these new sex moves are from your between man, as that might be a mojo killer...
Posted by portia12 on October 24, 2012 at 9:41 PM · Report this
80
@76:
There are definitely men who weren't circumcised who masturbate with a death grip.

But isn't that advice more about "don't always masturbate he same way, it might train your body to only being able to orgasm that way"? And that advice holds true for everyone alike, men and women.
Posted by migrationist on October 24, 2012 at 9:42 PM · Report this
81
@21 Gymgoth

Go crawl back into your Tea Party hole.
Posted by albeit on October 24, 2012 at 11:48 PM · Report this
82
@39 ZomBQueen

Porn Anal Sex does NOT equal real anal sex.

Does not. Sorry to burst your porn bubble, but anal sex that is pleasurable for the man AND the woman is NOTHING like porn.

What is it like? It is slow. VERY slow. There is LOTS of lube (water soluble) for condoms. And SHE takes the lead. She calls the shots. I prefer on top, so I can control the pace (which can be intense and delicious).

Just remember gentleman, the anus is not a vagina (which is self-lubricating & expands and inflates to accommodate the penis).

Just remember what ever you see in porn is not real. At least not real sex. There is editing. Most of the female porn actresses have prepped (ememas and stretching with dildoes) to get 'jack hammered'. The average woman hasn't. It's like expecting your woman to compete in the Olympics: she hasn't trained, she isn't prepped, but yet you expect her to get Gold.

Stupid.

Posted by albeit on October 25, 2012 at 12:21 AM · Report this
83
@9 - But at the end of the day, if a "pro-life" guy doesn't realize that his opinion about abortion does not trump a real life woman's opinion about abortion. If he does not get that women alone can make their own decisions. If he does not get that nuance is the answer. If he does not get that he will literally never be in the shoes of someone who will make that decision....he does simply want to control women by omission of trusting women.
Posted by Ms.11 on October 25, 2012 at 12:23 AM · Report this
84
@57, I'd love to hear how the Republican oversight of the deregulation of the financial sector, the GIANT war budget fought over....what again...and the huge housing bubble are responsible economic policies.
Posted by Ms.11 on October 25, 2012 at 12:26 AM · Report this
85
@Afinch, I love you.
Posted by Ms.11 on October 25, 2012 at 12:34 AM · Report this
86
@63 djinni

'women republicans. same thing'

What? Scratches head.
Posted by albeit on October 25, 2012 at 12:36 AM · Report this
87
@83 Ms.11

'But at the end of the day, if a "pro-life" guy doesn't realize that his opinion about abortion does not trump a real life woman's opinion about abortion. If he does not get that women alone can make their own decisions. If he does not get that nuance is the answer. IF HE DOES NOT GET THAT HE WILL LITERALLY NEVER BE IN THE SHOES OF SOMEONE WHO WILL MAKE THAT DECISION....HE DOES SIMPLY WANT TO CONTROL WOMEN BY OMISSION OF TRUSTING WOMEN.'

My emphasis exactly. Men lacking in empathy ( which leads to bonding and love) cannot see beyond their own experiences and therefore cannot connect to people beyond their own experiences/life.

Tis a sad life for the un-empathetic man.

Posted by albeit on October 25, 2012 at 12:47 AM · Report this
88
If my wife did E and finger-banged her girlfriend, the only thing I would be confused about is where I could find her some more E.
Posted by yuiop on October 25, 2012 at 1:18 AM · Report this
89
yo webmaster! How about correcting that faulty url???
Posted by concerned woman on October 25, 2012 at 1:33 AM · Report this
90
34-pb-- Point well taken. MAS has nothing to lose in trying to educate Mr. Solid in what it would take to please her. It's just that in my experience, it doesn't work, or it only works to a certain degree. I might teach Mr. Missionary Position to try putting me on top, but I've never succeeded in transforming him into a wildly imaginative, uninhibited, game for anything kind of guy. Mr. Missionary tends to be the sort who, if he doesn't like something in the first place (say oral or toys or fantasy play), can't be convinced with anything short of begging or bribery. (Who wants that in a relationship?) If he's totally satisfied with missionary, there's not even a bargaining chip, no way of saying I'll do this for you if you'll do this for me. The match is just wrong, and everyone will be happier if they move on.

56-Ven-- You are, of course, correct that MAS could be male. I even read the letter that way until I got to "happy life of decidedly average sex." At that, I identified so much that I couldn't picture the letter writer any way other than the way I was in my 20s, my Dona Flor years.
Posted by Crinoline on October 25, 2012 at 6:16 AM · Report this
GymGoth 91
#70- You state these items as facts about Romney which are absolutely false:

"Reverse the executive order that forces hospitals that receive federal money to allow same sex partners the right to hospital visitation." FALSE

"Only appoint supreme court justices who will oppose gay rights." FALSE

Unlike Democrats, Republicans do not apply litmus tests to Supreme Court appointees.
Posted by GymGoth on October 25, 2012 at 6:35 AM · Report this
GymGoth 92
24/47: You claim Romney wants to deny gay people equal rights and to vote Republican is against your own interests. Let's unpack that:

Regarding gay marriage, there is still a significant percentage of people who are uncomfortable re-defining marriage (as something other than husband and wife). I agree that the numbers are changing more rapidly than I would have thought.

But let's not forget that well into the 1980's most gay rights groups opposed the very idea of marriage (many of Dan's friends I'm sure). They felt it was trying to pattern straight life too much. Don't believe me, look it up. So let's quit pretending that it is a "basic right" under assault.

If you want to base your presidential vote on a single issue like gay marriage that is of course your right. But I'll be there are many more smart people who know that the gay marriage issue is not going to be controlled by the president. And several "conservative" Supreme Court justices have a libertarian/state's rights orientation and are not going to approve of overturning the state marriage laws.

Liberals would much rather have the Supreme Court "discover" a right to marriage in the Constitution like they did with abortion. But the better strategy is to have them decide it is up to the states.

Finally, smart people know that the president has many more issues to tackle than empathizing with you on gay marriage. I bet those of you graduating from college would prefer to have a job. Or know that we must do something about Medicare and Social Security---not for current seniors but for the next generation. And they don't believe in the kind of nanny state government that dictates all insurance plans must provide contraception with no co-payments.

For those people, the sane vote is for Romney.
More...
Posted by GymGoth on October 25, 2012 at 6:48 AM · Report this
93
Fortunate, I understand your points and reasoning for not supporting Romney, or any Republican for that matter.

However, if you're of a mind you may want to look for differences in Romney's positions on issues of importance to the gay community and Obama's positions in 2008. Or Clinton, the father of DADT, back when he was president.

I would suggest listening to Romney today, not the Romney of year's past. Just like you should with Obama.

My real problem is with the name-calling and attempted (sadly ironic) bullying by Dan politically. Rationalize that all you want but it is wrong.
Posted by Cletus on October 25, 2012 at 6:58 AM · Report this
94
I love Savage Love and the Lovecast but the comments about gay Republicans are a non-sense. Most gay Republicans I have met are open and secure with their sexuality and consider seriously who they support for political office, looking at a wide-array of issues/positions. Indeed there are a number of Republicans who support gay rights (take for example the several Republicans in New York State who voted for gay marriage). Dan, nothing is black or white and that includes the political parties we choose to support.
Posted by http://newyork-to-london.blogspot.com/ on October 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM · Report this
Fortunate 95
@91
""Reverse the executive order that forces hospitals that receive federal money to allow same sex partners the right to hospital visitation." FALSE"

Really? So Romney's campaign strategist Bay Buchanan lied:

"Governor Romney supports a federal marriage amendment to the Constitution that defines marriage as an institution between a man and a woman,” Buchanan was quoted as saying. “Governor Romney also believes, consistent with the 10th Amendment, that it should be left to states to decide whether to grant same-sex couples certain benefits, such as hospital visitation rights and the ability to adopt children."

https://www.washingtonblade.com/2012/10/…

""Only appoint supreme court justices who will oppose gay rights." FALSE"

So he was lying when he signed this pledge:

http://www.nomblog.com/wp-content/upload…

Which he clearly signed and which states:

"I Mitt Romney (name signed in his own hand writing), Pledge to the American people that if elected president I Will...

...Two, nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraing and to applying the original meaning of the Constitution, appoint an attorney general similarly committed, and thus reject the idea our Founding Fathers inserted a right to gay marriage into our Constitution."

If that isn't a litmus test for a supreme court justice I don't know what is.

You know, this is the 21st century. When candidates say this shit it is out there for everyone to see on the internet.

Nice try, collect your consolation prize on your way out and please play again sometime.
More...
Posted by Fortunate on October 25, 2012 at 8:20 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 96
@92: If you think the GOP is the party of fiscal conservatism, you either can not read, or choose not to.

Look at the past: Republicans spend more, run up the debt/deficit, and raise unemployment every time. This is well documented in decades of statistics. Meanwhile, Obama has borrowed less, spent less, and gained jobs over his tenure. He lowered the deficit and lowered debt increase from 100% to 50%.

Please offer one piece of evidence on how Romney is going to improve the economy. He has not said, so good luck.

To anyone with a working brain, the democratic party is the one of fiscal responsibility and prosperity.
Posted by Theodore Gorath on October 25, 2012 at 8:24 AM · Report this
Fortunate 97
@93 "However, if you're of a mind you may want to look for differences in Romney's positions on issues of importance to the gay community and Obama's positions in 2008. Or Clinton, the father of DADT, back when he was president."

Obama said in 2008 that he was personally against same sex marriage, but that he also opposed a constitutional amendment banning it, and from the start refused to defend DOMA.

What he personally believed was irrelivant because in 2008 he promised to NOT attack the rights of gay people despite his personal feelings, unlike Romney who has pledge, in writting, to do so (see my post @95).

As for Clinton, I voted for him the first time he ran, but I voted against him the second time he ran because of DOMA and DADT. If Obama fucked us over like that I would be voting against him as well, but he hasn't. He promised to support gay right and he has. He has done more for gay rights than every other president before him combined.

"I would suggest listening to Romney today, not the Romney of year's past. Just like you should with Obama."

I am. Romney only recently confirmed his intention to push for a Constituional amendment to ban same sex marriage. And the comments by Bay Buchannan where he stated that Romney would recind Obamas executive order that gaurentees hospital visitation rights to same sex couples at any hospital recieving federal money was made less than a week ago.

Since beginning his bid for president many years ago Romney has been consistant on only a few topics. His opposition to gay rights has been one of those rare instances of consistancy. He opposes them and he wants to not only prvent any more gains by gay people, but he wants to strip as many of the ones we already have away if he can.

Obama, on the other hand, promised that despite his feelings on same sex marriage he wouldn't oppose our rights, and today he is an even stronger supporter of our rights out and out advocating for same sex marriage.

Comparing the Romney and Obama of today there is no contest on the issue of gay rights. Romney is clearly against us and Obama is clearly in support of us.
More...
Posted by Fortunate on October 25, 2012 at 8:34 AM · Report this
98
@-48/ people who watch a lot of mainstream porn tend to have those fucked up views about relationships and women. My citation is being a human being on this planet and whitnessing reality. Just watch some of that shit, and if you must, go onto a chat board.
Posted by OXAM on October 25, 2012 at 9:23 AM · Report this
99
I respect your thoughts, Fortunate.

Dan Savage, on the other hand, is filled with hate. His name-calling is despicable.

This, sadly, is what happens with sex advice columnists. They get old. They get jaded. They lose their edge when they get into serious relationships. They stop being what it was that made them popular.

Savage is spiteful, petty and pathetic.
Posted by Cletus on October 25, 2012 at 9:37 AM · Report this
100
@57: I don't understand the taboo against Jewish Nazis. I think to suggest that I should oppose the National Socialists just because I'm a Jew is to suggest that I should become a one-issue voter.

I don't think what's best for <10% of Germany (including me) should trump the economic well-being of the country, and I'm personally inclined to think the Nazi ticket would further that variegated interest. It has nothing to do with my internalizing anti-semitism or self-loathing.
Posted by undewy on October 25, 2012 at 10:14 AM · Report this
101
@82: Wow, that was perhaps the most violent agreement with what the other person wrote that I've ever seen.
Posted by avast2006 on October 25, 2012 at 10:22 AM · Report this
shw3nn 102
Look, guys, I'll tell you how you can have gay Republicans. It's because they started Republican.

Self-delusion. Confirmation bias. The illusion of Asymmetric insight. Introspection illusion.

Those of you who are Democrats, trust me, you don't really know why you are a democrat; I say that knowing you are capable of explaining it to me all day. You think you are but you are not dispassionately weighing all the evidence fairly.

I am not judging you. I am a Democrat and I really think I'm right. But I also know that my judgement isn't the bedrock I so desperately want to think it is.

We all want to be right so bad that we ignore reality in order to do it. The reason science is so successful is because it protects scientists from their own need to be right. That is how you fly to the moon and create mechanical organs.

Your data sources know this about you. You are told what you want to hear by your news sources because that's how to keep you coming to that news source. Google tailors its search results to you. It returns results you want to see. It's called the google bubble.

Their are whole industries based around appealing to this, our worst, most counter-productive quality.

TL;DR Gay Republicans are completely delusional. So are you. Recognize.
Posted by shw3nn on October 25, 2012 at 10:31 AM · Report this
103
Holy crap, WAY too many political diatribes today. I already voted and am SO ready for this election to be over so we can get back to talking about kinky sex.
Posted by wxPDX on October 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM · Report this
John Horstman 104
@95: I applaud your effort, but you're not debating someone with a reality-based worldview. You're debating someone who believes in reality-relativism and magical thinking, altering facts to fit preconceived notions of how things should be and personal identity categories - for example, the idea that Republicans are fiscally responsible, when they've been responsible for the majority of deficit spending as well as market/trade/taxation policies (and spending priorities) that have substantially increased income disparity since WWII (the wealthy have been getting fantastically wealthier, while the middle and lower classes have seen real income stay more-or-less level or even drop since the 1960s). Granted, maybe some observers will be swayed, but for whatever reason, fact-driven views of market policy are given the same scorn by many people that fact-driven views of religion are. You really might as well be arguing with GymGoth about how hir god is imaginary.

Also, I feel like I should point out that the idea that raising income or corporate or capital gains taxes hurts jobs is just a flat-out lie. These are taxes on profits, assessed on NET incomes, after the costs of operating a given business have already been paid. Rates of these particular taxes have zero impact on supply curves and minimal impact on demand curves (they can impact the amount of disposable income people have, altering demand at given price points slightly, though progressive taxation schemes will tend to be far MORE favorable in their impacts with respect to everything except fantastically expensive luxury goods, as people with less money tend to route more of it into active circulation by buying useful things requiring actual labor instead of financial vehicles that make money by exploiting the debt system, providing no utility to anyone), so the optimal production (dictating how many people are hired to do the work of producing, distributing, supporting, etc.) and pricing points aren't really changed.

What lower taxes on the wealthy DO serve to do is concentrate wealth, not even linearly but exponentially, since greater excess starting capital allows the wealthy to utilize capitalist vehicles to make even more money than they're just getting back in taxes. This is simply bad economic policy unless your goal is to concentrate as much wealth with as few people as possible (I'll grant this is the likely goal of someone like Mott Romney). The Republican platform is a patchwork of appealing-sounding lies, magical thinking, and bigotry; the only reason it continues to exist is because there are a lot of single-issue (usually theocratic policy) voters, delusional voters, voters who have fallen victim to a 30-year propaganda campaign, and voters who are actually sociopaths.
More...
Posted by John Horstman on October 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM · Report this
105
And then his assessment of gay Republicans is the other 20%.

I'm pretty sure most gay Republicans are that way (Republican I mean, not gay) because they take the very sensible position of fiscal conservatism.


That doesn't make any sense. Republican politicians aren't any more fiscally conservative than Democratic politicians. If anything, they're less.
Posted by truthspeaker on October 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM · Report this
106
- The whole lube and death grip that comes up every once in a while refers mainly (only?) to circumcised guys.

I was wondering about that. Never seen an uncirced guy who was past Tanner stage I myself.
Posted by Eirene on October 25, 2012 at 1:42 PM · Report this
107
@104: Academic cite please for the proposition that capital taxation will not lead to capital flight?
Posted by aaaa on October 25, 2012 at 2:48 PM · Report this
seandr 108
@98: Based on my experience, men who don't watch a lot of porn tend to not exist.
Posted by seandr on October 25, 2012 at 3:18 PM · Report this
109
@102 & confirmation bias etc.: while I think there's a lot of truth in what you say, I disagree that it's the whole story, or even the main factor, particularly in the long term.

I'll put the TL;DR up here: Since there are only two electable parties in the US, there's often no way that a person can defend themselves against a claim that they're voting based mainly on confirmation bias, etc., but that doesn't make that true. As a Canadian who has multiple parties to choose from I don't find that confirmation bias is a good predictor of how I'll vote. It's true that confirmation bias and the like are always going to be factors, especially in the short term, but you can go too far in estimating their influence.

In the part of Canada that I live in, we have four parties that have shown they can get candidates elected, and my vote bounces back and forth between three of those parties depending on the details of the election. My vote won't go to the fourth party, because they have shown time and time again, and continue to show on a regular basis, that they do not share my values and that they do not have my best interests in mind.

On the other hand, I can remember telling a friend that I had never voted for the Canadian Liberal Party and never would. Five years later, the Liberals selected a leader who was, in my judgement, competent, more honest than most politicians, and willing to listen on environmental issues (the most important single issue to me), so I did an enormous double take, and voted for them. I REALLY didn't like the Liberal Party (still don't trust them further than I can throw them), so if it had been about confirmation bias I'd have found an excuse not to support them. I don't think I'm wonderful or special: I think this is something normal people do when they have real choices. In contrast, I think the differences between the Dems and the Reps are real and large and so it's normal for a person's choice to be obvious, even if it were freshly considered with no prior knowledge of the parties.

As for why gays might vote Republican, I agree that Dan's response is patronizing and insulting. All I can suggest is the observation that Democrats get most of the votes of people living in metropolitan areas and the Northeast while Republicans get most of the vote of people living in smaller cities and the South, so whatever it is about the Republicans that appeals to people living in smaller cities might also appeal to some gays.
More...
Posted by Old Crow on October 25, 2012 at 3:42 PM · Report this
110
Normally I totally agree with your advice about seeking sexual compatibility. But sometimes I wonder if you go too far. Your advice to "MAS" seems to just boil down to "you had ok sex with Mr. A. You had amazing sex with Mr. B. You and Mr. A are not going to work."

It seems reductive to ask people to expect that sex with their partners consistently be the very best sex they have ever had. I don't think that's fair or realistic.
Posted by Karny on October 25, 2012 at 4:50 PM · Report this
111
Anal sex takes different amounts of prep time depending on whom you're having it with. I had an ex-girlfriend who could slip me from her vagina to her anus with no prep and only her vaginal juices for lubricant (and yes, her sphincter was deliciously tight when she wanted it to be). Others have needed many minutes of slow dilation and copious quantities of lube.

Moral of the story: people are different.
Posted by Sust jayin' on October 25, 2012 at 6:18 PM · Report this
seandr 112
@104: Holy shit, a smart person on SLOG. Thank you!

It's really just common sense for anyone with a mind for economics that hasn't been overtaken by hate, ideology, or the belief that the money they've made is proof of their inherent superiority.
Posted by seandr on October 25, 2012 at 8:43 PM · Report this
113
I'd think that one of the most important things to tell a boy about porn is that the women in it aren't having fun and are faking orgasm. It's a job. They are acting. Important to be really clear on. Also, to tell him that's not how real people have sex.
Posted by gnot on October 25, 2012 at 9:49 PM · Report this
114
Republicans waging war on women = closeted homophobes who can't get laid because they're insanely rich, corrupt, fat, bald, ugly as fuck and fornicate with sheep (the only creatures willing to sleep with them), and that's why they hate everybody and are hellbent on destroying everything in sight while building their Evil Empire.
Because it says so in their "book".

I've got binders FULL of these assholes.
Posted by auntie grizelda on October 25, 2012 at 11:00 PM · Report this
seandr 115
@113: the women in it aren't having fun and are faking orgasm. It's a job. They are acting.

Dude, very few generalizations hold across all of pornography, and yours is no exception.

This will probably blow your mind, but some sex workers really enjoy their job! And some women can actually come, even if there's a camera rolling! Through sex or cunnilingus! Even if they are being paid and don't have a deep emotional connection to the fat 9 inch dick that's fucking them into next Thursday! I know, right?

The truth is, if the kid can fuck half as well (and long) as the average porn star, and he pays attention during the cunnilingus scenes, and he connects and communicates with his partners, he'll see plenty of orgasms from women with a variety of sexual temperaments. If he wants to be a good lover, he's probably better off watching porn than not. Sure, he'll still have a lot learn from the actual women he fucks, but at least he'll have some idea of things to try.
Posted by seandr on October 25, 2012 at 11:51 PM · Report this
116
seandr@115 -- would you agree that most non-ejaculatory female orgasms you see in porn are fake? Why would directors prioritize the woman's orgasm, when porn stars generally don't mind faking and the viewer can't tell the difference?
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 12:19 AM · Report this
117
@Seandr:
How do you know that the women in commercial porn come during the scenes?
I really recommend the documentary "9to5: Days in porn" for a relatively unbiased view on porn. I think it is a must for Belladonna and Sasha Grey fans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9to5_%E2%80…

I watched it 3 or 4 years ago, and was pretty impressed by some of the porn actresses (interestingly, I found most of the men interviewed quite disgusting and misogynistic). For some of the actresses I felt sorry.

NB: What really surprised me, was how the naked actresses would kind of crouch between shots, hugging themselves. Just one actress, filming a gang bang with three or four black guys looked relaxed and happy about being naked in between shots, standing upright and open.
Posted by migrationist on October 26, 2012 at 1:38 AM · Report this
118
Ms Griselda - Must "closeted" be a part of such vitriol? (Major LMB) I don't want such people sharing a box with vulnerable/suicidal teenagers, and see no viable reason to believe that the adjective fits those you describe in any significantly greater proportion than the general population. Or, put another way, I hope the image of closeted 14-year-olds reading posts using that adjective as the first in a string of insults would be enough dissuasion for anyone of good faith.
Posted by vennominon on October 26, 2012 at 4:04 AM · Report this
mydriasis 119
@ migrationist

They're probably cold.
I may be mistaken but based on my own limited expereince the sets are kept chilly.
Posted by mydriasis on October 26, 2012 at 7:30 AM · Report this
mydriasis 120
@107

Flight to where?
Posted by mydriasis on October 26, 2012 at 7:32 AM · Report this
121
@115, seandr, cunnilingus *is* sex.
Posted by clashfan on October 26, 2012 at 7:41 AM · Report this
122
@mydriasis:
You might be right. But why weren't the male porn stars cold?
Posted by migrationist on October 26, 2012 at 7:52 AM · Report this
mydriasis 123
@ migrationist

More physical exertion, greater muscle mass?
Posted by mydriasis on October 26, 2012 at 8:05 AM · Report this
124
@mydriasis:
Did you see the film and make assumptions based on their poses?
Or are you making educated guesses why women are more easily chilled than men?
Posted by migrationist on October 26, 2012 at 8:11 AM · Report this
125
@122/123, aren't women office workers generally cold at the temperature that's comfortable for their male colleagues?
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 8:11 AM · Report this
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 8:13 AM · Report this
127
#9 but Republicans don't traditionally enact fiscal conservatism once in office. They cut taxes, cut some high profile but .0001% spending that they hate (like NPR) but don't touch defense because the contractors pay them off, don't touch Social Security because old people vote more and don't touch Medicare for the same reason, then we end up with an even larger deficit. Meanwhile, in order to placate their rabid base, they start passing socially conservative laws while they can, and even worse, appointing right-wing Christian nutcase judges. So you end up with fiscal disaster and social conservatism LEGISLATED - not just wished. Think hard. Think real hard before you fill in that little circle.
Posted by GG1000 on October 26, 2012 at 8:24 AM · Report this
mydriasis 128
@ migrationist

Women are more easily chilled than men in general because men have more* heat-producing muscle mass and I'm under the impression that men in porn exert themselves more than women. So, the latter I guess?

* before people get all angry because that's a generalization, I think it's safe to say this applies fairly universally in mainstream porn
Posted by mydriasis on October 26, 2012 at 8:38 AM · Report this
129
@ mydriasis:

Thank you for the anatomy lecture.

Of course, it could have been the cold that caused the women to crouch - but then why not just put on a robe?
Anyway, since you didn't see the film, there's not much point in discussing details like this.

Posted by migrationist on October 26, 2012 at 8:55 AM · Report this
mydriasis 130
@ migrationist.

Simple body composition fact =/= an anatomy lecture.
Posted by mydriasis on October 26, 2012 at 9:17 AM · Report this
seandr 131
@EricaP: would you agree that most non-ejaculatory female orgasms you see in porn are fake?

That's probably true, although neither of us has enough info to put a number on it. My point is simply that not all of them are fake.

For example, there are the squirt movies you mention. I believe I've also seen real orgasms emerge from some cunnilingus scenes. I believe I've seen real ones in the home-made couples genre, as well as the "instructional" genre. I wouldn't automatically dismiss everything at kink.com as fake. There are a few actresses who are so amazingly creative and good that I am convinced they enjoy what they are doing (although I admit I don't really know). And every so often I'll come across a scene in which there seems to be genuine chemistry between the actors.

Turning back to adolescent boys and porn, given the lack of science, I'll speak from my own experience. At 12, I was highly motivated to learn how to please women, as were my friends. We turned to the crappy porn available at the time (among other sources) for clues. I learned about the clitoris from Penthouse Forums, for example. But none of us were so gullible that we'd mistake porn for a sex reference manual, any more than we might mistake an action film for a documentary.

And the idea that the wrong kind of porn could have warped me at that age? Please. What's remarkable to me is how stable my tastes have been since I first figured out what they were, despite all the porn I've watched.
Posted by seandr on October 26, 2012 at 9:31 AM · Report this
seandr 132
@migrationist: How do you know that the women in commercial porn come during the scenes?

Read my response to @131. Do you think it's plausible that they never do? Even the squirters? I've heard women claim to orgasm under much less romantic settings than a porn set.

And thanks for the movie pointer - I will definitely check it out.

@EricaP: Why would directors prioritize the woman's orgasm

Did you know there's a "real female orgasms" genre? Lots of men want to see women come, or, short of that, at least enjoy themselves. Sure, women can fake it, but not always convincingly.
Posted by seandr on October 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM · Report this
133
@69 Drusilla. [lucky comment # hit there]. Thank you! Your comment perfectly describes my take on why so many people vote Repub.

I would add: My impression is most of the women who vote Repub because of the influence of some conservative male: daddy (Coulter is a good example), husband, pastor/Jebus or brother. These are not independent thinking women who bother getting themselves broadly informed. These are women for whom loyalty to their man trumps natural inclination: (Laura Bush).

Then there are the growing # of female, small business owners who have, like so many, bought into the comfortable idea that *all* their struggles are due to "liberal-created" taxes and regs. They prefer to ignore the idea that bad business skills, uncontrollable international issues or bad luck might really be more to blame.

Ironically, too many of those same female SBO's don't recognize that their ability to be owners/operators in the first place is historically owed to Democratic activism on women's behalf. But that puts them in the same odd-thinking league as gay Repubs.

I have a sneaking suspicion that for most of those guys, needing to feel in control trumps their desire for sexual equality. Current social progress notwithstanding, Gay Repub denial and appeasement inherent in the face of stated, heterosexual Republican goals aimed at outlawing homosexuality is breath-taking.
Posted by Xweatie on October 26, 2012 at 10:24 AM · Report this
134
@132 "Lots of men want to see women come"

Duh. Yes. That's why women in porn pretend to come.

"women can fake it, but not always convincingly."

Evidence? Men in my life don't know that I came unless I make it obvious. I don't fake, but it wouldn't be hard, and most sex workers I know tell me they fake all the time. What makes you think that professional actresses can't fake convincingly if that's their goal?
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM · Report this
135
@ mydriasis:
I was referring to the tone, not the content of your post.

@ seandr:
I definitely believe that women in home-made porns have orgasms- not all, not every time, but a significant percentage. In commercial porn, it's possible but I wouldn't think a priority. But here it is just an educated guess- on your side as well as on my side of the argument.
Posted by migrationist on October 26, 2012 at 10:40 AM · Report this
136
@131, Granted, porn with post-production interviews with the actress earn my trust more. Most porn doesn't bother building our trust. They have plausibility on their side, and that's enough.
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 10:40 AM · Report this
137
@134:
Interestingly, I have the opposite problem:
I don't fake it, but I like to make noise during sex. When I am turned on, it turns me on even more to hear myself. And sometimes, guys then are surprised to hear that I hadn't come.
Posted by migrationist on October 26, 2012 at 10:46 AM · Report this
138
@137, that happens to me too. My actual orgasm can be accompanied by noise, or not; it depends. My noises can be accompanied by orgasm, or not; it depends.

Apparently no one else can tell whether or not any particular sequence of noises and motions reveals an orgasm, unless I say either: "oh, wow, that was great," or "whoa, I need a little break, let's try something else for a while."
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 11:51 AM · Report this
139
@134: There's a reason why porn-style moaning has become a cliche, is instantly recognizable, and generally provokes an eye roll. It's enough to make me want to stop watching, because it is _so_ obvious that she is not having a good time it becomes a turn-off. That would be one category of "not always convincingly."

Posted by avast2006 on October 26, 2012 at 1:05 PM · Report this
seandr 140
@EricaP: "women can fake it, but not always convincingly." Evidence?

I'd love to see a study that measures how accurately men classify video clips of fake and real orgasms, but as far as I know, that research hasn't been done. So you and I are left to speculate.

@migrationist & @EricaP: "noise"

If an unfamiliar woman is making a whole bunch of noise, I wouldn't assume she's coming, I would simply wonder if she naturally screams through sex or she's putting on a show. If a porn star is making a lot of noise, I assume it's the latter.

I admittedly don't have a huge sample size of long term relationships to draw from, and I know this isn't at all representative, but my girlfriends have all tended to get quiet and inwardly-focused in the moments just before they come, and then when it happens they moan or gasp (sometimes very softly) in a way that almost sounds like crying. (One would actually cry, sometimes). Also, their muscles would tense, shake, buck, and/or convulse, and their skin would flush. Their vocalizations and movements seemed distinctly uninhibited and involuntary in a way that would be difficult to mimic, although not impossible.
Posted by seandr on October 26, 2012 at 1:33 PM · Report this
141
seandr @140, sounds like you're more sensitive to muscle spasms and skin tone than the guys I've been with. Or maybe the vibrator interferes with their experience of the spasms.

"if she naturally screams through sex or she's putting on a show"
It doesn't have to be either/or. As migrationist said @137: "When I am turned on, it turns me on even more to hear myself." It's not uncontrollable, and I used to be quiet when I was younger and more inhibited. But it's not just a show, either.
Posted by EricaP on October 26, 2012 at 2:58 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 142
11 years old doesn't seem to be out of the realm of reasonable. I was looking at porn when I was 11. Me and a friend were downloading Compuware porn games in 5th or 6th grade (10 or 11), I think.

I was cyberfucking by 7th or 8th grade, and I was having sex the summer after 8th grade (or age 13).

I had my own porn stash starting in the 7th grade on 3.5" discs.

11 years old doesn't surprise me because I was that kid.
Posted by TheMisanthrope on October 26, 2012 at 5:21 PM · Report this
mydriasis 143
@ migrationist

My tone was "clearly and concisely answering question". If that seemed clinical or lecturey to you then... sorry? Jesus...
Posted by mydriasis on October 26, 2012 at 6:23 PM · Report this
144
@118 vennominon: Why---are you a fourteen year old Republican?
Posted by auntie grizelda on October 26, 2012 at 7:09 PM · Report this
seandr 145
@EricaP: But it's not just a show, either.

I get it.

And to clarify, I don't think putting on a show during sex is a bad thing at all. Costumes, dirty talk, posing, moaning, role playing, whatever it is - bravo!
Posted by seandr on October 26, 2012 at 7:54 PM · Report this
146
Ms Griselda - Why would I have to be to object to "closeted" being the #1 generic insult of anybody when it is entirely extraneous to the issue about which the insults are being applied? Off the top of my head:

First, it's not as if there aren't plenty of far more accurate insults just waiting to be lobbed.

Second, what's insulting is never just that somebody is Hiding Something. It's that (s)he's Hiding Being Queer.

Third, it's the kind of insult that lets those who are privately more anti-gay than they admit to have fun Insulting Queers while hiding behind It's Really the Closet. Recall my objection to Mr Ank wanting there to be a great many more jokes using the F word, that
lots of people aren't going to get or even look for the nuance of what the usage intended.

Fourth, closeted gay teenagers in general have plenty of cause to feel that there are enough people down on them already without adding the idea that Closeted is Bad to the list (saving for another time how to convey supportively that Closeted is Not the Long-Term Ideal).

Fifth, it's not exactly a helpful idea to instill into openly gay teenagers, playing to their Inner Queen Bees and giving them a sense of superiourity rather than solidarity.

I apologize if you thought I meant anything political by my objection. You could have been insulting Republicans, Democrats, third-party-voters or those who refuse to vote on principle, and I'd have said basically the same thing. You're quite intelligent enough to think of a substitution that is more accurate, more pertinent and more biting.
Posted by vennominon on October 27, 2012 at 6:36 AM · Report this
147
To not a lesbian...You cheated on your boyfriend. Be honest; If you love him he deserves to know. Tell him the story and deal with the consequences.
Posted by powderhound on October 27, 2012 at 7:51 AM · Report this
xjuan 148
MAS: When I was growing up, I wasn't able to see my girlfriends of the time in a sexualized way: they were just "too pure" in my mind. Dirty thoughts belonged with other kinds of women. Then, when I had some experience and was able to mix sex and love instead of keeping them in separate boxes, everything changed. Now I can imagine the BEST sex with my wife and, better yet, I can HAVE the best sex with her. Go on, MAS, help your LTBF change his internalized image of you and transform it into a sexy one. Perhaps some lingerie or latex or leather might help along the way. Or maybe he’s got some hangups with his own desires and doesn’t know how to express them. Whi nows? Does he crave redheads? Have a meaningful conversation --or many,-- and find out. He might just want to get something in particular. Be creative!
Posted by xjuan on October 27, 2012 at 9:45 AM · Report this
149 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
150
@146 vennominon; WHOA-----calm down.

First, I was trying (obviously unsuccessfully) to be funny---at least a little---in post @ 144.

Second: if you're closeted, that's your business. If you're a pinstriped Republican unicorn who's into crossdressing and massive spankings, etc., etc., that's your business. Peace--and EVERYBODY---don't forget to vote!

It's the election, and I'm on another menstrual cycle from hell.
Let's all chill out. I'm going for a hot soak, red meat, wine, and chocolate.
Posted by auntie grizelda on October 27, 2012 at 10:16 PM · Report this
151
@2: Actually, the red penis in the Smitten Kitten ad scares me more.
Posted by auntie grizelda on October 27, 2012 at 10:19 PM · Report this
152
I don't understand the mentioning of my straight 14 year old son in the first section. Why does it matter if he's straight gay bi etc. ?
Posted by aj2089 on October 28, 2012 at 12:30 AM · Report this
153
Ms Grizelda - That WAS the calm version. But I entirely empathize with anyone thrown off by this time of the election cycle. Good luck making it through.

My form of amusement at this time occasionally lies in devising means of suppressing the vote I undesire worthy of the master himself - and I refer not to Mr Rove but to the unparalleled Simon Barsinister.
Posted by vennominon on October 28, 2012 at 5:11 AM · Report this
154
The new barmaid is very young and has apple roundings in all the right places. She gets off at 6, and her father, an old regular, is usually here before then, to pick her up and take her home. They're intense about each other-- a lot of horseplay-- mostly nipple-twisting each other. There's no question of their relation-- he's not an inch taller than her petite frame, their facial features are alike.

He's a very late father, he wasn't there when she was born. He never put a crust of bread on her plate, a sock on her foot. Never lost a night's sleep for her being sick. Never had to tell her no. But this new discovered relationship makes them the best of friends, close-related, and he's so much more fun than Mom could ever be.

He reminds me of Avast and Seandr last week, as they pled the right to disavow support for any children they fathered. Because life owes them the right to opt out.

Posted by Hunter78 on October 28, 2012 at 1:03 PM · Report this
mydriasis 155
@ Hunter

You are literally the creepiest nonfictional person I've ever come across.
Posted by mydriasis on October 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM · Report this
156
@154: Tell the truth, Hunt: you're really a bored-as-hell 14-year-old who's batshit pissed that you can't legally drive or get laid yet, and have bizarre fantasies about eagerly becoming the next Mr. Mary Kay Latourneau or Norman Bates. Right?

@155: mydriasis: I think he's just trying to egg you on.
Posted by auntie grizelda on October 28, 2012 at 9:06 PM · Report this
157
While I happen to agree with a bisexual housemate of mine that the Log Cabin Republicans are "the worst excuse for a bunch of faggots that [he] ever met," I don't think they are particularly self-loathing. Instead, I think they simply don't identify with any oppressed group but their own. Basically, they have exactly one issue where they disagree with the mainstream of the Republican Party: that it privileges being a straight white male instead of just privileging being a white male.
Posted by Joe in Seattle on October 28, 2012 at 10:23 PM · Report this
158
While I do think that many gay republicans are delusional, I also think it's worth pointing out that one can be registered and identify as Republican without always voting Republican. I think a lot of people who were political in their formative years see their party as part of their identity and think of the party as it was when they decided they were part of it and not necessarily as it is now. I mean, Colin Powell endorsed Obama in '08, but I doubt that he's actually switched parties.

As for being a Republican because of fiscal conservatism... there's a disconnect there. Surely someone else has noticed that NEITHER party is anything like fiscally conservative- the Republicans merely pretend they are, and to be fair, they do so because they used to be. They're not now. The Democrats aren't either, but at the end of the day, both of them increase government spending. The choice between the two in terms of government spending isn't "how much" but "on what." The Republicans might give you tax breaks (depending on who you are) that you don't have now, and they will increase defense spending. The Democrats might give you tax breaks (depending on who you are), raise your taxes (depending on who you are), and will try to spend more money on social programs (if they have the spine).
Posted by alguna_rubia on October 28, 2012 at 10:30 PM · Report this
159
@seandr: In terms of "harmful" porn, I think that it is true that some of the things that are extremely common in mainstream hetero porn are things that the majority of women don't like (the ones that come to mind immediately are the "face-fucking" oral sex tropes, hair-pulling during doggy style, and coming on the face). I believe that what Dan is suggesting is that a possible explanation for this phenomenon might be something like this:

1) Men who can't get laid consume a lot of mainstream porn.
2) Men who can't get laid often resent women and want to see them "punished."
3) Men who can't get laid like seeing women in porn do things that the majority of women don't like to do because it is a form of "punishment."

It's hard to say whether this is really a plausible explanation or not; some of the examples I can think of have obvious explanations- coming on a girl's face is more visually interesting than coming inside her, for example. But I at least get the line of reasoning.
Posted by alguna_rubia on October 28, 2012 at 10:42 PM · Report this
seandr 160
@alguna_rubia:
Hmmm. I agree with the idea that a guy who experiences constant rejection from women can develop anger towards them in general. But for those guys, I think porn can serve as a surrogate, much like escorts, providing an outlet for pent up sexual energy which dissipates frustration and loneliness. And I think those guys are just as likely to beat off to lesbian pajama party porn as the rough, hardcore stuff. Guys seem to like what they like, and there's no accounting for why.

As for the directions mainstream porn has taken, I don't know. I think all those things you mentioned are pretty hot (and I don't think women who enjoy them or are willing to give them a try are that uncommon). But for me and most other men, it's the idea that a woman would give herself to you in those ways that's a turn on. If it's clear she doesn't want to be there, all the sexiness vanishes.

Also, what about gay porn? From what I've seen, those films are just as rough and raunchy as het porn, maybe even more so, and they feature most of the same tropes. Is that stuff also produced for man-hating losers who can't hook up?
Posted by seandr on October 29, 2012 at 8:58 AM · Report this
nocutename 161
Speaking only for myself, a straight woman, I like all the things that alguna rubia mentions in post # 159 as things "the majority of women don't like." I like them a lot.

I don't presume to speak for any women other than myself, and I think that to do so is a bad idea for lots and lots of reasons.
Posted by nocutename on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM · Report this
162
Perhaps the porn I've watched is non-representative, but it seems to me that most of the misogyny is in the set up for the sex and how these "plot" points play out is not always overt during the "good parts". The problem is not the acts themselves but the meaning they are imbued with by the storyline.
Posted by How must a "hate fuck" be mechanically different? on October 29, 2012 at 11:26 AM · Report this
163
@159 & @160

I few years ago I dated a guy who really liked 'facials' (coming on a woman's face). I had never had a lover request that, so I thought why not try it?

What nobody tells you: come in your eye BURNS like hell. And then your eye gets all red and puffy like Pink Eye. Sounds fun, huh? Also, if you get come in your hair, that shit does not rinse out with water. You have to get in the shower and use shampoo. Or your solvent of choice.

Gentlemen, next time you are finished jerking off on stomach, reach down to your puddle of come, dip your finger in it and put it in the corner of your eye. Hopefully then you can understand why most women will pass on 'facials'.
Posted by albeit on October 29, 2012 at 10:18 PM · Report this
164
@163 even worse when you have contacts in and it gets under the contact (and you can't take out the contact because you still have to drive home...)
Posted by EricaP on October 30, 2012 at 12:13 AM · Report this
nocutename 165
@163, 164: I *do* ask them to direct their stream as best as possible towards my cheeks, chin, etc. as far from my eyes as possible, which I also squeeze close as he's about to come (I like this act, as I said, but I need more than the usual amount of cooperation to make it work to my satisfaction).

@albiet (163): yes, semen is really acidic, but do you think that is really the reason that so many women object to facials? I got the impression that they minded the act more theoretically, as something they see as degrading. Many women I know who won't allow them or claim to be upset by the thought of them haven't experienced them yet, and none have ever told me that they fear or dislike getting their eyes burned and stung. The objection that they tell me never mentions that very practical reason.
Posted by nocutename on October 30, 2012 at 3:39 AM · Report this
166
Dan characterizes porn as being made by and for guys who have no other sexual outlets. Otherwise he says all men watch porn.

Posted by Hunter78 on October 30, 2012 at 4:44 AM · Report this
167
Myd,

Why? Because I can admire a young woman's appearance while commenting on her unusual familial relationship?
Posted by Hunter78 on October 30, 2012 at 5:08 AM · Report this
168
@nocutename @165:

Semen burns in the eyes but it isn't acidic. Its pH is neutral to slightly alkaline.

Fun (or less fun) facts: The vaginal pH, on the other hand, is definitely acidic. If the pH in the vagina gets too high (= less acidic), risks for infections increase. If the sperm cells are at a low pH for too long (= acidic), they die.
Posted by migrationist on October 30, 2012 at 6:33 AM · Report this
nocutename 169
@168: Thanks for the info. I just assumed that the burning feeling meant that the foreign entity must be acidic!
Posted by nocutename on October 30, 2012 at 6:44 AM · Report this
170
@154 Erica P

Yikes. That sounds horrible. And uncomfortable.
Posted by albeit on October 30, 2012 at 9:32 AM · Report this
171
@165 Nocutename

I don't know. I've never talked to my friends about facials, so I don't know if they object because they find it degrading or misogynistic.

After my failed facial experiment, my boyfriend showed me some facial porn he thought was hot. First of all, I'm down with porn, but most of what I see is a total turn off. What's the opposite of a hard on? A hard off? So the facials he showed me just looked stupid and fake. And all the girls on their knees yelping and begging like a dog waiting for it's 'treat'. What a gross hard off.

But how are facials any more degrading than when I pee on my lover (in the bathtub of course)? Or when I sit on his face? These are both positions of power and submission.
Posted by albeit on October 30, 2012 at 9:45 AM · Report this
172
@115 I'm a girl. Also, try just watching the girls face in porn. Or listening to it without watching it. Not all guys seem to be able to tell when she's faking it. Women can easily tell, which is probably why you don't get as many female porn watchers. It's the vast vast majority of the time. Porn stars lie about this because they know they are more marketable if buyers believe they actually enjoy the work. It is rare (1/100?) that I find porn where the woman is actually into it. And I'm only watching amateur stuff so my odds should be better than that. Some women do seem to like the display aspect but even those tend not to get off. And the cunnilingus in porn generally is just godawful. Annoying as hell training high school boyfriends out of this bullshit. I've only run into one guy under twenty who seemed to know that's not what orgasming or even happy women look like. There is a lot of implicit anger in porn too (not talking violence, that can be fun). Gay porn (guy on guy) less angry, more tender in general. Which is weird, right?
Posted by gnot on October 30, 2012 at 10:09 AM · Report this
173
@172 re: gay porn (above): by that I'm not saying it's less extreme, less degrading or less hardcore. I'm saying that there just seems to be more, I don't know, respect? Equality? Everyone's in it for a good time? I don't know, it's subtle, but it's there. EricaP? Thoughts?
Posted by gnot on October 30, 2012 at 10:15 AM · Report this
174
@173 - It's also really really rare to see porn sex where the woman is truly in charge (I don't mean domming, just truly in charge, getting what she needs the way she needs it). Guess it doesn't sell well. But it should.
Posted by gnot on October 30, 2012 at 10:19 AM · Report this
175
seandr - maybe watch some porn with a female friend and have her translate for you? Tell you if the girl is cumming for real or not? Even more fun/accurate with lesbian friend!
Posted by gnot on October 30, 2012 at 10:21 AM · Report this
176
@172 gnot

I have found that in commercial porn the men look like Jersey Shore douchebags (GTL) and the women look like pneumatic drag queens. it's like taking a regular woman and giving her the 'monster truck' treatment: the most aggressive extreme of femininity. Maybe men subconsciously are turned on by the drag queen/she-male look? It's crazy cartoon-ish.

Neither of which I find sexy.
Posted by albeit on October 30, 2012 at 12:20 PM · Report this
177
@171 If the facials were in the context of dominance/submission porn, then being about power and submission wouldn't be an issue. But they're everywhere, in porn scenes that are presented as being about normal sex with no power/submission aspect at all.
Posted by Old Crow on October 30, 2012 at 12:54 PM · Report this
178
Albeit,

You get what you seek. Today you have a wide diversity of porn stars. Young, old, big, small, beautiful, plain, ugly, any race you want. You are what you watch.

Posted by Hunter78 on October 30, 2012 at 3:11 PM · Report this
179
@gnot, albeit, re porn -- I watch het porn as if it were a drag show, all camped up. Of course it's all fake (and much of it I can't watch), but when I find something fun, it's because they're just throwing themselves into the performance with exuberance. We play along at home and it's like being at a silly orgy.

Gay porn is much hotter, for me, but I'm not sure if that's because you lose the (goofy) women or have extra hard cocks. A little of both. And a lot of it is surprisingly friendly, yes, gnot @173, and shows how the het stuff is more about dominance and less friendly.
Posted by EricaP on October 30, 2012 at 3:16 PM · Report this
180
@171 - when you pee on your lover, yes, that is a degrading act. If you're into that, then fine. As a straight woman, I do not get the kink of humiliation and degradation. I just do not comprehend how that can be sexy in the least. So, yeah, facials are out. To me, face-sitting is a little more about power-play. And since I'm the dominant one, well, that suits me just fine.
Posted by sanguisuga on October 30, 2012 at 3:24 PM · Report this
181
Has anyone seen Caligula? I think it was made in 1977 or so.

It was so great to see normal bodies in the orgy scenes. No ink, pumped up, plastic surgery, just naked natural bodies. With full bush.

I remember thinking 'Wow. The naked body is so beautiful in it's natural state'.
Posted by albeit on October 30, 2012 at 4:31 PM · Report this
Roma 182
159/alguna_rubia: I think that it is true that some of the things that are extremely common in mainstream hetero porn are things that the majority of women don't like (the ones that come to mind immediately are the "face-fucking" oral sex tropes, hair-pulling during doggy style, and coming on the face).

161/nocutename: Speaking only for myself, a straight woman, I like all the things that alguna rubia mentions in post #159 as things "the majority of women don't like." I like them a lot.

nocutename, as you went on to note, you weren't presuming to speak for other women. I'd bet that, although you and some other women love those things, alguna is right; the majority of women don't like those things. If you're a guy who's really into, for example, coming on a woman's face and you meet a woman who not only tolerates it but loves it, you probably feel like you won the lottery.
Posted by Roma on October 30, 2012 at 6:03 PM · Report this
Roma 183
180/sanguisuga: As a straight woman, I do not get the kink of humiliation and degradation.

I'm a straight guy and that doesn't appeal to me either. I like dominance and submission, but more like dominance-lite and submission with 50% less humilies.
Posted by Roma on October 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM · Report this
184
@183 - Exactly. I might kneel to my lover because I want to give myself over to him, but if he says, "on your knees, bitch", well, the evening is over.
Posted by sanguisuga on October 30, 2012 at 7:48 PM · Report this
185
@171 sanguisuga

'when you pee on your lover, yes, that is a degrading act. If you're into that, then fine. As a straight woman, I do not get the kink of humiliation and degradation. I just do not comprehend how that can be sexy in the least.'

It's funny, I didn't feel like I was humiliating him. He asked me to pee on him after he told me how sexy it was. I had never done it before, but I could tell he was really into it. To me it's a harmless kink to explore and indulge.

But I agree with you, I'm into power play, but I am not into humiliation or degradation. That's not sexy. At all.

I would never get naked with a man with that as his modus operandi.
Posted by albeit on October 30, 2012 at 7:51 PM · Report this
seandr 186
@gnot: I'd be grateful for any insight lesbians have to offer. I wish I had some lesbian friends who would dish about women with me, the way gays and straight girls talk boys.

@migrationist: I watched about 30 minutes of that movie you suggested before I turned it off, curled into fetal position, and wept. Assuming that movie is representative of the San Fernando porn factory in general, I doubt any woman could possibly have an orgasm under any circumstance within a 3 mile radius of that city. Frankly, I'm shocked the men manage to pull it off.

@albeit: Read your story and thought, "Wait a minute, what's my wife doing in the Savage Love comments section?"
Posted by seandr on October 30, 2012 at 7:52 PM · Report this
187
@186 seandr

No doll, I'm not your wife.
Posted by albeit on October 30, 2012 at 9:41 PM · Report this
188
Humiliation comes under discipline in BDSM, not under dom/sub, as I understand it.
Posted by Eirene on October 30, 2012 at 10:44 PM · Report this
189
@seandr:
Sorry, I didn't want to disillusion you.

I just liked it because it was the least prejudiced (pro or con) view on the making of porn I had ever seen before.
Posted by migrationist on October 31, 2012 at 1:31 AM · Report this
seandr 190
@albeit: No doll, I'm not your wife.

I figured that out when you started talking about golden showers, which aren't my thing. The "come in the eye" story, on the other hand, could easily have been written by her.
Posted by seandr on October 31, 2012 at 10:54 PM · Report this
191
THIS IS A NON-ISSUE. AS A SMALL CHILD, MY TWO BROTHERS AND I OFTEN ENJOYED OUR FATHER'S EXTENSIVE ADULT-FILM COLLECTION. IN OUR FAMILY HOME, MY FATHER'S ADULT-FILM COLLECTION WAS ON FULL DISPLAY IN OUR DEN.

ADULT NUDITY SHOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM FOR SMALL CHILDREN. FALSE CLAIMS OF "pedophilia" IN THE MEDIA HAS "CLOUDED" THE ABILITY TO REASON IN THE MINDS OF "POLITICALLY-CORRECT" ADULTS.

CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON
Posted by CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON on November 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM · Report this
192 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy

Add a comment