« October 2006 | Main | December 2006 »
I had one of those inexplicable evenings where I had three (3!) men give me "Oh, baby!" comments in the five minutes it takes me to get home from my neighborhood coffee shop. What the...? I wasn't even particularly dressed up!
Until I can explain why this sort of thing happens, I probably have no business trying to give advice on sex and hookups.
Last night, I went on about nonmonogamy, but I didn't really talk about the last part of my reader's question: "How have the social constructs of sex and love impacted you, or your partners, if at all?"
To some degree, this entire blog is a response to this question. Social constructs of sex and love are so massively overlapping that it took me a very long time to separate them in my emotional landscape, and I was lucky enough to grow up in a liberated setting where it was never implied that you can only have sex with someone you love. Still, as we all know, there are a lot of social equations that influence how we think and act without realizing it, and our culture certainly has managed to conflate sex and love.
For a long time, it was easier for me to believe that one could feel love for multiple people than that one could lust after more than one person at a time. Now, is that the most ridiculous thing you've ever heard? Come on, there's so much evidence for people desiring multiple others simultaneously, both looking around my immediate environment and looking at media examples, both fictional and non. Where did that idea come from? I blame the ether.
The ideas about sex and love that I find most appealingly countered in nonomongamy center around possession and agency. In a traditional monogamous pairing, partners more or less belong to each other. The degree to which a partnership plays this out varies significantly, of course. For example, my cousin has been dating an incredibly possessive fellow for several years. He gets twitchy when she goes out with male friends, and he insists that if she dresses up and looks hot that she's trying to make him jealous (and, it appears, succeeding.) What she gets out of this clingy form of love, I have no fucking clue, but, then, I obviously prefer a freer version of commitment.
Even when I think I might like to be able to have more say over who my partner spends time with, I'm glad I've chosen a relational style that doesn't allow me to do so, because I don't actually want to be possessive, and this makes me look closely at those urges when I have them. And it also means that I have largely dismantled the idea that love and exclusivity prove each other. I'm sure there are ways to break out of the ownership frame while conducting a healthy monogamous relationship, but since I haven't done that, I don't know what those ways are. Any of y'all who have? Pipe up!
I came across a post or two in the archives where you mentioned the logistics of casual sex in tension with a committed relationship. This caught my eye since I've been dealing with that very issue a lot lately. I've been in a serious relationship with my girlfriend coming up on four years now. I'm nearly 22, and we've moved in together after years of commuting between nearby cities. Recently, we realized that we had never done much of anything, sexually, with other people. Were we missing out on anything? Were there vast secrets of sex which were entirely lost to our naive conceptions? With these considerations in mind, we decided to give one another leave to mess around with other people, because hey, we're open-minded and "hip," right? So that's been working out moderately well, we've explored a bit and learned things and had fun. Trouble is, we both seem to sometimes get the predictable instances of nagging jealousy. I know each of us, when hooking up with another person, is fully aware that it's in no way serious, emotionally - but as a third party to the transaction, it can be difficult conceiving of that hookup occurring, and what it means to one's own lingering competitiveness and possessiveness.I was wondering whether you had had any similar experiences, perhaps in the early stages of your ... casual sexperiment, as it were. Have you ever run up against these issues, or was it always an easy thing - I'm unattached, sex is fun, I'll go have some? How have the social constructs of sex and love impacted you, or your partners, if at all?
I love this set of questions, but, wow, what a can of worms! Fortunately, I'm not writing for a newspaper, so I can go on as long as I want, or until Law & Order distracts me too much.
First, you won't be surprised to hear that I think it's great that you've decided to check out what else is out there in the world of sexual experiences. A partnership based on affirmative choice is necessarily stronger than the same partnership chosen by default. Not to mention that there is something to be learned, technique-wise, from a variety of partners. For example, I learned to do this thing with my tongue recently that my past lovers will never get to enjoy. But I digress!
I hope, though, that you're not doing this because it's hip. Is nonmonogamy hip? I don't even know. There are plenty of good reasons to play with it, but that's not one of them. But you're a smart guy, so you know that, already.
Jealousy? This is obviously par for the course. As a rule, when I have a regular partner, I don't have any trouble with the partners they have in place when I enter the scene, but I frequently struggle with people who come on board after I do. If I could apply logic to my feelings, I would be able to say that the more clear my partner's commitment to me is, the less insecure I feel when my partner finds someone new. Unfortunately, this isn't the case, so I'm not going to tell you that since you and your girlfriend have a solid relationship and clear communication, this shouldn't be an issue for you. Are there ways to eliminate jealousy? If there are, I haven't found them.
I'm least likely to feel jealousy in very light relationships, obviously. The less invested I am, the less it matters if my lover has other things going, because I don't feel possessive of my time with him or my place in his life. I'm most likely to feel jealousy in a longer-term relationship that wants spicing up that I can't do, because that's something I can't do. I hate things I can't do for someone I love a lot.
Things that help me include talking to my partner and getting reassurance from him that he wants to be with me. That might mean spending extra time together or simply being sure that the time we spend together really "counts" (that is, doing whatever makes me or us feel connected, whether that's sex or reading to each other or working on house projects or walking in the woods or what-have-you.) This can be a good time to check our relationship for lazy spots (Do we spend a lot of our time together both of us IMing with other friends? Are we in a rut that's not taking us anywhere interesting?) and reaffirm our choice in being together. Or it might just be a time to have him hold my hand (or for me to hold his) and say, "Yes, this thing we're choosing to do is hard sometimes."
It may be useful to identify the details of what's happening. Rather than, "I'm jealous when you're out with him," you might examine more closely what's going on. Are you hanging out at home alone while she's out having fun? Do you spend a lot of time mooning over your new lover? What, specifically, gives you pause? I often find that focusing on the little things helps me work through my difficult feelings. After all, I'm not insecure about the big stuff, so even though jealousy feels big, it's often simply a reaction to small things.
There are a lot of things I love about being nonmonogamous, and I could go on and on about it, but far be it from me to suggest that it's the right thing for everyone, and jealousy is one of those things that just about everyone runs up against. That doesn't mean you're doing anything wrong, and the main thing I can suggest for dealing with it is to communicate clearly about what's happening.
Tomorrow, I'll talk about sex and love and how that relates to nonmonogamy for me.
Ahh, Thanksgiving! That wonderful little holiday that's so perfect for unplanned and unanticipated vacations. Sorry to have disappeared on you all, and I hope you were able to find other ways to entertain yourselves while I was offline.
I also hope you all had warm and happy Thanksgivings, including, I hope, plenty of fun and guilt-free sex! That's one of the best things to get out of a holiday, wouldn't you say?
Now that I'm back, I have a couple of backlogged questions to get to this week, including one on open relationships (Hello out there! I haven't forgotten you!) and one on why promising email contacts fall through. And somewhere in the midst of all that, I'll have to take some time to catch you all up on my latest, too.
I'll sign off with the entirety of an email I received in response to a recent ad:
"too many words... We just want to see pictures. Keep the talk between your girlfriends"
I think part of the reason it seemed relevant to share these chat logs is that I credit my friends witha lot of great knowledge, and, further, support. Once upon a time, I was a relatively uptight, corn-fed kind of girl who was accepting (but also a tad scornful) of people who had casual sex. "Oh, sure," I used to think, "that's fine for them, but I'll never do anything like that!" My transition from sweet, innocent girl-next-door to internet sex blogging slut-next-door would have been a hell of a lot harder if my friends weren't so damn awesome.
Not to mention that a) I often learn something new from my friends and b) these conversations are hot!
jen: or are we talking abouut sex?
cluechick: mmmm, sex
cluechick: we WERE talking about sex earlier
jen: sure, talk about sex while I'm in class ;)
cluechick: we can talk about it now, too! we were discussing favorite positions
jen: I'm lame about that, though. I *heart* being on the bottom.
cluechick: that's not lame
cluechick: my favorite positions are missionary and on my stomach
cluechick: though I have some novelty favorites thanks to mr. vacation fling
babs: hear hear! (for missionary and stomach)
cluechick: and I think I'd like being on top more if I had something above my head to hold onto
jen: I like missionary. And I like variants, like legs to shoulders
cluechick: *grin*
babs: mm, yeah
cluechick: jen, have you met arthur?
jen: once or twice!
babs: heh
cluechick: okay, so I don't need to introduce you, then? :)
jen: although oddly, he's never offered to put my knees by my ears and see what happens.
cluechick: I bet he will now!
babs: i'm sure he will!
kitty: stomach legs open, or stomach legs closed? :)
jen: only closed seems to work for me.
cluechick: I like both, with extra thumbs up for closed
babs: yeah, closed
jen: If I want to come, me on top or him on his side, with me across him with my hips facing the ceiling.
* cluechick tries to picture the latter
kitty: those are both lovely :)
cluechick: I don't think I've done that
kitty: and the latter is great for toys and hands and such
jen: yeah, there is total unfettered clit access.
kitty: mmmmhmm :)
cluechick: I may need someone to demonstrate this. I just can't picture it :)
kitty: ok!
jen: me, me!
jen: so the guy lies on his side, like he was going to spoon you.
jen: in fact, if you start spooning, and then you rotate onto your back, you're pretty much there.
jen: your legs go over his
kitty: well, one leg sorta goes over his side
cluechick: okay, I can picture it, now, but I still want a demonstration
babs: he stays on his side?
kitty: yep
babs: doesn't his top leg get in the way?
kitty: no, it's under your other leg
kitty: his legs are together
jen: no, both your legs go over him.
babs: oh, so your body is perpendicular to his?
jen: depending on geometry, sometimes you need to move so you're closer to perpendicular
kitty: babs, yeah, pretty much
babs: kind of on top facing feet, but then fallen over
kitty: depends how flexible i'm feeling :)
kitty: babs, yeah
kitty: or on top facing sideways and fallen over, really
arthur: okay that warrants trying
arthur: though I may need a diagram :)
jen: come over here.
arthur: woot!
kitty: *grins*
cluechick: *laugh*
cluechick: arthur, you've met jen? ;)
jen: your wife was just alleging you'd offer to put my knees up by my ears and see what happened!
arthur: she wasn't alleging she was avering
cluechick: *laugh*
arthur: and speaking of backscroll, reverse cow-girl is also quite nice
kitty: yeah, i've never been very into it
cluechick: that's woman on top facing feet?
arthur: yeah
jen: that was the first way I ever got myself off during piv.
cluechick: I've never tried it
arthur: especially if the woman leans forward just a smidge, rubs everything just right
cluechick: I did, however, like it when he sat cross legged on the floor and then I sat on him, facing him
cluechick: I could have done that for a looong time. did, in fact.
arthur: mmmmm that is nice
arthur: or sitting on the edge of the bed so you can use your legs more
babs: yeah, i like that. it's hot, but doesn't go as deep
babs: so missionary still wins :-)
cluechick: *grin*
jen: knees to shoulders.
jen: *nod*
babs: *sigh* yeah
cluechick: in part, my preference between missionary and on my stomach depends on my mood: sometimes, it's essential to see his face
jen: yeah, definitely.
jen: I used to be categorically opposed to positions where I couldn't see my partner
babs: really?
jen: it used to freak me out.
babs: Seeing is nice, but not at all necessary for me
cluechick: I do keep talking about getting a mirror, so we can do other positions and still see each other
jen: I slept with an artist once
jen: and he spent the whole time with his chin tucked to his chest, watchign himself fuck me.
babs: *laugh*
babs: "hello! over here!"
jen: it was actually kinda hot.
cluechick: *laugh*
cluechick: I can really enjoy a guy watching the action, but not if that's ALL he looks at
cluechick: unless I'm sucking his cock. he can watch that as long as he wants :)
cluechick: fuck, I'm horny
jen: meeeeee toooooooooo
babs: watching action and looking at you at the same time!
babs: that explains why sucking cock is the best thing ever *nods*
cluechick: totally
cluechick: well, that and fucking
Tonight, and tomorrow, I'm taking the extremely easy out of posting excerpts from a very entertaining chat I had with a bunch of friends this afternoon. I'm going to put the main part of the post behind a jump for a change, because it's rather long. I have no idea if this will be interesting for you all to read, but if nothing else, I'm keeping myself entertained here!
cluechick: we were just talking about fucking
mitte: oh!
cluechick: okay, favorite positions?
mitte: depends strongly on my partner and our, er, compatibility.
cluechick: *grin* I agree that partner makes a difference, but I've yet to find someone with whom missionary and me-on-my-stomach aren't the top two
arthur: for me, it's from behind with my partner either laying down or on their knees with their head on the bed
cluechick: mmm
arthur: or on their back with their knees up by thier ears and their ankles on my shoulders
cluechick: arthur: ah, another good one :)
mitte: arthur: good choices. :)
cluechick: I've only rarely done it me on top, and I did with the pathologically virile vacation fling, and it made me think I might enjoy it more if I got a bar over my bed that I could use for leverage
mitte: Me on top is usually enjoyable, but mostly for emotional-type reasons
cluechick: mitte: ah, interesting
cluechick: I really loved the one where he lifted me up and we fucked standing, but that's more a novelty position :)
arthur: that is totally hot
arthur: and I so don't have the upper body strength for that
cluechick: thus the novelty aspect of it -- it's not the sort of thing I can expect to be a regular activity
mitte: Don't knock novelty. Novelty is hot.
cluechick: hey, I'm all over novelty, as we know
arthur: what about sex with one person on the bathroom vanity? or laying on the dining room table?
cluechick: I don't think our dining room table would be up for that
* cluechick makes a note to try that one next time she's visiting arthur
moby: Oh, I really like the standing thing.
mitte: I like the rough-and-tumble aspect of it. :)
cluechick: mm, rough and tumble
mitte: (surprising approximately nobody)
moby: I am amazed at how much I like fucking a partner who's lying flat facedown.
arthur: oh, yeah, especially when I can kneel over them
cluechick: yeah, the first time I had sex that way, I was taken by surprise by how awesome it was. everyone talks about doggy style, but lying down is... mmmmm
evan: one of my faves :)
evan: i remember introducing that to another partner. "Holy crap that was fun!"
moby: cluechick: exactly! *so* much better than doggy.
cluechick: does it even have a name? it really should
mitte: "Mmmfmffmmmmmph!"
moby: the Unspeakably Hot.
moby: the Lie Still If You Know What's Good For you.
cluechick: yeah, that
arthur: reverse-missionary?
* evan thinks the oversharing light may be on a bit.
arthur: never
evan: arthur: i've noticed your oversharing light has a short in it...it doesn't seem to go on as often as i'd think..
* evan taps the light.
cluechick: oh, wait, that's supposed to go ON?
* arthur 's light fizzles briefly then goes back off
moby: you're doing it with the lights out? talk about kinky!
mitte: wait, I'm confused. I blame horniness.
cluechick: *laugh*
moby: poor mitte!
cluechick: that's just terrible
* mitte is feeling faint
cluechick: here, let me help you
mitte: I'm fading! I'm fading! Quick, someone get me a handjob before --
mitte: *poof*
* cluechick tucks her arm under mitte's shoulders
cluechick: *laugh*
cluechick: wow, right for the handjob, eh?
mitte: One of those days.
cluechick: and here I was going to start with kissing
harry: Okay, this is going to sound odd, but I can't recall ever getting off from someone else giving me a handjob.
cluechick: I've only ever gotten a guy off with a handjob once. it was fine, but I'd rather use an orifice
cluechick: oh, sorry, twice, and one was a matter of necessity: I *would have* fucked him or given him a blow job, but I was really tired
arthur: depends on my mood and how long it's been
arthur: I prefer the kind of handjobs that involve mouths :)
harry: arthur: Those are blowjobs from what I recall :)
cluechick: I was gonna say
moby: my favorite kind of blowjob involves plenty of mouth *and* hand work.
moby: so there's a certain amount of overlap.
evan: okay, i just had the image of going "arthur, umm. for the record... *pulls down roll-up display in front of classroom, gets out pointer* *points to hand* *points to cock* "Handjob." *points to mouth, points to cock* "Blowjob."
evan: "Any questions?"
moby: "we need a lab, prof!"
arthur: I always did like the lab classes
* arthur makes a note to dig out the lab coat and goggles
cluechick: not goggles, blindfolds!
arthur: I like to see what I'm doing though...
wendy: or who
Listen, fellas, I know there are young women out there who really like the daddy thing. And I suppose that just because I'm 30 and you're 55 doesn't necessarily mean that I won't want to fuck you. What does mean that I won't be interested in your 55 year old ass is the fact that not only is it too old for me, but it (and the rest of you) didn't read the part of my profile that states, "I'm only interested in guys who are around my age."
By emailing me, you show yourself to be the skeevy older guy who thinks he's "young at heart" or "looks 20 years younger" but who, in fact, is obviously incapable of reading a profile before responding to it, which does not bode well for your ability to listen to me when I talk about other things that are important to me in a relationship, even a casual one. Furthermore, it grosses me the fuck out when you suggest that we could take advantage of the age difference to play "daddy daughter games."
Your kink is okay, but it is so far from my kink that my sex drive is cowering in the corner at the mere mention of it. Again, if you had read my profile, it might have been easy to read between the lines and understand that I'm not the woman of your dreams.
Plus, frankly, you look insanely desperate when you email someone so obviously unlikely to be interested in you. And we all know desperation is never hot.
You know what's great? Fucking. Yeah, okay, it's not a revelatory statement, but fucking is goddamn awesome.
Pretty much everything about fucking is pretty great, too. There's the flirting, the teasing, the hinting, the batting-of-eyelashes and all that fun stuff that leads up to fucking. And then there's the full-body-contact, rubbing up against each other, getting-it-on of the actual fucking. And, then, as if that weren't enough, there's the sweet drifting down afterwards, which is when I'm always most tempted to say something that will embarrass me when I've recovered my wits, but it's also when I'm most likely to say what I'm feeling without running it by the censor, first. (Yes, no doubt these things are related.)
But, really, a day with some fucking in it is a day that's worth having. A bad day + fucking = hey, at least I got laid. A good day + fucking = really fucking awesome!
Yes, I think I'll have more fucking, please.
Well, then! I will certainly give someone a blowjob in celebration of the hopeful turn of yesterday's election. But first, I need to have some anal sex to mark my specific celebration with regards to Mr. Santorum of PA. (For those of you who don't understand the link, click here.
But I now return to my regular night job of dispensing opinions, advice and all-out snarking:
While in a local bar the other night I found myself flirting with my waitress. She seemed to welcome it - lingering at my table, holding conversation beyond "what do you want to drink next", etc. What suprised me was that she actually made physical contact with me - touched my shoulder when asking if I needed another beer, and leaned up against me lightly to point me in the direction of the bathrooms.So I have two questions: one, was this a sign that I should have left her my phone number (I didn't, though I left a nice tip), and two, is trying to pick up your waitress extra-gauche?
I'll start by saying I've never waited tables, so I could totally blow this one. I encourage any women who have direct experience here to weigh in.
But! Yes, you should have left her your phone number. If you ask me (and you did), it's never gauche to pick up a woman who's clearly flirting with you. (Okay, that's not true if it's, say, your best friend's fiance the night before the wedding and she's really drunk and they haven't talked about it first, but let's consider most reasonable examples, here, shall we?) As long as you, personally, are not skeevy (and if you are, she's probably not flirting with you), you're in good shape. Also, leaving your phone number is extremely low-key as come-ons go.
In fact, my first thought here is that, well, of course you should leave your number! But because women are often used to being the pursued rather than taking the initiative, if you actually want something to happen, you might do better to ask for her number. But, really, if she's flirting that much, she ought to be able to pick up the damn phone herself, right?
So, now I have an assignment for you: go back to the bar, flirt with her, leave your number, and report back, 'k?
Good morning! It's election day!
In order to encourage you all to vote, I'm initiating a new incentive program: oral sex for votes!
Okay, maybe not... well, some of you qualify, certainly, but in all seriousness: get out there and vote. It's the thing to do. And it definitely gets you a CC point. Collect ten and we can talk about the oral sex offer!
Sometimes, I don't know how I resist:
Hi sexy Girl,here is a German Boygroup,with STRONG Hard COCKS for your HOT HOLES.We see the Fantastic BODY and must Contact You.In your City we can meet us,You Test the BIG COCKS and we have a Great SEXACTION.We like to FUCK You...
Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked "female". -Erin McKean
This quote floated across my computer screen recently, and I had to bring it here, because beauty continues to be a major bugaboo for our society and individuals in it, especially (but not exclusively) women.
I like to look good. I like to put on a swingy skirt and a velvety shirt and go out and flirt with strangers. I also like to put on a frumpy, cozy robe, curl up on the sofa and drink hot tea. I like to feel good, and to be able to wear what suits my mood. And if I want to wear something frumpy out of the house, too, then by gosh, that's what I'm going to do.
As a woman who has a lot of sex, and for whom the dance around sex is a big part of life, I'm often all too aware of social expectations about female beauty, and, in particular, about the impossibility of meeting those standards. Don't wear makeup and some people will think you're lazy and don't care about your looks. Do wear makeup and other people will say you're asking to be hit on.
I even like to be hit on, if it's done in a way that doesn't seem presumptuous or intrusive. A polite opener? Good. A hand on my ass? Bad!
It's all tied up with the ingrained idea of women as objects, and as such, as needing to satisfy the consumer's gaze. All of this has been said before and by more eloquent people than I, so I'll leave it at that, and thank Erin McKean for her well stated post.
Do you ever wish you could watch yourself having sex? Oh, sure, I know lots of people do the home video thing, but I'm most interested, actually, in seeing if my face is actually as expressive when I'm fucking as it feels like it is. Sometimes, when my lover has his fingers inside me and is watching my face, I feel like he can see all the way to a me that I barely know, who only comes out (pun intended) when my conscious mind is distracted by the all-consuming job of saying, "Oooooh, yeeeahhh!"
What, if anything, would I learn about myself if I could see that? Maybe nothing. But I know my lovers reveal something to me when I watch their faces while we fuck, and I don't doubt that the ones who pay attention get a glimpse of something from where they are, too.
I wonder if seeing myself in a camera would be the same, or if it's a matter of being in the moment, sharing that eye contact, opening up -- almost involuntarily -- to the immediacy of the experience?
Today, I address a question from a reader, which I got ages ago and just rediscovered:
Should a guy just listen, or try to solve the his girl's problems?
My friends joke about "male answer syndrome," which is what happens when they talk to their boyfriends about a problem and the boyfriend immediately starts offering solutions, even if they're just looking to vent.
I've seen this pattern repeat itself irrespective of gender, though, so let's broaden out the question a bit. This isn't just a matter of how a guy should be with his girlfriend's problems, but how people, in general, can be helpful to each other.
First, if you have a problem, you can help yourself by being clear on whether you're looking for sympathy or suggestions. I'm often looking for sympathy and rarely for suggestions, personally, and I can save myself the aggravation of unwanted advice if I start the conversation with, "I just need to vent." That way, I figure I'm perfectly justified in biting the head off the imprudent person who tries to tell me what to do!
But many people don't do that. So, say you have a lover who's talking about an issue. What should you do? I suggest a clarifying question: "Are you looking for ideas or advice, or just a listening ear?" That's really the only way to know what the right approach is. Save this question for later, too, because the answer will be different in future conversations, as well.
Sadly, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. If only life were so easy. Of course, then I'd be complaining about it being dull.
