We are increasingly becoming sensitive to what we say for fear of offending others. For that reason, it’s oftentimes risky to tell the truth. Though it shouldn’t, this truthful post will undoubtedly offend certain visitors starting with this personal observation: The personnel of the New York Times is, unlike, let’s say, The Wall Street Journal, both great newspapers which I read daily. It is an intentionally designed diversity one staffed by heterosexual and homosexual males and females, male and female feminists, many of them politically to the left liberals and a variety of ethnic and racial backgrounds. Conservative men and women are simply either not there or deprived of their computers.
The Times has energetically led a crusade for women’s rights including rights to their bodies and abortion. It has successfully played a visible role in bringing about the homosexual marriage movement and the awareness of the transgender issue and the need to address it. Regarding the military, it has and continues to support the integration of females into the Armed Services even to the level of combat Marines. Regarding military sexual assaults, it has launched a major coverage effort almost always, either indirectly or directly, supporting the female position as victims ignoring data which clearly point out that females are frequently the perpetrators on females and males on males. And that’s another story for a future post.
In its efforts, the Times generally takes the woman’s side on many issues.
But, believe it or not, here’s what pleases me: The Times coverage of sex issues does support the concept of the Brain Genital Law or BGL! The BGL means that the brain, in order to insure sufficient copulation which is necessary to propagate the race, has a huge and broad reservoir of ways to stimulate the human sexual drive from straight sex to sodomy to snuff movies, all of which are natural phenomena. All cultures, however, have recognized that it’s necessary to regulate the free expression of the BGL because of the destabilizing effect on societies of sex gone wild. A couple, for example, cannot copulate on the street of Broadway even if Mayor DeBlasio is for it! (Or can they)?
But, here’s what really piques my interest: Based on the Supreme Court’s preliminary decision supporting homosexual marriage, polygamy will inevitably arise on its future agenda of increasingly complex, tough to handle, social issues. Now historically polygamy has been and remains common in many cultures whereas homosexual marriage is a rarity, if not absent. If the Times is to remain consistent, it will strongly support the right of men to have multiple wives. Right? I think not for the feminist element of the Times, supported by the powerful male and female feminist elements in our universities, almost assuredly believe that polygamy demeans women despite history’s broad acceptance of it as, which it is, a natural, sexual relationship.
But, if I were a supporter of polygamy and sought to have the Supreme Court sanction it, I would, instead, first present to the justices a case on the legalization of polyandry- the right of a woman to have multiple husbands. This would be very consistent with the Times push for women’s rights and should gain its support. What do you think?
Ladies and gentlemen, hold on to your hats. The general deregulation of the BGL is well on its way and, if the Supreme Court is consistent, polygamy and polyandry may soon be with us. But the Supreme Court is often inconsistent on social matters influenced not by the Constitution or long-held accepted law, but by the attitudes and American values at a point in time. G and I believe that this will cause a much greater uproar than homosexual marriage. One thing is for sure: Emotion, and not reason, will be the driving force behind the polygamy-polyandry debate including coverage by the New York Times.
What I’m hoping for is that the controversy will finally lead to a rational, national discussion on the sexual revolution and the BGL and what are acceptable groundrules to accommodate the universal quest for orgasms.
Over the years I’ve met and counseled dozens of high school students many of whom are now making more money than I! A couple of days ago I met two of my male and a female “alumni” who are now seniors at three highly regarded universities. For some reason, our conversation turned to the subject of hookingup. It was a learning experience for me, indeed, including the enrichment of my English vocabulary. For example, I now know the meanings of “Friends with benefits” and “Fucking buddies.” The guys had such friends and buddies but the lady did not. I had no reason to doubt their honesty. Bottom line and ostensibly so, hookingup means having sex and orgasms without any other ties, emotional or otherwise. It is becoming increasingly prevalent on university campuses.
Piqued by another “innovative “category of our sexual liberation movement, I decided to do some heavy hookingup homework. Though it is a recent phenomenon, I was surprised to discover that there are some credible surveys (many on sex are not nearly so) characterizing what’s going on. One finding which got me thinking is that this type of sex is trending to oral and anal sex rather than vaginal penetration. Frankly speaking, I’m stumped and would welcome any credible thoughts on the dynamics of this pattern.
I just read a well written review article, In Hookups, Inequality Still Reigns, in, would you believe, the Science Section of the New York Times authored by Natalie Kitroeff. It’s about orgasms! She begins by quoting the frustrations of a young lady who bemoaned the fact that her male “fucking buddy” falls asleep after ejaculation before paying attention to her orgasmic needs. It surprised me that she was surprised. After all, this is what lots of men do.
Ms. Kitroeff, reports on two surveys. The first, led by Justin R. Garcia at Indiana University and researchers at Binghamton University, was conducted on 600 college students. They reported that women were twice as much likely to reach orgasm from vaginal or oral intercourse during serious male- female relationships than in hookup ones.
In the second survey of 24,000 students, it was reported that, during their last hookup, men have twice as many orgasms than women. In contrast, the ladies had far more orgasms in a committed relationship than a hookingup one. This survey lends support to the above mentioned study that the hooked-up clitoris is no match to the hooked-up penis when it comes to orgasms.
I believe that I can safely assume that the vast majority of oldtimer, pre-sexual liberation men and women would not be surprised at the conclusions of these surveys. It is what the wise Catholic theologian, Thomas Aquinas, termed as a “self-evident truth.” But, however, I did momentarily wonder that maybe times had changed. With our rapidly embracing of socially acceptable liberating sex values coupled with modern technology that increasingly allows for safe sex , women might have indeed changed and become more men-like regarding the biologic quest for orgasms.
In two previous posts, I concluded that – now listen to this!- women are different than men when it comes to sex! This was impressively expressed by Robyn, the simpatica waitress at my local Italian restaurant, when she, regarding the differences in volume sex between the sexes, exclaimed, “It’s women. It’s expectations. Women have greater expectations!”. Women view it on a higher emotional level. Another survey reported that women who cheat on their husbands do so because they feel “more appreciated” with their lovers.
I’d like to make a personal observation with respect to marriage and other long-term relationships: Hookingup for both men and women is a training ground for divorce as well as the breakdown of non- marriage long term, man-women cohabitation. It becomes a kind of habit and makes it psychologically easier to cheat.
And cheating will, in a number of ways, lead to great, insupportable emotional stress for both men and women resulting into permanent separation in many. That’s a “self-evident truth.”
Most kissing has nothing to do with sex. Its application ranges from a good morning and family friend greetings and goodbyes to encounters among diplomats. Depending on the circumstances, it’s an expression of love, recognition, respect, support and a reminder of the value of relationships. French kissing is not permitted!
Here’s a riddle for you: There is an annual event at Stanford University where the freshman are obligated to kiss the upper class students at the command of the latter. Make no doubt about it- the air is not scented with perfume but with spirits of the liquid kind. Is this a ritual of sex or student camaraderie?
It is believed that the kiss originated in India. When Alexander the Great conquered India and was eating lamb in Punjab, he saw lots of kissing going on. He liked it so much that he took the custom back to Greece where it was accepted. But it was the Romans who went bananas over kissing and spread the custom throughout the empire eventually taking root in the Western world. It is also mentioned in the Song of Songs in the Old Testament: “May he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth.”
It’s puzzling, as with many things sex related, there are very few good clinical studies evaluating the nature of kissing. Jan Hoffman wrote an interesting column in the New York Times about a survey conducted at Oxford University on hundreds of men and women who were asked about their feelings on kissing in romantic relationships. One controversial finding was that kissing does not play a significant role in stimulating sexual arousal and vice versa. Another major finding was that most consider kissing as more important in maintaining relationships and happiness, as mentioned above, than in the act of sex. I would agree with the latter.
I called G, my friend who kissed at least 300 women before and during the act of sex, to get his take on the study. Much to my surprise he wasn’t surprised at all. “Like many studies, the interpretation of the results regarding the act of sex are misleading. Please take note that not everyone in the study said that kissing was not involved in sexual arousal but only the majority. As I mentioned in the book, most men and women are not great at kissing and have not developed it as a sophisticated act of arousing their partners. That’s one reason why those surveyed in the study did not rate it high in sexual arousal. Most were not good kissers!”
“I hate to interrupt you, my friend, but if there are no good studies on the subject, how do you know that men and women are not good kissers?”
“From my personal experience and my survey. Most of my lady friends were not good kissers, and I had to take time with them and coach them to get it right. And, believe it or not, it worked most of the time which is very encouraging news for it’s a quick learn. Men and women should take note. Also, during my conversations with the ladies, when the subject came up- and it frequently did- most of them complained that men were not good kissers. Bad kissing up front is a big sexual downer. If I remember correctly, there was a Gallop Poll which reported that the majority of men and women are sexually turned off by bad up-front kisses which confirms my personal experiences.
“Lorenzo, as I explained in the book, a kiss is a very sophisticated act and is not isolated to lips on lips or tongues on tongues contact only. It must be harmonize with other physical and verbal acts. Before I forget, I’m talking about high level sex where the artful kiss is, without question, the essential bridge from prolonged foreplay to prolonged and high level copulation.”
“G, did I get you right? Did you say that it doesn’t take a great effort to teach somebody to kiss properly?”
“You’ve got it half right. I taught women- not men! I just don’t know about the latter. Lorenzo, I mentioned before in one of your interviews, someone who really knows about the art of love-making should start a school.”
“G, anything else before we call it a day?”
He paused and then laughed heartily. “I’m a little pissed off at myself. In one of your previous post you mention that the dynamic Italian poet lover, Gabriele D’Annunzio, ‘fondled eyelids with his tongue’ which drove the women crazy. That’s something I didn’t do and beg pardon from all my lady friends for this unforgiveable omission.”