Showing posts with label sex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

job posting of the day, or "girl 6"?

Actor/Actress
You could be working for the largest telecommunications company in the world! Do you have a charming voice? Do you love chit chat? If so, you may be the perfect candidate for telephone acting! You MUST have an open mind and a very charming voice!

It goes on, but really, by this point it's just about said it all. Or rather, it's said much more without explicitly saying it than much else in the job description ads to. A quick google of the company.com referred to in the posting* discloses that yes, indeed, it is phone sex. So how much does phone sex pay these days? "$15+ per hour. (hourly rate plus bonuses)" Man, I don't even WANT to know what the bonuses are for.

*It probably goes without saying, but I'll say it anyhow because it's so important: For any job search, always, always google the company if a company name is given and if not, google what you can get from the posting.

Sunday, March 09, 2008

break

It's break here. My fella says since he's on break he may just start randomly flashing people. I told him if he starts doing this, he'll also have to adopt other pop culture spring break behaviors like grabbing whichever same sex friend is nearby and making out if someone trains a camera on him. (If he were to wear chaps while doing this, we'd know we had entered an evil alternate dimension)

Flashing and other popcusexual* shenanigans aside, I think we'll be having a pretty tame and lame break. He's got a paper rewrite deadline on Saturday and I've got hey, what else is new....job searching, grading, and doctors' appointments. Oh yeah kids. Hold onto your hats (and lunch) - it's Spring Break, grad student style!

* = Popcusexual. N, Adj. /pȯp-kyü-sek-shə-wəl/ (only because the more morphologically transparent /pȯp-kə-sek-shə-wəl/ seems a bit anemic - although the usage board is divided on which is preferred). Apparent sexual orientation and/or preferences primarily determined by believed appeal to a pop culture audience. Also, popcusexuality.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

brain scramble

My head's scrambly this evening. I'm blaming the weather. And undergrads.

I opened my email inbox just now and scanned quickly, as I often do. This was the most recent email's subject:
perfectly crafted exclusive
watches rolex
And my brain filled in something about "crotches" and "wax". Exactly what is gone now, obliterated by a real actual reading of the subject line (a sort of literate double take).

I know my unconscious choice of top down to make intelligible the set of scrambled letters could indicate I'm a perv. In my defense, the subject lines in spam (which my inbox is full of courtesy of the university's hideous spam filter) do make those words contextually probable.

Sunday, October 14, 2007

"how deep?"

This is the line on the flash Ford advertisement open in another tab of my browser. If I can, I'll post a shot of it. Until then, here's my description.

The picture this phrase accompanies is of a craggy looking man, close up on his face. In the gauzily focused background, there's a large black pickup, bed open, holding a very large, complex looking motor (there's shiny metal, dull metal, propellers, and even wood involved). The craggy man's face is creased extra hard with barely held in emotion. His mouth is making a begrudgingly appreciative flat smile, clefted chin straining to push that curve back into something more appropriately masculine. The overall effect is something which suggests judicious satisfaction. Mere inches from his face, a disembodied hand (presumably his) holds a very large metal bolt. The bolt is not shiny. It's dull with a bit of sheen on the head. It is perched delicately on the man's fingertips, glinting head about level with his creased brow, the base of the bolt disappearing down out of the frame (along with the rest of the hand which holds it). It is a large bolt.

The man is considering this bolt. The posture of him and position of the bolt inform us that he has been inspecting it and by the look on his face, we can conclude that he has found it to be satisfactory.
And now he is still standing there, struck by the imminently satisfying looking bolt, wondering "just how deep does it go?"


Update: Here it is. A screen shot of the craggy man pondering his bolt.


That is so Brokeback Mountain.

Sunday, May 06, 2007

A diamond is disgusting

I think I just vomited in my mouth.

I was reading this article on a town in Massachusetts where a proposal has been made to double the excise tax on SUVs (which makes me chuckle) and I noticed an ad for a diamond seller/jeweler.

Around mother's day and valentine's day, all jewelers are diamond peddlers. One of these days I am going to make that diamond ad parody for the station, I swear.

For now I'll suffer with choking down the bile when I see something like this ad, which has text which starts with "This mother's day..." under a picture of a man being kissed on the lips by a woman. The man's head is the main focus of the frame with the woman who is planting one on him barely making it into the shot. We can see all of his big head but only the important part of hers (her face) as she holds the man's face in her manicured hands (no pigment in that polish though). That was enough to get the stomach churning. What launched it was the trademarked logo under the company name: "Every kiss begins with _____"
(where ______ is the name of the jewelry/diamond company)

Every on the closed lips oedipal kiss might indeed begin with them, however my completely non-oedipal smooches are non of their fucking business and began with a desire for human intimacy. Not feminine decoration bestowed on me by a man.

Friday, May 04, 2007

designer baby?

Another one from Reverse Paranoia. Or rather through. While looking up her link to the "rump presentation" story on the BBC online, I found this one.

Early baby sex test over the web baby gender

A test is being sold on the internet that enables parents to check the sex of their unborn baby at just six weeks.

The kit, sold by DNA Worldwide for £189, is controversial. Critics claim it may prompt parents to abort if they are unhappy with the test result.

The company rejected these claims, saying the early results, obtained from a finger-prick of blood, allow parents more time to plan for their baby.

Michaela Aston of the pro-life charity LIFE ...rejected the notion that the test would allow parents more time to plan for their baby's arrival, arguing that the needs of baby boys and girls were identical.

The saying "Even a broken clock is right twice a day" comes to mind regarding that last line.

It just kills me that the company could even think that the justification of needing more time to plan for the sex of a baby would wash with anyone. I mean, obviously they suck, but consider what it says about the public that the company (a) exists and (b) could use this defense for their existence.

They're exploiting an attitude which is already prevalent. Granted, they are probably stretching it a bit - I mean even if some loser is planning on having extremely gendered baby gear, does she really need to have it 1 and 1/2 months into her pregnancy when she's not even sure if her body's going to keep the little womb-booger or not?


Oh, relatedly - I just ran across the nursery rhyme "Monday's child..." (elsewhere but here's a non-obnoxious link). Perhaps intolerant gay hating would be parents should try to postpone delivery to after Sunday since according to the rhyme, Sunday's child is bonny and blithe and good and gay.

Destined to be "good and gay"? Check here.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Shameless

A website I visit frequenly has an annoying ad on it. It's for a drink being promoted by a chain coffee shop. The tag line is "Snack Shamelessly" and it features the drink being held up close to the viewer by a rather young and wholesome looking young woman who is smiling around her finger, which is stuck in her mouth.

It's the pinky finger.
Because she's dainty and wholesome.

What's amusing, ok well one thing that is amusing, is that when I first read the logo, I read it as "Smack shamelessly". Which to me made somewhat more sense with the young lady presumably having made such a mess that she has to suck it off her fingers, you know, noisily, because it's so yummy and you want to get all of it, even that bit that dripped down the side. Turns out it's just another annoying reference to weight and food guilt. Complete with a sexualized image.

Here's this wholesome young lady who has finally found a guilt free way to enjoy herself. She's snacking so shamelessly on her topical fruit smoothie that she's thrown all decorum to the wind and is sucking her own fingers. Has the smoothie aroused some hidden lust demon in her?

I suppose we should be thankful this shameless hussy still has the decency to suck on a doughnut shop straw and her own finger rather than channel her shameless decadence into other sucking activities.

Update: It now also has text that says "I feel so good. Do you?" This is so close to "was it good for you" that I want to punch the monitor. What's super odd is that the food guilt supposition seems so very female targeted yet this written message is very stereotypically heterosexually male focused. Oh wait! I think I have it. Maybe it's the smoothie who is stating that it feels good and asking the woman if it was good for her too. Silly me attributing animism and agenthood to the female in an ad. Shoulda known the smoothie was doing the talking. I mean, of course that chick can't talk - what with her finger stuck in her mouth and all.

Friday, April 13, 2007

C is for...

...CONDOM

CDC says gonorrhea is drug-resistant
ATLANTA - The sexually transmitted disease gonorrhea is now among the "superbugs" resistant to common antibiotics, leading U.S. health officials to recommend wider use of a different class of drugs to avert a public health crisis.
...
"Gonorrhea has now joined the list of other superbugs for which treatment options have become dangerously few," said Dr. Henry Masur, president of the Infectious Disease Society of America. "To make a bad problem even worse, we're also seeing a decline in the development of new antibiotics to treat these infections."

The CDC made the new recommendation after discovering that nearly 7 percent of gonorrhea cases among heterosexual men in a survey of 26 U.S. cities last year were drug-resistant. In 2001, only about 0.6 percent of gonorrhea cases among heterosexual men were drug-resistant.

"That leaves us with a single class of highly effective antibiotics," said Dr. John Douglas Jr., director of the CDC's division of STD prevention. Other experts called the situation perilous.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

More junk

Had a visit with the GYN today. Not trying to get preggers, I just don't need endo-mess on top of trying to manage being tired, achey, underweight, and poopy most of the time.

At the moment, it seems it's possible the endo has gotten into my ligaments and such. Endometriosis means endometrial tissue has habit of "extending into places where it shouldn't". This is fucking painful but is also potentially more problematic - i.e. all those hip problems I had? They happen to be on the same side that has the most pelvic pain too, and oh let me tell you when the doctor was rummaging around in there it hurt like crazy on that side. "That's your uterosacral ligament" he said.

I guess ultrasounds don't image this shit well. That's the really shitty part about endometriosis. Usually there's no imaging of it, confirmation of diagnosis, or localizing of implants without surgery. My god, it's the 21st century and we have no way to find or confirm endometriosis without cutting into a woman. WHAT the FUCK.

My diagnosis of endometriosis confirmed by laproscopic surgery in 2002. There was a site in place where it was definitely symptomatic but impossible (I was told) to remove. After the surgery, I took bcps on the advice of a silly, old fashioned gynecologist. I switched to a new gynecologist not long after when the silly one retired. The new one prescribed a (synthetic) progesterone only therapy in the hopes that it would shrink that inoperable site up and prevent new ones from forming.

I took it for about months with rotten side effects I didn't even know were possible side effects (hey, who knew it was a respiratory stimulant?). But it helped. I lived with the side effects and stayed on it until about 7 months later it stopped working all at once - all at once while I was travelling. My doctor switched me to medroxyprogesterone acetate (a different progestin), which I took for a month before it landed me in an ER for blood blood and more blood. It was like a horror movie. I stopped the progesterone stuff and haven't been back to it since. That was about 3 and 1/2 years ago.

After I went over all this with the doctor today, he said "well, there's Lupron..."

Lupron is given for hormone suppression therapy. From what I've read and heard, it's like inducing menopause. I've heard very bad things about it from women who've taken it. Since I'm not keen to have an artificially premature menopause at 35, I'd rather only do it if it's seriously necessary, like if there's no other option and I have implants in places where they'll cause more than pain.

Thus my choice today was between inducing menopause with no assessment; scheduling surgery for assessment, some relief from the excision of sites that can be removed, then choosing a hormone therapy based on the severity and location of the endometriosis; or doing nothing and wait until if I can no longer fuck, walk, sit, or pee without being in excruciating pain.

I chose surgery. I'm hoping for an IUD after if the endo is not bad enough to warrant Lupron. IUD stands for Intrauterine Device. This one releases a synthetic progesterone. It's local and not systemic, so it's likely to not give me the rotten side effects but there is some hope it will at least help prevent new endo sites from developing.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Junk

Here are some fun items from a search on Uterine Fibroids.

(from the NIH)
Sometimes, health care providers find fibroids during a routine gynecological exam.

  • During this exam, the health care provider checks out the size of your uterus by putting two fingers of one hand into the vagina, while applying light pressure to your abdomen with the other hand.

  • If you have fibroids, your uterus may feel larger-than-normal; or, if you have fibroids, your uterus may extend into places it should not.

"may extend into places it should not" makes it sound like it might go out for a stroll alone in a seedy part of town late at night. It'd probably be smoking a cigarette, leaning against a wall covered in graffitti, skirt hitched up to its, uh...oh hell. Don't know my uterus anatomy. Fortunately, the search also turned up Sally. No reason to call her Sally other than that her hair just kind of says "Sally" to me.

I was immediately struck by her Mona Lisa like smile. Enigmatic, perhaps even a bit puzzled. We might consider whether or not she is wondering "Where the fuck are my nipples?"

Still, Sally does not seem displeased to be here - blue shaded and nippleless before us. What an accomodating gal.

Notice how the second and third fingers of the left hand ever so slightly curl to show a subtle, feminine vulnerability. Or possibly this pose reveals a downwards gesture of the index finger, suggesting the viewer may be descending into a lowly state of existence for having glimpsed Sally's stylized lady junk.

Regardless, Sally shows us that the uterus or WOMB is simply one uniform bit of lady junk. Therefore I am free to make up whatever terms I choose in reference to any part of my homogeneous "baby pocket".

Just to be fair, I did look up erectile dysfunction too, to compare Sally to some of the man-style stuff designs. I guess we should be happy we have Sally. Men just get the meat and two veg on a brain pipeline.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

"knocking boots"

"That's always struck me as an odd term for it" my fella A___ said the other night.
Seems he wasn't clear on why it is a word for sex. And so now we have a dilemma. Urban Dictionary offers it's usual variety of user given definitions. The key word being "variety" there. After I demonstrated to A____ what my conception of the origin of the term was (seems I'm a freak as I quite naturally assumed it was the sounds your boots or shoes made when you had sex with them still on), A____ explained (with lively gestures as well) what actions he figured the term might refer to. They included "when someone goes to take off their pants and they step on their shoes to get out of them fast..." which sort of loses something without the visual to go with it, and the action where one person's legs are wrapped around the other person's hips during a penetrative moment. Presumably, the penetrated person's feet would meet on the other side and knock.

But it strikes me that these may be silly. Any other thoughts or definitive definitions, or should I keep browsing through Urban Dictionary?

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Here be treasure!

Oh look what I just found via Kate's comment. It's something new to make me laugh.
I'm potent, Now

Their mission statement reads: Objectifying human beings is wrong. But anthropomorphizing objects is just dandy.

I think today and tomorrow, and possibly Friday, need to be about laughing.

Monday, November 20, 2006

global o!

This is so my speed. Not my style - the acoustic guitar serenade when you get to the site is a bit er, not me. And the stuff about male sexual displays being aggression and war is a weak tie in at best. BUT....as a concept I think it's fucking great. That time of year needs some good positive energy and I'm all for being a part of that.

Pass it on!

The more info part (from globalorgasm.org)
This is the First Annual Solstice Synchronized Global Orgasm for Peace, leading up to the December Solstice of 2012, when the Mayan Calendar ends with a new beginning.

The intent is that the participants concentrate any thoughts during and after orgasm on peace. The combination of high- energy orgasmic energy combined with mindful intention may have a much greater effect than previous mass meditations and prayers.

The goal is to add so much concentrated and high-energy positive input into the energy field of the Earth that it will reduce the current dangerous levels of aggression and violence throughout the world.

Global Orgasm is an experiment open to everyone in the world.

WHO? All Men and Women, you and everyone you know.

WHERE? Everywhere in the world, but especially in countries with weapons of mass destruction.

WHEN?
Winter Solstice Day - Friday, December 22nd,
at the time of your choosing, in the place of your choosing and with as much privacy as you choose.

WHY? To effect positive change in the energy field of the Earth through input of the largest possible surge of human energy a Synchronized Global Orgasm. There are two more US fleets heading for the Persian Gulf with anti-submarine equipment that can only be for use against Iran, so the time to change Earth’s energy is NOW!

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

fuck santorum!

Of all the election results news, I think this one warms my heart the most:
In Pennsylvania, Democrat Bob Casey, son of a popular former governor, soundly defeated incumbent Sen. Rick Santorum, a conservative and third-ranking member of the Senate GOP leadership.
To hell with a victory toast. I think all of us, gay, straight, and in between should have a victory fuck in honor of his defeat. And just for fun, try something different. I think Rick would have wanted that much at least.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

healthy man love!

Is the most unexpectedly funniest thing I heard today. It was on an episode of Penn and Teller: Bullshit. Doh, hey here's A___, coming over just in time. Got some healthy man love for me?

Actually the context for "healthy man love" was annoying but the commentary by Penn Jillette was amusing so it's ok for me. The term had been used by a PSYCHOtherapist who cures gay people of being gay. He was saying it to a client who had experienced "healthy man love", apparently a big step on the straight and narrow path. What an appropriate show to watch on Coming Out Day. Happy Coming Out Day. Do we say happy? See, if I start my business, we will have coming out baskets...including one for the people who react like assholes. They will get butt plugs of various shapes and sizes (and colors - to be festive) so they can learn to loosen the fuck up.

A____ about shit himself laughing at the therapist saying "healthy man love" with such misplaced and overblown sincerity. A____ immediately promised give some health man love to all his closest man friends when he sees them next.

Me personally? I want all men to give each other health man love, and hey, if they just happen to slip into it* all the better for everyone. The world needs a big happy orgasm.


*ask cjblue about "slipping into it"

Monday, October 09, 2006

missed out

I tell my fella A____ "Oh man, Jon Stewart was on campus!"
A____ says "When?"
"This weekend. We missed it."
"It's probably best. If we'd gone, we both would have ended up sleeping with him....and that might have been awkward."

Indeed.

Friday, September 22, 2006

Good news, bad news II

I think I had a post of a similar title at a similar time a year ago. I'll have to go check that. I don't recommend any of you do, it's likely to be rambling shit about the ex and big fat breakup shit.
This year's pre-birthday good news/bad news for me is as follows.

The good news is I think I'm getting a sense of prepping for teaching in terms of what I can reasonably expect to cover, how to leave room for discussion and questions, shit like that. I'm not saying I've got it down, just that I finally have a fucking clue.

The bad news is tomorrow was not a prep intensive day and I only just now finished.

Good news: After several rounds of PT and playing "pull my leg" (literally) with my very nice and very preggers therapist twice a week at the strange circus-like clinic, after a month of religiously doing my exercises, my hip was finally not hurting most of the time for over a week.
Bad news: Migraine sex fucked it up again. I think that was what did it, not sure but it's been screwy since (hey, you should see the other guy).

Good news: My birthday is in 3 days.
Bad news: I SWEAR I saw a whole bushel more lines under my eyes tonight when I was washing my face than I saw yesterday. I'm not aging (look wise) fast enough to be super freaked about looking very old yet. That's coming, I can feel it, but it's not here yet. What I am freaked (a little) about is the getting and being old part. My body's already acting quite a bit past the prime. I think none of us looks forward to an aged existence (who would? we treat our old people worse than we treat our young people). But generally it seems that's a sense of dread based on what we've seen happening to others. I know, I used to have that objectivity. To have my own sneak preview in Feel-A-Round sucks on a very subjective, personal, and sucky level. So the eye lines are visible evidence that I really am as old as I feel.

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

188, 65, 200+

188 minutes was how long my phone call was. The one that just ended. It was with a friend I haven't spoken to in close to a year. "So what's new?" he asked. I debated refering him to the blog. It's a little dangerous since the last thing I want is to feel like I have to deal with people I know in a professional manner on my blog. Yes, there are some radio people who lurk around now and then (hello radio people), but, well, they are a little different.

So we talked and talked and talked. Still there was more I'm sure, but damn, your bladder can only go for so long. He's a close friend but not that close.

Sharon and M___ came over earlier tonight. We were talking about sex. Sharon has a new boyfriend, and mentioned the hassle of having to buy condoms for the first time in forever. "I always feel sort of embarrassed" I said, "But then I remember - I'm getting some! So fuck it, you know?"

The conversation continued to the "how many people you've had sex with" discussion. Now I had always assumed my figure was shockingly high. Even if I add in a couple for good measure (on account of the blur of my early college days), it turns out I'm an innocent little flower, comparatively speaking. Sharon claimed "somewhere around 65". And M____ trumped us both with 200+ guys. They are both five years younger than I am. Holy shit. It's not a judgment, I just can't imagine that many for myself. As long as it was a good thing for all involved, there isn't a damned thing wrong with it.

What's odd is that both of them say they have a specific type. This surprised me since I guess I'd have thought that having a type would mean you would have more limited scope, a smaller net, and so fewer fish to catch. By contrast, I don't think I have a terribly specific type (my sister is probably the best qualified to comment on that from an outside perspective - A___? Your thoughts?). I suggested my five year marriage might have slowed down my rate. Sharon said "I was in a seven year serious relationship for most of those!" Ok, so maybe not.

Now I'm wondering about this. I'm wondering if having a type means if someone meets a certain (minimal) set of criteria for the type, that person is immediately and imminently fuckable.

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Sometimes a yoni is just a vulva

A while back I decided I wanted a word that described the external part of female genitals, a word that would capture the anatomical sense of PHALLIC but in relation to female. I discarded vaginal quickly as it places too much focus on the interior (see 3 below). YONIC is a good counterpart to PHALLIC in an extended and usually abstract metaphorical sense, e.g., if I were a baby boomer English major, I might talk about the phallic versus yonic versification in a comparison of selected writings of Ayn Rand and Tolkien. What is a counterpart in the physical sense? Does YONIC work as well as PHALLIC in that case? My concern was about how to express the adjectival form of VULVA, how to express the concept "being (physically) like a VULVA" in the same neat, concise, and non-ambiguous way that PHALLIC can be used to describe everything from skyscrapers to cigars.

Sticking with the most concrete definitions (that is, not the abstract extensions of being "like X" in form, function, or philosophical metaphor), here is an overview of some mostly coherent thoughts on the matter. Mostly coherent because in addition to the fever I still have, I am starting to feel the brain clogging tendrils of anxiety about the MRI I have this evening. I'm sure this is affecting my, well, everything. I've had to edit this post numerous times now for purely superficial problems. Oh well, apologies in advance for any difficulty the ones I might have missed cause.

1) Phallus/phallic
- We got it from Latin. They got it from Greek. In both ancient languages, it was used to describe the actual protruding part. No ambiguity here. No "meat and/or two veg". It's the meat. It can mean more than that...
Wordnet: relating to a phallus especially as an embodiment of generative power
...but it still can be used unambiguously to describe something which shares physical properties of the anatomical term PHALLUS
(btw, wordnet doesn't even have an entry for YONI or YONIC)


2) Yoni/yonic
- Sanskrit. In the physical sense in modern English use, apparently it's not so clear what part a YONI is. I haven't personally studied Sanskrit so I'm left to rely on second and third hand interpretations but it looks like the jury's out as to what part exactly YONI refers to and therefore whether or not YONIC properly refers to being like vag, vulv, or womb. Here are some representative definitions and etymologies.
AHD: Definition: Hinduism. A stylized representation of a vulva worshiped as a symbol of a goddess or Shakti.
Etymology: Sanskrit yoni[h], womb, abode, source.
Wiktionary: 1. The womb, 2. The vulva, especially when worshiped as a symbol of a goddess or Shakti
Wikipedia: The word yoni (Sanskrit योनि yoni) is the Sanskrit word for the female reproductive organ. Translated directly into English, it could mean vulva or vagina.

Wiki does suggest YONI as the basis for the Western-used adjective YONIC, which is the counterpart to the term PHALLIC. However when you click the link to YONIC in that wiki entry, it gives the definition of YONIC as in the shape of a vulva or vagina, in the shape of a yoni which continues and possibly even adds to the confusing and non-specific senses of the term. I don't know if this ambiguity arises out of sexism or ethnocentric laziness. Someone who has studied Sanskrit and Indic languages would have much better insights about this I suspect. The point is though that in the modern English usage, the term YONI and YONIC seem best described as higher class phrasings of "meat and/or two veg" (see 1, above).

Therefore, I concluded that if I want a word to characterize and object based mostly on a physical resemblance to the external part of female genitalia, the word YONIC was a little imprecise.

Before I go on to VULVA, let me describe the specific situation where the word was required. I think it helps to understand the full context in order to make the correct word choice.

At one point in my life, I had decided that a noticable number of men seemed to be afraid of women's purses. If you're female and you want to test this, carry a big leathery purse and put it down on a man's desk/work space. It should be up as close to eye and face level as possible and definitely in line of sight. You don't even need to root around in it although you might be tempted to in order to draw attention to it, if you do this, you can't observe your subject without exposing him to an unnaturally divided attention which could influence his behavior. Best bet is just put it up where he has to see it in order to look at you or even in your direction while you two are talking.

For the unconvinced, I present as (further) evidence the humor (and pejorative connotation) of the term and concept "man purse". It seems reasonable to say the humor is largely if not entirely related to the very strong association between a purse and a thing exclusively and embarassingly female. If a man is wearing a dress, we've got common use words for that (e.g., drag, transvestite(ism), cross-dressing) which aren't all considered automatically humorous and which don't require male specific modifiers. However, MAN-PURSE is funny, right? It belongs to the same class as "he-pussy", "man whore" (yes, I will pretty much watch anything), and "man-boobs". Whether or not you personally find those terms funny, several people thought they were funny enough to constitute a core part of entertainment which they expected people to pay for.

We can postulate a productive algorithm which involves adding a masculine identifier before something strongly female: [man, he] + [boob, purse, pussy, whore]. I realize that I am saying women's clothes are not considered as inherently or strongly female as something like a purse, a highly female and highly negative role (whore), or a part of a woman's body. Maybe we as a society will find a need for words like "man earring" or "man necklace" although I've never heard those (have heard just plain ol' "earring" and "chain"). So I would say this does suggest a pattern in which purse is more feminine/female even than things like jewelry, and my proposed explanation for that is the combination of its use as a woman's accessory and the purse's actual physical resemblance to a vulva.

Hey I just realized we can add in [minivan] as well. I think the minivan characteristics might be a little bit of a stretch as based in a directly physical analogy to female anatomy, but not a whole lot. In this case it's a little more function than morphology, but it is physical.

A slight detour on minivans:
The minivan came first, not the SUV. The SUV is a masculinized minivan, and it was masculinized by removing things that made it seem passive, by remarketing it as being primarily for outdoors shit and not for carting kids around. The first SUVs were extremely uncomfortable to ride in - seats like boulders and a suspension that would rattle the man-earrings off your pretty little head. Minvans remain as large and road-wise significant as all but the super gianormous SUVs but possess different physical features that mark them as [-male, + female]. Those features are largely stylistic details like how high up the driver sits (low and presumably dominable in the female minivan) and design (boxy exterior, angular lines in the SUV versus Rounded edges, tapered front end in a minivan). Minivans have unexpected openings which confuse and sometimes bother people unfamiliar with them (sliding doors which intrude less into other people's space versus "regular" doors which open out and into the car parked next to the SUV).
From Forbes.com:
Minivans don't need Chili Palmer to make them look cool anymore. These days, the fanciest options packages on minivans...have elevated them beyond the merely utilitarian into the downright luxurious. But beneath their glossy new veneers, minivans are still about transporting large groups of children and groceries--and with typically better fuel economy than comparably sized SUVs and pickups.

Minivans do follow the algorithm, although in a slightly more phonologically efficient way, resulting in manivan.

So I was sitting there one day (substances may have been invovled) wondering what the hell the right word for something like this would be. It needed to be something describing the thing ( a purse in that instance) in terms of its similarity in form and somewhat in function to the external visible part of female genitals. And so the term VULVA was raised at this point. VULVA seemed the right basis for whatever word I was looking for to describe this property.

3a) Vulva
-Latin
Online Etymology: 1548, from L. vulva, earlier volva "womb, female sexual organ," lit. "wrapper," from volvere
Wiktionary: From Latin vulva, earlier volva ‘womb, female sexual organ’, probably from volvare ‘to turn, wrap arround’.
AHD: The external genital organs of the female, including the labia majora, labia minora, clitoris, and vestibule of the vagina.

A usage note from Wikipedia: In common speech, the term "vagina" is often used improperly to refer to the vulva or female genitals generally, even though strictly speaking the vagina is a specific internal structure and the vulva is the exterior genitalia only. Calling the vulva the vagina is akin to calling the mouth the throat.

3b) Vulval/vulvic/vulvar/vulvalic/vulalescent?
Wiktionary didn't have separate entries for any adjectival forms, instead listing them under "derived forms" in the VULVA entry (PHALLIC and PHALLUS each get their own entry in Wiktionary).
Wordnet: vulvar, vulval (of or relating to the vulva)
AHD gives the following adjectival forms: vulval, vulvar, vulviform, vulvate (the latter two of which were not listed in wordnet).

Which means that if you want to describe something as being like a vulva, it seems you can simply take the word VULVA and add whatever adjectival marker suits you at the moment. I believe this lack of standard form (compared to the very agreed upon "phallic") is due to an underusage of this specific term (and perhaps the concept). I see the underusage of the term, the ambiguity of YONI and YONIC, and the usage of VAGINAL to refer incorrectly but commonly to something that is more properly vulval, as linguistic evidence that we as a society still have an extremely limiting view of women's sexuality, one which is seen through the fingers of the hand mom or dad places over our eyes when something naughty is happening. Who can be expected to get a good look if they are always looking away? Of course, we are not always looking away, but when we are allowed to take a good look, what we are shown is usually a yoni, given the best sense of the word as it is used in our modern language, a stylized representation of female sexuality.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Marriage

One of my heroes, Dan Savage, has been saying for some time that the religious extremists in this country have launched a war on straight rights (you know, as well as the almost openly declared one on gay rights - pretty much it's a war on anyone and anything different from "them" with an increasingly visible number of battlefields).

Here's a story about a city in Missouri where it is NOT ok for an unmarried couple to live with their two children. I gotta wonder if it is ok for someone to live with his sister, mom, and wife (this needs to be at least two different women) and their 11 children.

The Missouri instance of state based family enforcement is put forth under the guise of housing code. Yes. Really. The city's website says one of the purposes of these codes is to "avoid overcrowding by non-related parties", "preserve the character of the neighborhoods and the City" and "protect the general safety and welfare of the City’s residents."

Apparently, the thinking of many residents goes something like: We must do something ti protect ourselves from unmarried couples living together and their bastard children who will destroy the character of the neighborhood! We want to be sure our cars are broken into by legitimate children only.

Funny thing is, this forced adherence to "legitimate" baby making coupling only is nothing new. Even the coat of morality paint that has been thrown on it is not new. Augustus Caesar did the whole pushing the traditional marriage one man, one woman, approved by the state and making lots of babies thing a long time ago. He also did the whole punishing people who didn't have babies, didn't get married, didn't have a monogamous marriage thing too. Nothing new. Not even a little.

So now from the far flung province of Black Jack Missouri comes this very Augustan instance of state mandated family values. Is the Black Jack city council proud of enforcing good pagan values? Were they told to do this by watching birds over town hall or by reading the entrails of a ritually slain sow? Did someone give them a stone fucking tablet? Because otherwise, they should butt the fuck out.

Black Jack's mayor, Praefectus McCourt declined to be interviewed but said in a statement that those who do not meet the town's definition of family could soon face eviction.

The current ordinance prohibits more than three people from living together unless they are related by "blood, marriage or adoption."

So what makes a family? Love, commitment, devotion, and support are not enough by some folks' standards. Apparently, if you're a really serious cracker, family is one man, one woman, one blessing from a church, one expensive ceremony, one frighteningly prom-like reception, one new brother-in-law getting drunk and hitting on the bridesmaid, one new mother-in-law drunk and hitting, two rings you probably couldn't afford to buy and which you will loose within the first year of your marriage when one of you gets angry and throws their ring at the other one, and a piece of paper stamped by an important person who raised enough money for the local pols to be given a patronage position.

BTW, if you'd like to congratulate McCourt and the City of Black Jack council for upholding the values of the (unholy) Roman Empire, you can e-mail him here. You can read Mr. Savage's most recent "Straight Rights Update" here.