or A Cynical Look at Some of the Reasons People Fuck Each Other
Guy Who Needs to Feel Special
Girl Who Needs to Quiet Her Sex Drive so She Can Focus on Work
Guy Who Gets Super Drunk and Wants to Fuck Something, Anything
Girl with Boyfriend Who Needs an Occasional Breath of Fresh Air
Guy Proving to Himself That He’s a Badass
Girl Going Through a Rebellious Phase
Guy Who’s Now an Independent Adult and Can Do What He Likes
Girl Experimenting with Her Body
Guy Proving to Himself That He’s Still Young and Carefree
Guy on the Brink of Falling in Love with Everything
Girl with Inferiority Complex Fucking to Feel Better About Herself
Guy on Vacation Going Wild Fucking Everything in His Path
Totally Not That Kind of Girl Who Has No Idea What Got into Her
Guy Who Needs to Feel Close to Someone
Girl Who Smokes and Drinks and Drugs and Doesn’t Give a Shit About Anything
New in the City, Making Friends
Heard About You from Her Friend
Guy Who Only Likes a Specific Kind of Sex or Body Type
Lesbian Couple Spicing up Their Relationship
Straight Couple Spicing up Their Relationship
Girl Who Wants to Get Back at Her Friend/Parent/Sibling/Loved One
Guy Who Wants to Be Like that Guy He Saw on TV
Girl Who Feels Such a Strong Connection with You
Guy Who Has so Much in Common with You
Girl Who’s Bored
Guy Who’s Impressed
Girl Who Feels She Owes You Sex
Guy Who Feels You Owe Him Sex
Girl Who Fucks Because She’s There and You’re There
Guy Who Fucks Because……..Party Woohooo!
Girl Who Wants a Story to Tell Her Friends
Guy Who Wants to Feel Superior to His Friends
Girl Who Wants to Celebrate
Guy Who Is Crazy (I Mean Literally Having a Psychotic Episode)
Girl Who Wants to Be Famous
Guy Who Wants to Try Something His Girlfriend/Wife Would Never Go For
Girl Who Doesn’t Want to Waste All the Time/Money She Spent on You Before You Turned out to Be a Jerk/Catfish
Guy Who Wants to Forget About His Ex
Girl Who Can’t Have Who She Really Wants so Fine She’ll Just Settle for You
Guy Who Just Wants to Feel Good
Girl Who Just Wants to Feel Good
or A Short Study on Weapons Legislation vs Crazy People
I think the gun control issue is a question of percentages. We have to weigh acceptable Weapons Legislation against the percentage of Crazy People with a Chance of Going on Killing Sprees. If the latter was exceptionally high, say around 50% of the population, we might only legalize the possession of exceptionally mild weapons such as swords or slingshots. If we had 0% Crazy People, we might be able to legalize nuclear bombs and light sabers.
To decide where you are as a rational person on the issue of gun control, you have to decide how many people you are comfortable with putting at risk of dying, say each year, in Crazy Person Killing Sprees.
In a nation of 320 million people, you have to assume that there will be some Crazy People and that some of them will go on Killing Sprees for whatever Crazy Reason. If all they have is slingshots or their bare hands, they will be able to kill very few people, maybe one or two per incident. If they have nuclear bombs, they will be able to kill maybe 100,000 per incident.
Weapons Legislation usually looks at weapons and victim numbers somewhere inbetween those two extremes.
Over the last 20 years, there have been an average of four Crazy Person Killing Sprees per year (not including robbery-, gang-, or domestic abuse-related mass killings). 5/6 of the weapons used in these incidents were obtained legally. The number of people killed per Crazy Person Killing Spree has ranged from three to 49, with an average of eight per incident. The number of people wounded per Spree ranges from zero to 58, also with an per-incident average of about eight.
So. Eight people killed + eight people wounded = a total of 16 people affected per Spree. Four Sprees each year. Average.
Obviously, with the kinds of high-capacity magazine assault weapons that are currently legal, the average number of deaths could be a lot higher. It could easily be as high as 50 people per Spree.
On the other hand, the average number of deaths and wounded could also be a lot lower. A ban on “weapons that let a shooter fire a large number of bullets quickly without having to reload” would have illegalized 48 of the 143 weapons used in these Sprees (a third).
Sure, a sufficiently-motivated Crazy Person would have just gotten ahold of a smaller weapon, or a slingshot, or just gone into a movie theater and strangled people with his/her bare hands one by one. But the point is, his/her (let’s be honest: his) body count would then have been a lot lower.
There’s no way to know exact numbers here, but we can make educated guesses. Without high-capacity magazine assault weapons, there’s no way to kill/wound 40, 30, even 20 people before someone/everyone takes you down or runs away while you’re reloading. If we lower these large numbers of killed/wounded at the top of the Killing Spree curve, we can get our death average down to about five per Spree and our wounded average down to about four. (Assuming low-capacity magazines of 10 rounds max and extremely high rates of accuracy.)
That’s a minimum of around 12 people saved per year + 16 people unwounded = 28 fewer people affected per year. Not so many. But they would be living human people just the same.
And that’s just the Crazy People Killing Spree victims. A ban on these assault weapons would also lower the robbery-, gang-, and domestic abuse-related mass killings by about the same amount. Approximately another 28 people might be saved. Let’s say a conservative total of around 50 more people living and unharmed per year just from this one tiny adjustment.
So if you’re comfortable with risking 50 more people dying/wounded per year so you can go “Woohooo!!” in the back of your pickup truck or, I don’t know, take down a few more birds before you have to reload, you should oppose any ban on assault weapons.
Also, just think how many birds you could vaporize if grenades were legal, and how cool would your “Woohooo!!” be from the back of a legalized tank instead of your pickup truck!!
But if you think a ban on assault weapons is an acceptable price to pay for 50 fewer victims per year, you should support that.
If all guns were banned, we might get our averages down to one or two people killed per incident, and then those wouldn’t even qualify as mass shootings. So there might be no Crazy People Killing Sprees. But then, there would also be a lot more wild birds and deer alive, so we’d have to worry about that.
It all depends on:
1) How depraved you believe human nature has the capacity to be and
2) How many people you would like to risk giving those depraved people the capacity to kill in one setting.
We have to draw the line somewhere. Are you comfortable with where the line is now? Are you comfortable with mourning 50 extra people killed/wounded per year so you can have the freedom to buy assault weapons? Would you be comfortable with, say, doubling that number and mourning 100 more victims per year if you could have the freedom to buy even heavier weapons such as grenades or fully automatic weapons? Would that be worth it to you?
Would you like the victim number a little bit higher in exchange for a little more freedom? Would you like the victim number a little bit lower in exchange for a little less freedom? Or perhaps a lot lower in exchange for a lot less freedom?
You should think about it while you look at this cute picture of a panda with a machine gun:
or Friends and Benefits (In Order of Importance)
I fuck and am fucked in a very comfortable amount by a very few people in a circle of generosity and respect. And maybe that’s why I’m not often willing to put up with lack of generosity and respect.
What I want is more complex than “to fuck.”
I want to fuck sometimes and just to not fuck other times.
I want to give and receive.
I want to feel like she respects me enough in our friendship so that when she grabs a handful of my hair and thrusts her clit into my face, I don’t feel a lack of respect.
I want to respect her enough in our friendship so that when she chokes on my cock, she doesn’t feel a lack of respect.
I want for it sometimes to be Her Day and sometimes to be My Day.
I want to be able to hear/say some days, “I only have 15 minutes, let’s fuck quickly.” And I want to be able to hear/say other days, “I don’t feel like having sex right now, can we just hang out?”
I want to be part of a subset of humans who treat each other like living-breathing-feeling; intelligent-emotional-sexual; honest, complete human beings.
I want community, mutual respect, friendship, and fucking; in that order.
Or I don’t want anything at all.
or 5 Important Differences Between Sex Blogs and Sex Politics Blogs
Sex politics blogs come with an ulterior motive – an agenda that sneaks around the corner behind every word, staining those words, for better or worse, in its own colors.
That agenda may be to promote:
Male rights activism
Here are 5 crucial differences between sex blogs and sex politics blogs:
- 1. Sex politics blogs have an agenda beyond just being sex positive. Sex blogs just love sex.
- 2. Sex politics blogs are often fueled by some kind of outrage over perceived inequality. Sex blogs are fueled by fun.
- 3. Sex politics is about breaking apart. Sex is about coming together.
- 4. Sex politics is about conflict and power. Sex is about enjoying yourself. Both are very necessary and very different. But let’s not mistake one for the other.
- 5. Sex blogs want you to have sex. Sex politics blogs want you to have sex if… There is always an if involved. I just don’t think that sex between consenting adults should come with any caveats.
Bigots deserve to have good sex too.
Both the freaks and the faithful need their fun. My job, as a sex positive writer, is to focus on the fun and leave the politics to the politicians.
I have been guilty of sex politics. I have written about non-monogamy, gay rights, Donald Trump, racism, feminism, victim-blaming, slut-shaming, health, etc, etc. Maybe as long as I keep my agendas varied and conflicting, all of my disparate, day-to-day politics will cancel each other out, and the one resounding message that will emerge from all the noise will be the one that I always intended to convey to you from the beginning, and that is:
- Have fun.
or Sex Negative
Heterosexuals bash gays.
Gays bash bisexuals.
Bisexuals bash transsexuals.
Transsexuals bash polys.
Polys bash swingers.
Swingers bash voyeurs.
Voyeurs bash porn.
Porn bashes feminists.
Feminists bash sex workers.
Sex workers bash sadomasochists.
Sadomasochists bash urophiliacs.
Urophiliacs bash coprophiliacs.
Coprophiliacs bash vanillas.
Sex positive means that we’re positive about sex (between consenting adults). Not just our own sex, all kinds of sex in all kinds of forms.
Why can’t we all be less Sex Politics and more Sex Positive?