“How do you do it?”
How do I do what?
“When you’re seeing a girl, how do you keep from falling madly in love with her?”
I do fall madly in love with her.
“So then you stop seeing other girls?”
No, because I’m also madly in love with them.
I get asked this regularly.
“I wanna be single, but I keep falling in love. How do you keep yourself from falling in love with just one person?”
How does grass grow.
How are gay men attracted to men.
The answer is: you don’t do ‘it.’ There is no ‘it’ to do.
You ‘are’ it.
You don’t become poly.
You are poly.
Or you aren’t.
Stop trying so hard.
or The Other Woman
Lying is wrong.
And bullying, assaulting, and humiliating someone because of his/her sexual orientation is worse.
When you give regular, timid humans the choice between 1) coming out of their socially-unacceptable closet to face the public opinion monster and, 2) lying,
They will probably choose lying.
It doesn’t make lying any less wrong, but in that context, it certainly makes it more understandable.
I don’t agree with cheating, but look at the context. -It’s a common movie trope where the girl finds out about her husband’s poly orientation, which he has kept hidden from her due to society’s shaming and banning of it, and to get back at him, she puts drugs (laxative, estrogen) in his coffee. He shits himself or grows giant nipples, and it’s hilarious.
If that was a girl and he put something in her drink without her knowing, then laughed as she made a fool of herself, we’d call it rape.
If that was an LGBT-identified individual struggling to come out of the closet, and his partner (beard) threatened and assaulted her/him, we would call it a hate crime.
Polyphobia is as ugly a problem as homophobia has ever been, and here’s why.
Same-sex marriage is now legal in 19 states. But multiple-simultaneous attraction remains shameful and vilified practically everywhere, and any kind of multi-partner union remains illegal in all 50 states.
The most common percentage figure for same-sex sexual orientation is 10% (some sources say higher, some lower). The most common percentage figure for people who are attracted to more than one person at the same time is 100%.
Almost everyone watches porn or occasionally thinks about someone else even when they’re supposed to be in a monogamous relationship. We’re encouraged to repress that side of us. We’re encouraged to be disgusted by that part of us that thinks with his dick/pussy and is magnetized by the tits/ass/biceps/cock/lips of people who are not our life partner.
With gays we call this type of repression Aversion Therapy. With polys we call it Being Faithful.
In many modern media mediums, polys are depicted as terrible douchebag people who ignore their kids, abandon their families, and steal, lie, and cheat. Polys are the new Germans/Russians/Japanese. Polys are the new villains of the story, discriminated against like we used to do with the races we were at war with. These poly villains, however, are just regular people who happen to have some really bad habits, not one of which is their poly orientation. The presence of these bad habits are completely apart from and have nothing to do with their sexual orientation. Happily monogamous people have also been known to occasionally ignore their kids, abandon their families, and steal, lie, and cheat (see Regular Human Beings).
What these media depictions don’t want us to realize is that you can be a great mother/father/friend/business partner, and yes even a great husband/wife to your primary partner without abandoning your poly orientation.
Polyphobia is the new homophobia. And even the Bible doesn’t encourage polyphobia.
The slippery slope argument is one of the favorite homophobic tropes, but few people are really afraid of a guy fucking his donkey/dog/car as the next step down on the slope. And besides a few Old Testament fundamentalist, non-shrimp-eating types (very few), I don’t think very many people actually even care if some guy they don’t know fucks another guy they don’t know. What they really mean by this slippery slope is that they’re afraid of their own personal, private, exclusive, pegged, claimed little sweetheart sleeping with someone else who isn’t them.
Because once you’re okay with the ethics of consenting same-sex relationships, being okay with the ethics of consenting multiple-sex relationships is the next logical step.
But this is where polyphobia is different from homophobia,
And here’s where the crunch comes because:
Everyone wants to be poly themselves,
But no one wants to let other people be poly.
polyphobia – definition: An extreme and irrational aversion, fear of or antipathy toward polyamory or polyamorists.
A polyphobe is someone who hates or fears polyamorists or treats them badly.
This month, let’s turn our attention to our own fear of or aversion toward the polyamorous people in our life, or the polyamorous side of our own self. Let’s see if we can make a little progress toward clearing up the centuries of hatred and misguided fear that society has directed toward people who love more than one person.
Polyamorists are beautiful, loving, honest people and responsible and productive members of both families and society in general. If we continue to denounce them in our minds and condemn them in our media, we will be closing ourselves off to large, lovely swaths of humanity. Polyphobia compels the millions who form part of this sexual minority to live in ostracism and exclusion – for the timid, in their polyamorous closets, and for the bold, in smoldering and covetous rejection by the small-minded.
Recent statistics demonstrate that some form of polyamory is practiced by 15-28% of heterosexual couples, around the same for lesbian couples, and up to 65% of gay male couples.
It’s time to quit being petty about other people’s sexual lives.
There are a lot more sexual deviants than you might think.
Of the Unbearably Long Joke
So last week we realized (ha ha) that life is long and becomes tiresome.
Life is a tangled popcorn string that goes on for miles, and the happy man’s only solution/recourse is to waste it on happy little things.
Don’t spend your time under an assumption of scarcity, hoarding it like a college kid’s coins. Spend it like the tower of breadcrumbs that it is. Toss it to whichever featherbrained sparrow crosses your flight of fancy; scatter it to the wind or let the pavement take it; spend it like Netflix spends its TV shows.
(Life is better binge-watched. -Not nibbled at like an HBO series, but gulped down entire seasons at a time.)
You will live an average of over 2.5 billion seconds.
There’s a hella lot of them.
In the end, working your ass off to make money, working your ass off to create a legacy, working your ass off to improve yourself or just sleeping, reading, or staring at a screen will all get you to the same place, one breadcrumb at a time. And that place is: bored and full of regrets on your deathbed about not having done the opposite of what you did.
If this sounds to you like it’s coming from a place of pessimism, look closer. Fatalism is actually at the root of the most indomitable types of optimism. (The kind that sings about the sun always shining behind the clouds. It’s always going to be there, so it doesn’t really matter if it’s raining or pouring or night or nothing.)
Life is more beautiful when you take the pressure out of the equation.
Because the best kinds of beauty are never immortal…
With No Punchline
When you think about it, life is extremely,
For the intents and purposes of this thought, there are two types of people- the satisfied and the unsatisfied.
If you’re a malcontent, brimming with ambition, always pushing to go further, and never satisfied about your lot in life or your rung on its ladder, life may seem short to you. There’s never enough time to do all the hurrying you want to do, to shoot for all the stars you have it in for.
The malcontent’s legacy is stuck in a perennial race against his/her timeline, a mad dash to immortality one way or the other, and when you think about life in that way, there’s never enough time. Yes, life is too short to become immortal.
If, however, you’re a happy man, thrilled with what the universe has laid in your lap, content to just sit back with a beer and watch the tide roll in, and satisfied with the bounty of beauty that it washes up at your feet, life can seem a bit too perpetual.
For me, the best pleasures are ones that don’t overstay their welcome. They pop into your window, brighten your livingroom, wrinkle all the covers, and then leave you with a smile still ringing between your ears.
A two-minute song. A 1:15 movie. A wave.
A friend’s child. A meal that isn’t supersized. A one-liner.
Life, on the other hand, is like the guest who just won’t leave.
She made you laugh at first with her irreverent antics, and his carelessness was kinda cute I guess the first few times he left his dishes in your sink and his clothes on your floor. But then she took all your blankets one time too many and he puked all over your car seat again, and you began to want just one night to yourself and just one day without driving him around. You kind of began to wish he and she would just leave you alone for a bit.
I don’t want to ever write her off entirely though. To me, the ideal existence would be a period of life, and then a period of not-life (whatever that might be), followed by another period of life then not-life, and so on.
I would rush into life with an unparalleled exuberance and then sink happily into not-life, and then burst into life with vigor and then lay exhausted and cloyed and grateful into not-life. And then leap up and bearhug life and hold it close and then let go and drift contentedly and relieved into not-life. And then back again.
or The Sexual She-Beast vs. the Average Male
or Are Men Just Nastier Than Women?
I want answers.
The modern woman insists that she is a sexual beast. She insists that, contrary to what man has believed for so long, her sexuality and hunger rivals that of the male. That if only you knew the filthy, salacious things going through her mind, which she represses due to the role in which society tries to pigeonhole her, you would be shocked to find that she matches you in raw sexuality pound for pound.
She is, in other words, just as nasty as any man.
I want to believe that’s true.
I, however, am way too familiar with male sexuality.
While women’s fantasies may be wild, strange creatures (as reading any Nancy Friday book will tell you), men’s fantasies seem to have an element of nasty in them that, in a fair fight, would kick women’s fantasies in the crotch and hold her face in the mud. An inter-gender skirmish in the nasty arena would seem to be somewhat of a mismatch.
He is, in other words, the king of nasty. Or at least he seems to be.
Maybe men’s sexuality is really just nastier than women’s. Or maybe I’m looking at it all wrong and there are reasonable explanations that have nothing to do with inherent, gender-specific sexual tastes. I’ve compiled a list of men’s nastiest fantasies – the kind that few women would touch with a ten-foot pole (or at least admit to touching). I’ve tried to put them into some categories involving possible ‘non-nasty’ explanations, but there are a still a few that I can’t explain beyond saying that men are just nastier than women. That’s where I need your help.
I am not a PUA or a feminist, I’m just a human person, a student of sexuality, politically incorrect, searching for truths about people and their sex. If you don’t like something here, tell me, and tell me why. Or if you can explain something better than my clumsy attempts, I will love you for it.
Here is my list of fantasies that men have and women decidedly don’t.
Gloryholes – Where he finds a magical hole in a public bathroom or other foreign place, inserts his cock, and something on the other side sucks the life out of it.
This one seems to be anatomical: we have a sexual organ that we can insert into a hole. Still, with the right kind of hole or covering, a woman could presumably be penetrated, licked, or stimulated by something she couldn’t see. Are there no gloryholes for women because it would be awkward and clumsy, or because the thought of being stimulated by an unknown thing doesn’t turn her on? Is this fantasy the sole property of man-kind due to purely anatomical reasons, or is it because it’s just nasty?
Dildos – Where he watches her get herself off with phallic objects that may include monstrous sex toys, shower heads, fruits and vegetables, tiny vibrators, or other unrelated technology.
Although this one could be anatomical (we can picture inserting ourselves into her in the dildo’s stead), a reverse fantasy IS anatomically possible. Why aren’t more women turned on by the thought of men inserting themselves into things (fleshlights, couch cushions, pies)?
Gagging – Where she stuffs his cock down her throat and gags on it, the fantasy being the act of gagging itself.
Anatomically speaking, we do have an organ we can stuff down her throat. But there are ways women could cause us oral discomfort with their sexual organs too. We could suffocate on her pussy or choke on her breasts. Is gagging a man’s fantasy because it’s just so nasty?
Cumming All over Something – Where he ejaculates on a certain place, her face, boobs, ass, stomach, in her mouth, or even in a cup and she drinks it.
Yes, we are the gender that generally expels bodily fluids during sex. But many women also ejaculate, and do they fantasize about squirting all over a certain place on a man’s body? How come there is so little talk about squirting on his biceps or his chest and so few female fantasies involving, “Honey, get down on your knees, I’m about to cum and I wanna squirt all over your face”? How come we so rarely hear, “I’m so wet right now, and I want you to put your face down in there and drink it”? Too nasty?
TRADITIONAL, CULTURALLY-INDUCED POWER ROLES
Slapping – Where he is turned on by slapping her ass, her face, her boobs, slapping his cock on her, or one woman slapping another woman’s body.
This one seems to be due to men’s centuries of immersion in patriarchal societies, with slapping representing his power over her. As women begin to take the power back, will we see more women sexually fantasize about slapping at his chest, slapping her boobs on his face, or about one man slapping another man’s ass? Or is this one just too nasty?
Teens – Where is she barely of age.
Although this one could be a fantasy that emphasizes men’s power over women, I’m not sure that fucking barely-legal teenage girls is strictly a power fantasy. Do powerful or power-hungry women fantasize about having that barely-18-year old cock? Or is this just another nasty thing that men do and women rarely do?
Politically-Incorrect Dirty Talk – Where he calls her derogatory things like a dirty little whore or a filthy slut or his bitch.
Maybe there just aren’t male-appropriate sexually-derogatory terms. Or maybe it’s just another nasty, male-only fantasy.
Bukkake – Where a group of men stand over a woman and cover her with their cum.
The monarch of nasty fantasies, there is a definite power angle to bukkake fantasies, and it can also be explained by anatomical reasons. Is there a woman alive who fantasizes about getting together with a group of women, subduing a man, and then standing in a circle around him and masturbating?
INTRINSIC BEAUTY OF THE FEMALE BODY
Is a woman’s body just intrinsically, objectively more beautiful than a man’s, and does that (indisputable, self-evident?) fact explain away a lot of nasty things that we want to do to them and they don’t want to do to us? Do we want to cum on them because they’re so beautiful and they don’t specifically want to cum on us because we are intrinsically less so? Do we want to slap them and objectify them because their curves are so beautiful and they don’t objectify us because our lines are not?
Panties – Where he fantasizes about her panties, smelling them, leaving them on during the sex act, keeping them afterward.
As beautiful extensions of a woman’s beautiful body, her panties and the fantasies involving them make prime candidates in the argument for the aesthetic attractiveness of the female form. Do women not fantasize about smelling/keeping our boxers/briefs because our bodies, and thus by extension our lingerie, are less universally aesthetically pleasing? Or is it just because men are so nasty and women aren’t as much?
Hentai – Where a cartoon depicts sexually-explicit acts.
Maybe it’s because her body is so universally attractive that she is sexually arousing even in cartoon form. Do women not fantasize about being ravished by cartoon men because even the best male forms are less intrinsically beautiful? Or is cartoon pussy just another example of men’s intrinsic sexual nastiness?
Shemales – Where he fantasizes about a beautiful woman with curves and boobs… and a dick.
I imagine that the female form is so beautiful that even if you love cock, it is possible to still want it served on a woman’s body. Is this the reason that he-women are not a thing, and that you don’t see women fantasizing about strong, muscular men… with vaginas? Or are chicks with dicks just another example of men of any sexual orientation being straight-up nasty?
Here are the man-fantasies that I could find no reasonable alternate explanation for other than sheer nastiness.
Feet – Where he licks her feet or she cups her feet around his cock and jerks it off.
Out of all the women I interviewed for this article, very few of them were turned on by any of the above fantasies. Only one or two of them thought they could possibly be aroused by a woman’s equivalent of a gloryhole, a man with a fleshlight, a man suffocating on her pussy or drinking her, by slapping a man or keeping his boxers, by a barely-legal or virgin man, or by a shemale (and these things had never occurred to them before as viable fantasies).
Not a single woman I talked to could ever fathom the thought of fantasizing about putting a man’s toes into her pussy or getting off with a man’s feet.
Feet fetishes seem to be strictly male fare, even though it is anatomically possible for both sexes, it doesn’t seem to be power-related, and let’s face it, feet are not universally considered to be intrinsically beautiful. Is this definitive proof of male superiority in the sexual nastiness arena? What else could possibly explain this nasty, nasty fetish?
Sloppy Sex – Where the juices flow freely, usually referring to blowjobs.
If you’re a woman thinking, “But I like wet cunnilingus,” in a man’s mind, this fantasy involves strings of saliva like spaghetti, gushing liquid all over her face and his cock, and a massive juicy mess. Do men like their sex sloppier because they’re nastier? Or do women also like it with buckets and buckets of spit?
Compilations – Where we watch videos of compilations of various sexual acts performed by various individuals in rapid succession, usually referring to male cumshots or female orgasms (cumpilations).
Men are more visual, and men generally prefer multiple sexual partners, and men are more goal-oriented. Are those the reasons why we don’t see women porning out on compilations of men licking women or masturbating or orgasming? Or is it because it’s actually kind of nasty?
Mother/Daughter – Where he has the milf and her daughter at the same time or in succession, possibly with the mother teaching her daughter.
A woman could presumably have a father and his son at the same time, or attractive twin guys, or just brothers together, but very few (possibly none?) do. The relative fantasy seems to be relatively male territory. Just nasty? Or can you think of a different reason?
or A Sex Positive Bible
I think some people were born monogamists, and some were born monogamish, and some were born polyamorous, and some were born gay, and some were born bi, and some were born religious, and this is all normal and okay as long as consent and respect is involved.
I think pickup artists, prostitutes, feminists, and Christians alike all have their reasons for what they do, and I respect that.
I think it’s possible to be an honest, respectful, sex positive (Christian, prostitute, pickup artist, feminist).
It’s only when we try to use our gene-mashup to take consent out of the equation (kids, animals, coercion, force) that we have to draw a line.
I think that being sex positive means being positive about sex and about all the bright and scandalous colors in the sex positive community spectrum.
If a monogamist is positive about sex while adhering to his moral principles and not raping… his wife… then I can respect that. If a pickup artist is positive about sex while being the best version of himself and not lying or coercing, I can respect that. If a feminist is positive about sex while believing firmly that men are dogs or bicycles, but not stooping to violence against the male gender, I can respect that. If a Christian is positive about sex while staunchly going to church and respecting alternative lifestyles, I can respect that. If a gay or bisexual man is positive about sex while sucking that cock and not creeping on straight guys, I can respect that.
We’re all a proud dynasty of sex positivity, and we’re beautiful, and I love it.
If we start bickering among ourselves we take a little bit of the positive out of the sex. And we step a little closer to being intolerant (like ‘them’).
If you are sex positive in any way and you are offended by something you read here, don’t be. It’s (abundantly) clear from the context of this site the respect and support I have for (women, swingers, men, sex workers, families, religion, kink, LGBTQIA). And for YOU.