Skip to content

Big Cocks and Why They Are Totally Stupid

January 27, 2009

So I haven’t been posting. Which is Bad Blogging Etiquette. But there has been nothing to report, since I have a snowball’s chance in hell of finding someone kinky here. There is still nothing to report, so that leaves bitching about things I don’t like. And I am going to bitch about big cocks.

The big cock craze has fucking annoyed me since I was like eight years old. What? Seriously? Who decided that was a good idea? I can kind of see men getting into the big cock competition, because, sorry to say, most of the men I’ve met are fucking idiots. What pisses me off even more than guys getting into it, is the idiot women who support it. What! The! Fuck!

“It feels better,” “It’s more pleasurable,” “I can only be satisfied with a big cock.” Bullshit! There are only a large concentration of nerve endings in the first three inches of the vagina! You ain’t feeling much after that.

Oh, and let us segue into the idiotic myth of the infinitely stretchy continuum of the vagina that can somehow magically accommodate anything. Reality check: it ends. Ultimately, the vagina has a finite length. You hit the cervix, squeeze into the deep spots on the side, and you’re done. Can’t go any farther. I can only speak from personal experience, as I have not put anything up anyone else’s cunt but my own, but to tell you more about my internal proportions than you ever wanted to know, more than five inches? Impossible. Utterly. Five. Inches. Four on a sore day. Five and a quarter on a particularly stretchy day. Do you have any idea how annoying it is that the standard size for dildos is seven inches?!?!?

The only consistent result I’ve ever encountered from the big cock cult is generations of men who take out their insecurities on everybody else through anger, depression, idiotic competition, or addictive consumerism because they’ve been conditioned to believe they’ll never pleasure anyone with their ‘mere’ seven inches. I have had man friends, intelligent, thoughtful, reasonable people, who I have confronted with documented and verifiable facts about average penis size, the nature of the vagina, and the bullshit of the big cock cult, who are so insecure about their average cock or bigger than average cock that they just filter out everything I say. I just get a broken record of, “Well apparently I can’t pleasure anybody because my cock’s not big enough.” It’s that deeply embedded in their psyches. AND IT PISSES ME OFF.

Generations of men, half psychologically ruined because some asshole men said cock size matters for anything, and a bunch of asshole women decided it was a great idea to agree. As if there weren’t enough problems in the world!

I know someone is going to tell me, “Well it’s just my personal taste, and I have a right to my personal taste, so it’s okay.” Well, if your public, enthusiastic affirmation of your stereotypical personal taste is ruining half the world’s population, you need to shut up and enjoy your personal taste on your personal time instead of turning all the men I know into flinching puddles of despair. (If I like you and you have a taste for big cocks, you can be forgiven. If I don’t like you, go to hell).

Someone else is going to try to tell me that it’s related to evolution, and that men with big cocks have a better chance of reproducing, thus the competition, but there are more men with average sized cocks in this world than there are men with big cocks (thus the term ‘average’), so they’ve obviously been reproducing just fine. I don’t need eleven inches of cock rammed up my five inch vagina to get pregnant. Sperm have tails. They swim.

[By the way, I’m using gender ‘man’ intentionally, as I have seen how the big cock cult affects that gender, but not how it affects male people of another gender. Using ‘woman’ likewise.]

And if the big cock cult has this positively insane effect on men with average and bigger than average sized cocks, what the hell is it doing to the men with smaller than average cocks? What about people with micropenises? I bet it makes many of them feel like shit, a way they should not have to feel just because a bunch of assholes are so sexually uncreative that they have to make up for their lack of skill with a genetic fluke.

Another thing: Aesthetics. Mine. Personally. Let’s say a man has eight inches. Now that is scary as fuck to me, but not necessarily repellent. After eight? Sick. Gross. OW. Holy SHIT get that away from me!!!!!! AIIIGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! Big cocks in porn disgust me. And I really don’t get into artistic representations of impossibly large cocks that start draping places they have no right.

Now, I’m not saying it would be a deal-breaker if a person had an eight inch cock. I would accept them as a whole package, despite their horrifyingly large appendage. We would find a way. But my ideal preference? Bring on the nice, comfortable, perfectly adequate four or five inch cock.

This will also make it easier to take it all in my mouth, which makes me happy.

25 Comments leave one →
  1. January 27, 2009 7:49 pm

    Yay! You’re not dead!

    I’ve been a bad, bad blogger, too. Crazy work stuff. Will be back soon.

    Yes, really huge cocks are not good. I once slept with a guy who turned out to have a truly humungous dong. It just hurt.

    Shape makes a difference, though. One of my exes had a cock which… well, I have no idea what it was about it that produced this effect, shape or angle or what, but somehow it always managed to hit my g-spot. Amazing. The only person I’ve ever come with just from penetration.

    You know, the ancient Greeks prefered a small penis. To them, large ones were bestial, and small ones were refined.

    And while we’re on the subject: Americans, please stop mutilating your sons’ penises. You crazy medical interventionists.

  2. ranat permalink
    January 27, 2009 8:11 pm

    Hi Nameless!

    “And while we’re on the subject: Americans, please stop mutilating your sons’ penises. You crazy medical interventionists.”

    I know, right?!? God, I fucking hate infant circumcision. If someone wants to make the choice to modify their body that way as an adult, fine, but for the love of whatever your hold dear, don’t mutilate your child. There is no health risk as long as you keep shit clean. And it looks better.

  3. January 28, 2009 4:11 am

    So, just before anyone does say “well it’s your personal taste so blah blah blah,” I consider myself unusually resistant to the vast majority of negative hegemonic masculine stereotypes, and yet I still had to personally face this issue and it was not easy. I’m much better now than I used to be, and at ~6 inches in length and a ton of research on penis size, I can finally lay to rest the crazy notion that I’m somehow under mean size, even though that’s what I thought at first.

    So yeah, seriously. Even if I could ignore the terrible emotional injustices this causes, I’m also pretty damn pissed I had to actively research medical sources just to get accurate anatomy information. At any point where the facts get so distorted by crazies that people stop internalizing them as facts, I think we’ve gone too far.

    As an aside, Ranat, I think you might like this very related rant. I’ve been a bad, bad blogger boy, too recently, and I think that linked rant is going to be the topic for my next round of posts (hopefully soon).

  4. ranat permalink
    January 28, 2009 4:40 pm

    @maymay – I went a looked at the thread you mentioned and left my two cents. Like I said in that comment, my position is somewhere in the middle of the two main factions.

    One thing I will address in this comment, however, is the idea of personal taste, which got brought up a lot in the thread.

    I said in the post above:

    “I know someone is going to tell me, “Well it’s just my personal taste, and I have a right to my personal taste, so it’s okay.” Well, if your public, enthusiastic affirmation of your stereotypical personal taste is ruining half the world’s population, you need to shut up and enjoy your personal taste on your personal time instead of turning all the men I know into flinching puddles of despair.”

    I think this parallels your sentiment about how the ideas connotated by the name “Straight Hell.” Since the idea that anal sex and/or sex with a man is considered so widely repulsive in our culture, entities that validate those ideas by their existence (in this case Straight Hell dot com) harm members of several sexual subcultures.

    That being said, my argument in the bitchy quote above was not that people should give up or change their sexual preferences to be politically correct, but that they shouldn’t act like their preferences are universal or universally correct, and should certainly not go spouting said preferences in venues where oppressed people are dealing with that issue in real life not in fantasy.

    I think in the comment thread about Straight Hell, the people who saw less of a problem with the site were dealing with it in fantasy, whereas you are dealing with it in real life, thus your offense. Which is why I thought both sides had very valid points, but for different areas.

    I’m certainly not going to stop fantasizing about forcing straight men to have sex with men, forcing gay men to have sex with women, or forcing gay women to have sex with men (for some reason fantasizing about forcing straight women to have sex with women doesn’t do it for me), regardless of how politically incorrect it is. My entire sexuality is politically incorrect. And if I ever got the opportunity to negotiate a scene with subs to do any of those combinations, I would pounce. I am, however, not going to go pay StraightHell dot com any money.

    I may steal their pictures, however, because I am a desperate porn scavenger and as long as I am not helping them continue their existence I see no moral quandary.

  5. January 28, 2009 4:44 pm

    @Ranat: You are going to like my upcoming rant about the StraightHell dot net site. I say very much what of what you say, in different words.

    Also, for the record, I’ll reiterate again that I love being “forced” to have sex. ;) And I also love political incorrectness.

  6. ranat permalink
    January 28, 2009 6:01 pm

    @Maymay –

    “Also, for the record, I’ll reiterate again that I love being “forced” to have sex. ;) And I also love political incorrectness.”

    This is good. :D

  7. January 29, 2009 1:16 am

    “‘Well it’s just my personal taste, and I have a right to my personal taste, so it’s okay.’ Well, if your public, enthusiastic affirmation of your stereotypical personal taste is ruining half the world’s population, you need to shut up and enjoy your personal taste on your personal time instead of turning all the men I know into flinching puddles of despair.”

    Substitute “women” for “men” and “insecure doormats” for “flinching puddles of despair,” and this is pretty much how I feel about maledom/femsub. Yes, liking big cocks is fine; the cultural insistence that *every* woman likes bigs cocks is not. Similarly, my enjoyment of domination at the hands of a man is fine; the assumption that every man is dominant and every woman submissive is not…this is why I’m not all “whoo, maledom/femsub, HOT” every time it turns up in advertising, art, porn, book covers, mass media, discussions of male-female relationships, and on and on. When our fetishes are reinforced by popular culture to the extent that it becomes difficult for men with small penises to feel sexually adequate and for dominant women to be taken seriously — THAT’S the problem.

  8. ranat permalink
    January 29, 2009 2:06 am

    @Subversive Sub – Interesting point. I’d been thinking of the parallel issue for women being breast size, but on a larger scale the “woman is inherently submissive, man is inherently dominant” paradigm of the patriarchy punches the whole universality issue in the face too. As you say, despite the fact that your maledom/femsub activities are empowering (and hot), because a woman caught in the teeth of the patriarchy experiences helplessness and degradation (in the not-hot way), and it’s the latter that is most often portrayed in mass media, you don’t go around telling women being subjugated by men that they’re actually living out teh hotness.

    “[…]becomes difficult for men with small penises to feel sexually adequate[…]”

    What really blows my mind is it’s not just men with small penises feeling inadequate. It’s men with average-sized and larger than average sized penises also feeling inadequate! The hell! Maymay provides a perfect example in his comment. He has a six inch long penis, and the average length for white males is around five inches. So he has a bigger than average penis, and he still had to deal with that shit.

  9. Ireen permalink
    January 29, 2009 11:52 pm

    Oh yes, absolutely! And the vagina not just ends – it bloody fucking hurts if a dumbass with a way too long dick keeps trying to push through to the uterus.

    Other than that I’d assume that there’s a connection to the general overvaluation of penii (penises? penes?). As much as I find psychoanalysis bizarre, the whole idea (or that someone actually managed to come up with the idea) of fear of castration and penis envy does tell something. Just like the fact that Lacan actually had to point out that the penis is not the phallus. So there’s probably more to the obsession with huge dicks than wanting to pleasure women, namely being a man at all, fulfilling the expections on that gender and hence receiving the whole bunch load of privileges that comes with it. Do I sound like Freud? I really need to finish my papers!!!

  10. Leah B permalink
    January 30, 2009 12:59 am

    I’ve just been lurking about here on your blog, but I had to comment on this one. I think it’s TERRIBLE how preoccupied with big penises people are, and how misinformed they are about what is “big”. Honestly, if anything I wish my boyfriend was SMALLER. It makes me sad to hear all these guys with seven-inch cocks saying they’re “average”. That’s more than average! That’s cervix territory!

    I haven’t made any new points but I had a little rant there for a moment.

  11. ranat permalink
    January 30, 2009 1:31 am

    @Ireen – Wait, the phallus is not the penis? I had to go look that up. I’ve always thought of the phallus as an erect penis, especially in sculpture, so the distinction according to that dude makes sense now. Hmm… Males trying to live up to artistically ginormous phalli in the flesh… New angle…

    In New Guinea, the highland people specifically I believe, men wear prosthetic penises around two feet long and feel naked without them. Maybe we could start a trend in the Western world and put all this bullshit to rest.

  12. ranat permalink
    January 30, 2009 1:34 am

    @Leah B – Cervix territory indeed! I’ve heard some women say they enjoy cervical stimulation, but the only reason I enjoy it sometimes is specifically because it’s painful, and I’m a masochist.

  13. stagetwo permalink
    January 30, 2009 2:19 am

    in a perfect world, everyone would be desired exactly equally — by different people. in reality, there are preferences (such as the male preference for certain types of female beauty) that are much more widespread than others. this is cruel to those who do not conform to the ideal. but it is a reality.

    regarding penis size, there are true size queens, no doubt. but then also there is the element of power: if women are under such pressure for there bodies to conform, why not turn up the pressure on men a little. in particular relationships, if the girl is a bit insecure herself, it might be hard for her to resist using that thumbscrew a little — even if she actually has no such preference. if she manages to make the guy insecure in this way, ironically, his insecurity, not the size of his cock will turn her off.

    i feel that the true cruelty of female sexual preference is the preference for male dominance and emotional control: this imposes several vicious dilemmas on men: where to orgasm means not to satisfy, and to love means not to be loved. this remains a central cultural challenge.

    (the true cruelty of male sexual preference is more widely understood: it is the preference for youth and beauty, which causes much suffering among women who do not conform.)

    our sexual preferences at the core are biological, the product of evolution. this means that (1) they cannot be arbitrarily redefined or constrained by political correctness and (2) they are not our fault. but we can find creative and civilized ways of dealing with these facts and enjoying sex and love anyway.

    –stagetwo.wordpress.com

  14. ranat permalink
    January 31, 2009 4:32 am

    @stagetwo –

    “regarding penis size, there are true size queens, no doubt. but then also there is the element of power: if women are under such pressure for there bodies to conform, why not turn up the pressure on men a little. in particular relationships, if the girl is a bit insecure herself, it might be hard for her to resist using that thumbscrew a little — even if she actually has no such preference. if she manages to make the guy insecure in this way, ironically, his insecurity, not the size of his cock will turn her off.”

    I don’t know the extent of the sentiment you describe, as I’ve never had anyone tell me of personal experience with it, but I have to say that if that is an issue, it is definitively fucked up. ‘Someone did something cruel to me so I’ll return the favor’ is bullshit, and often helps perpetuate cycles of sheer nastiness to other people. I know this, because I have participated. I agree, however, that insecurity is a huge turn-off. I could see the scenario you describe happening very easily.

    “i feel that the true cruelty of female sexual preference is the preference for male dominance and emotional control: this imposes several vicious dilemmas on men: where to orgasm means not to satisfy, and to love means not to be loved. this remains a central cultural challenge.”

    I’m not sure what you mean after the first colon, but I’m hoping you could define your terms. What do you mean by ‘female sexual preference?’ Female sexual preference is not homogeneous, and there are many forms of sexual expression among people with female anatomy.

    Secondly, what do you mean when you say ‘preference for male dominance and emotional control?’ Do you mean male dominance/female submission in a kinky or BDSM context, or do you mean the mainstream sexual proclivity of men being in charge socio-economically and sexually? Either way I must point out that this over-generalization is disproven by me, a sexually dominant woman.

    “the true cruelty of male sexual preference is more widely understood: it is the preference for youth and beauty[…]”

    Similarly, while common, this is not universal and therefore cannot be said to be all of ‘male sexual preference.’

    “our sexual preferences at the core are biological, the product of evolution. this means that (1) they cannot be arbitrarily redefined or constrained by political correctness and (2) they are not our fault.”

    I disagree with your first point, as I point out in the post above. Many people’s sexuality is defined biologically, but my sexuality is based on beating, whipping, bleeding and tying my partners and fucking them with foreign objects, which does exactly nil to get me pregnant. I don’t necessarily agree that sexual preference can’t be redefined or constrained, but I would agree that they shouldn’t have to be as long as one’s activities are with consenting partners of sound mind. While our sexual preferences may not be our ‘fault,’ there’s a difference between enjoying our sexual preferences and declaring them universal and fucking up half of humanity and in general making the world more miserable.

    Thanks for sharing your perspective, and hope to hear from you again to clarify those points I had questions about.

  15. stagetwo permalink
    February 1, 2009 12:08 am

    when i speak about “male and female sexual preference”, i refer to the the bulk of the population. this is not to deny that there are people who are totally different. and you appear to be be one.

    my own experience is more mainstream and my politics progressive. i’ve summarized some of my views here: http://stagetwo.wordpress.com/about/.

    i believe in the political ideal of gender equality. and i am also most comfortable with love and sexual relationships based on equality. power-play as well as dominance and submission has always been somewhat uncomfortable to me.

    however, my experience with women is that they respond sexually whenever i am dominant and lose interest sexually whenever i am not dominant. this is extremely predictable in my experience.

    it starts with the initial eye contact, continues through early conversation, and on to sex itself. all my girlfriends’ have responded most positively to physical and psychological dominance during sex (i.e. me leading position changes, pinning down limbs, pulling hair, dominant dirty talk, hard persistent fucking).

    i fought admitting this, because it appeared to contradict my values and was also emotionally challenging and uncomfortable for me. but it does seem to me to be a truth about the majority of women.

    i am fine with being sexually dominant (and it clearly does not mean the relationship cannot be based on equality), but it was not something i ever fantasized about before sleeping with women. it is at worst a concession to my girlfriends’ sexuality and at best an acquired taste of my own.

    even now, my masturbatory fantasies center around the physical act with a physically beautiful woman. dominance-submission (in either constellation) is not part of my fantasy at all.

    my experience (though shared i think by many men) does not indicate that there aren’t people who are completely different. you appear to be exploring a very different form of female sexuality: the opposite pole of the sexuality of the vast majority of women in my opinion. (although power appears central to your sexuality as well, and i remember you referring to yourself as being also a masochist — which is more typical in my opinion.) i find your nonconformism very interesting, perhaps even heroic for its radicalism.

    do you know any women whose sexuality is not at all about power, but just about the physical act? i’ve never met one like that, but i’d definitely be interested to engage her.

    –stagetwo

    ps: the first colon you’re referring to should have been a full stop.

  16. stagetwo permalink
    February 1, 2009 1:01 am

    the link should have been this:
    http://stagetwo.wordpress.com/2008/12/31/about-this-blog/
    –stagetwo

  17. Ireen permalink
    February 2, 2009 12:29 pm

    @stagetwo: I’m a bit taken aback by your assumption that women’s preference for male dominance, as you have experienced it, is genetically determined. It’s a bit like assuming that gender has disappeared and now all we can see is sex. The body, though, is not unmediately accesible: How we perceive, categorize and express it is shaped by social norms, even if these allow for a lot more freedom nowadays. But still, there is nothing we can say about sexuality that is not deeply entwined with our cultural assumptions about gender. Neither can we ever make any true, objective, unbiased facts about the biological core of sexuality. Sex is always already gender.

    The only stage in a person’s life where we can get anywhere close to the biological core of sexuality is in children before the oedipal phase. And Freud, who wasn’t anywhere close to being a feminist, already noted that all children are bisexual and equally aggressive. That a greater amount of women eroticize submission and a greater amount of men eroticize dominance is hence not a biological factor. It is a product of cultural bias, that works strongly in favour of men.

    The social norms you refer to are not just oppressive, but repressive – that is, they work productively. They create the state of affairs they govern. The Western world view is based on the assumption that there are two sexes and it hence creates these two sexes as opposite. As with every binary, these are not equal but hierarchical, putting men (active, agressive etc.) on top and women at the bottom (passive, soft, caring, etc). These assumptions are at the basis of our world view and cannot be overcome in merely 40 years – I wouldn’t have to worry about being paid fairly otherwise, homosexual marriage wouldn’t be an issue at all and intersex people wouldn’t be made to undergo surgery straight after birth.

    What you describe as progressive world view is just the other side of the radical feminist coin. MacKinnon and the like argue that men’s sexuality is the problem because it is intrinsicly violent and at tension with gender equality. You just turn their theory upside down. And I don’t think that accepting inequality makes it any better.

    Sorry for hijacking the thread with some feminist theory, Ranat. (And I’m always for starting a new fashion trend! These strap-ons are just lying around most of the time anyway…)

  18. ranat permalink
    February 2, 2009 10:21 pm

    @Stagetwo – I went a looked at the ‘about’ page of your blog to get a better idea of where you’re coming from. So what I read there will inform my response here, but I’m going to try to stick mainly to points you made in your latest comment.

    “when i speak about “male and female sexual preference”, i refer to the the bulk of the population.”

    Which population are you referring to? Human population, Western-developed world population, a specific country’s population? Knowing which one you mean will help me understand your generalization. I feel this is especially important when specifying Western trends and world views, since many Westerners (particularly citizens of English-speaking Western countries) often assume what is generally true for them is generally true for everyone else. Which it often isn’t except in cases where Western socio-economic and cultural ideas assimilate those of other socio-economic structures and cultures.

    “i believe in the political ideal of gender equality.”

    What do you mean by the political idea of gender equality?

    “however, my experience with women is that they respond sexually whenever i am dominant and lose interest sexually whenever i am not dominant. this is extremely predictable in my experience.”

    While I have known many women who in the kinky subculture would be categorized as ‘vanilla,’ or of a more mainstream sexuality, who prefer to have a dominant male/man partner, I think it is a mistake to assume this is biological (which is often conflated with ‘natural.’) As Ireen points out, these social ‘norms’ are merely the expression of the average of a culture– and Western culture is an amalgamation of civilization, patriarchal oppression, capitalism, and industrial production (among many other things). I think the disconnect you experience with women you’ve had sexual relationships is not because of the women’s ‘inherant’ sexuality, but because of the culture in which their (and presumably your) sexuality developed. (Also, do you mind telling me what gender you identify as?)

    Along similar lines:

    “i find your nonconformism very interesting, perhaps even heroic for its radicalism.”

    I certainly wouldn’t call my sexuality heroic, or nonconformist. I did not consciously choose to go against the tide and turn patriarchal paradigms upside-down then attach my skene’s glands to my newly rewired head. Rather, subconsciously as a child I created nearly an exact mirror of this paradigm, then flipped the binary genders. In a way that is conforming to the paradigm, by recreating it where I got to be in the position of power rather than the position of powerlessness, not that I could have helped it. Though I know through self-examination and a lot of long, hard remembering this is how my sexuality was formed, as it stands now, my sexuality is not owned by the oppressive powers that shaped it. I cannot be unmade as I was wrought, but my sexuality is mine and I can do what I want with it. I too ultimately want my relationships to be based on equality, and I believe very strongly that all humans are equal (as is everything else). Power play, as you noted, does not have to be unequal though. Though it may seem contradictory, I can have power exchange and equality.

    “although power appears central to your sexuality as well, and i remember you referring to yourself as being also a masochist– which is more typical in my opinion.”

    On a side note, I would like to point out that my masochism is not necessarily a part of my sexuality just because my sadism is. Having someone hurt me to my specifications arouses me not in the least, it simply feels good (masochism is not necessarily submissive either). Hurting someone who has asked me to on the other hand has decided physiological reactions in pointed places.

    “do you know any women whose sexuality is not at all about power, but just about the physical act? i’ve never met one like that, but i’d definitely be interested to engage her.”

    I have known one young man whose sexuality is just about the physical act. He is, however, a total asshole, and I don’t think you should engage him. I’ve thought quite a bit, however, about what it would be like to be aroused just by the physical act of intercourse itself with another person, since it’s not something I can relate to at all. Even before I admitted I was kinky I just couldn’t see it. I can see it as being very beautiful, but not arousing.

    “(i.e. me leading position changes, pinning down limbs, pulling hair, dominant dirty talk, hard persistent fucking)”

    I would also like to point out that with the exception of ‘dominant’ dirty talk, none of the things you describe in this list are necessarily dominant, though they are often perceived so in cultures such as the United States (which is the culture I have the most experience in). For example, Bitchy Jones is a dominant sadistic woman who often rants about her love of hard persistent fucking, and Miss Calico is a kinky sex worker who discovered the joys of being dominant and being fucked hard and having her limbs violently rearranged by a submissive man. I don’t know if these behaviors are considered dominant in your relationships, but my point is that they don’t have to be.

  19. ranat permalink
    February 2, 2009 10:33 pm

    @Ireen –

    “The only stage in a person’s life where we can get anywhere close to the biological core of sexuality is in children before the oedipal phase.”

    I have a theory with little to nothing to back it up, that the biological core of sexuality is more accessible the less civilized* and abstractified a culture is. Like I said, little to back it up, but one of the things that made me start thinking about this is how much more commonly kinky sexualities seem to be reported in civilized, hierarchical cultures in my experience (I would say patriarchal, but that’s a given in civilized cultures). Of course, I have not actually gone out and done ethnographic studies of sexuality in several cultures to actually find out.

    “And Freud, who wasn’t anywhere close to being a feminist, already noted that all children are bisexual and equally aggressive.”

    Although Freud made some sort-of insights into the human mind, I do not trust him. How in-favor is he in psychology these days, out of curiosity?

    “That a greater amount of women eroticize submission and a greater amount of men eroticize dominance is hence not a biological factor. It is a product of cultural bias, that works strongly in favour of men.

    The social norms you refer to are not just oppressive, but repressive – that is, they work productively. They create the state of affairs they govern.”

    What you said. Although there may be many more dominant women lurking around and being put-off by all the weird clothes, which was a definite factor in why it took me so long to admit I was dominant.

    “These strap-ons are just lying around most of the time anyway…”

    I need to get a strap-on…

    *[EDIT: As per a comment Ireen made below, I would like to stress that in my world view being less civilized is a GOOD thing. I just forgot how tacky it looks in coming from the mouth of an Anglophone.]

  20. Ireen permalink
    February 2, 2009 11:47 pm

    Ranat, concerning your first point, I’m not so sure about that. BDSM is a specific Western invention, but yeah, I don’t know what other people do or if there’s anything similar. I haven’t done ethnographic studies either (and those offered are usually not about kinky sex abroad). But I don’t think the biological core of sexuality is ever accesible and I’d be very careful in talking about “less civilized” cultures…

    As to Freud – he’s not my friend either and half the time I wanna slap him with my non-existant phallus, but some basic insights he had are standard theory, I assume. Though most of it has been questioned and altered over time by other theorists.

    “Although there may be many more dominant women lurking around and being put-off by all the weird clothes, which was a definite factor in why it took me so long to admit I was dominant.”

    Absolutely!

    “I need to get a strap-on…”

    If only I had somebody to strap-on with :(

  21. ranat permalink
    February 3, 2009 2:00 am

    @Ireen –

    “[…]BDSM is a specific Western invention[…]”

    ‘BDSM’ is specifically Western, but the Japanese were all about bondage and weird sex-toys before Perry forced open the ports and they started segregating baths and shit. I actually want to write a post soon about voluntary torture in indigenous cultures and how it may or may not relate to kink. The Japanese wouldn’t qualify, but it made me think of it.

    “[…] and I’d be very careful in talking about “less civilized” cultures…”

    Oh, lol, wow, I’d forgotten how bad that looks in print. For me, civilization = bad, so being less civilized = compliment, so it never even occurred to me as I typed it what it would look like to people without my world view.

    “If only I had somebody to strap-on with :(”

    I know, right? *sigh*

  22. Ireen permalink
    February 3, 2009 6:25 pm

    That sounds like an interesting post! Looking forward to reading your thoughts on it.

    “Oh, lol, wow, I’d forgotten how bad that looks in print. For me, civilization = bad, so being less civilized = compliment, so it never even occurred to me as I typed it what it would look like to people without my world view.”

    Hehe, I kinda suspected that.

  23. mike permalink
    June 16, 2012 3:34 am

    I agree on MORE on what this guy says.
    Ex: alright, I’ve been thinking, when life gives you penis. Don’t make porn!!!!!! I don’t want your dam penis!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Make life rue the day if it thought it could give Cave Johnson giant cocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!……Anyways, the point is, if I die before you could drain by dick into a computer, I want Caroline to fuck this place

Trackbacks

  1. Five and five-eighths « Denying Thumper
  2. on not wanting a monster cock « tor the tormentor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: