On View Right Now

Had sort of a mixed week, so here’s a mixed bag of a post—things I’ve seen that made me smile or think or go hmm. Call it a look inside what I use for a mind...which is as much of a warning as you’re going to get. Enjoy!

Everything Old is New Again

Advice from the CDC: Do It In Your Sleeve. (Sneeze, that is.) Of course, no one remembers that the reason men’s jackets have those useless buttons on the cuffs was to prevent this “uncivilized” behavior... Somehow, that thought led me to history and styles of men’s underwear—yes, well, do remember what I write! —where I discovered that here, too, progress is sometimes cyclical.

And, hey, how’s this for a segue? Underwear between the covers: in the old days when people actually read paper books , that paper was made from rags. Not exactly breaking news, nor terribly archaic (I print my vita on linen bond paper when I want to impress someone), but still good for a smile. Especially the comments—man, those science types can snark!

The Light! It Blinds

That had to hurt The phrase “blinding flash of the obvious” comes to mind here: Networks admit that taking the show (Jericho) off the air might have hurt ratings! I thought this made a logical follow-up to old-and-new as these long-arc shows have a fair bit in common with the old radio plays and early television, but that mid-season hiatus is something Grandda et confreres would never, ever have pulled. Nor dear ol’ Boz and his ilk (just to bring things home to print). Ever feel like we’re on a treadmill, or is it just me?

Vocabulary-Building, Anyone?

Best new word I've seen in ages:
sapiosexual. N. One who finds intelligence the most sexually attractive feature.

Now and then, one does need a word Websters et al haven’t gotten around to indexing. This suggestion came with what might as well have been a love poem directed at Your Humble Hermit—

"I want an incisive, inquisitive, insightful, irreverent mind. I want someone for whom philosophical discussion is foreplay. I want someone who sometimes makes me go ouch due to their wit and evil sense of humor. I want someone that I can reach out and touch randomly. I want someone I can cuddle with.

I decided all that means that I am sapiosexual."

by Mr M. Ister May 26, 2004

Now tell me that isn’t perfect?! And, oh, "Reach Out and Touch Someone." Speaking of segues...but that can wait. Hope your weekends—and your lives generally—are filled with peace and x-rated joy

pxj

***

A bonus link so that the DVD-watchers won’t miss it—

Wish fulfillment as advertising! Because everyone has that memory, of some parental unit dragging out some embarrassing family memory...

Read More...

Summary only...

Is it cheating if it follows the local rules?

No, I’m not talking about the “California Stop Sign”—a joke applied mostly to metro areas rather than whole states, referring to the white line around the sign as signifying that it’s conditional: this sign only applies when there’s a traffic cop around.

I’m talking about infidelity. And the most eye-catching title I’ve seen in weeks: Lust in Translation The Rules of Infidelity from Tokyo to Tennessee

And it’s ostensibly non-fiction.

Reuters has a fluff piece about the book. The New York Times panned it, while admitting it was entertaining. (Registration-required link) Amazon reviewers were split.

What is this book? A geographical review of modern infidelity. Oh, come on. Tell me you’re not intrigued!

Me, I was interested for professional reasons (too), after a recent CFS listed “cheating” as a whole sub-genre. That venue publishes what might generously be called stroke fiction—she says while trying to decide which of her unsold pieces they might buy! . Certainly not the sort of place to pitch the romance with no sex until the third act, or the fetish fiction with half a book’s worth of build-up before there’s any physical contact at all. But, still, I should have a couple of shorts to suit their needs, right?

Um. In other categories. Because I’ve never considered cheating a good thing. Makes it hard to write, y’know? Actually, just seeing that item listed has made it hard to write the past few days. Picture me: Cheating as erotic? How would one write that? Give me examples! Oh. Ick. This...people get off on this? But they’re cheating!

Etc.

Now, I distinguish between open relationships and cheating. Hey, that’s between you and your significant other(s). But infidelity? To me, that’s the stuff done without the knowledge or consent of your partner(s), and it’s a bad thing. Which, says Lust’s author, is a very American attitude.

First time in a long time I’ve been a member of the local mainstream!

I feel sort of silly posting anything about a book I haven’t read, but perhaps I needed to vent a little about that CFS. It’s not often I wince away from any area of sexual exploration, and this might be the first time a simple list-item has gotten under my skin, but it did. Which might seem a little funny to folks who routinely complain that I don’t use a second pen name for my non-romantic pieces. “And why do you have to write that stuff anyways?” goes the plaint.

Because. Which is probably what some of those people Druckerman spoke to said, when asked why they stray. (The least loaded term I could think of!) Because something intrigued me. Because I was bored. Because it was there...

As I said, I haven’t read Lust in Translation yet. Can’t say I’m all that likely to, based on those reviews—I tend to prefer my social science to have a more rigid methodology than this seems to have—but now that I’m aware of the title, I’ll be on the lookout for it. So if I happen to stumble upon a copy...

Oh, dear. Is that a cheater’s mentality?

Read More...

Summary only...

Stop the presses! Scientist says "erotica has its place"

File this under “No Duh!” Reporter interviews scientist from the Kinsey Institute, gets a story out of it that says there’s nothing inherently wrong with erotica.

Give the newspaper credit—because in Salt Lake, otherwise known as Mormon Central, printing anything even debatably pro- free sexual expression takes courage. But I couldn’t help reading this article with a more than slightly jaundiced eye. “Nothing wrong with erotica!” it proclaims, citing cave art and the Kama Sutra, among other things.

I’m a card-carrying erotic writer, myself. Obviously, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with erotica. “Every man thinks he’s righteous,” as the saying goes; if I didn’t approve, I wouldn’t create the stuff, nor consume it.

But, seriously. This merits column inches in a major metropolitan daily? And on a rather more serious note—there is a difference between erotica and pornography, which this reporter apparently does not grasp.

The article is headed “Kinsey scientist says erotica has its place,” and the first line references “erotic imagery.” But the word “erotica” appears only once in the brief story, as opposed to eight appearances of “porn” or “pornography,” with no clear delineation between the two—it actually ends with a defense of porn as “...a more innocent outlet than adultery.” No mention at all of erotica’s place in a healthy psyche or sex life!

Sigh. Erotica does, indeed, have its place. So does porn. I’d argue that they’re different places, but...baby steps, right?

Read More...

Summary only...