omorka: (Scientology Pervert)
I am contemplating starting another journal for the purpose of musing specifically about the various intersections of kink, feminism, and religion. This name is a little too easy to trace back to my RL identity, so if I do it here it pretty much all needs to be under friendslock. Then again, the obscurity of this site might be protection enough.

Eh.

Utah Sutra

Oct. 30th, 2012 09:54 pm
omorka: (Scientology Pervert)
Okay, this is too funny not to share:

The Book of Mormon Missionary Positions

Technically SFW, but only technically; your boss will look at you funny for a week but probably won't fire you.
omorka: (Bi Symbol)
Man, I'm almost late - hope everyone had a great Celebrate Bisexuality Day! Here's to all the bisexuals, biromantics, pansexuals, panromantics, omnisexuals, non-monosexual queers, and other polysexuals* and polyromantics out there.

* Whether polyamorous or monogamous, that being Another Spectrum Entirely!
omorka: (Abstinence Fails)
The video linked in this post here is not the creepiest abstinence video I've ever seen, but it's in the top 10. Note that, like most stuff from this crowd, it portrays the girl as the temptress, wantonly leading the young boy astray. Granted, I seduced the Imzadi, but for the most part, when I was that age that was fairly rare.

Also, some of the stuff [livejournal.com profile] quantumduck and the Out-of-Sync players did on videotape in high school has better video and audio quality. Certainly they had better acting. In this digital age, there's no excuse for this lack of even decent framing and lighting.
omorka: (Abstinence Fails)
The video linked in this post here is not the creepiest abstinence video I've ever seen, but it's in the top 10. Note that, like most stuff from this crowd, it portrays the girl as the temptress, wantonly leading the young boy astray. Granted, I seduced the Imzadi, but for the most part, when I was that age that was fairly rare.

Also, some of the stuff [livejournal.com profile] quantumduck and the Out-of-Sync players did on videotape in high school has better video and audio quality. Certainly they had better acting. In this digital age, there's no excuse for this lack of even decent framing and lighting.
omorka: (Scientology Wickedness)
You ever had one of those "I'm not the least bit sure whether I want to see this movie, but I think I already know what I ship in it" moments?

Yeah. I'm hoping the trailer for A Dangerous Method (warnings: oversimplified history, bad science, implied parental abuse, and caning) is just cut to appeal to prurient interest (it is a Cronenberg film, after all), but - it has Viggo Mortensen as Sigmund Freud. It's got to have some redeeming value, right?
omorka: (Scientology Wickedness)
You ever had one of those "I'm not the least bit sure whether I want to see this movie, but I think I already know what I ship in it" moments?

Yeah. I'm hoping the trailer for A Dangerous Method (warnings: oversimplified history, bad science, implied parental abuse, and caning) is just cut to appeal to prurient interest (it is a Cronenberg film, after all), but - it has Viggo Mortensen as Sigmund Freud. It's got to have some redeeming value, right?
omorka: (Educator At Work)
This post by [livejournal.com profile] neededalj is really about Survey!Fail, but it encapsulates pretty much everything that I find enraging about both the educational trend towards "brain-based learning" (*blech*) and the whole "gay brains" trope.
omorka: (Educator At Work)
This post by [livejournal.com profile] neededalj is really about Survey!Fail, but it encapsulates pretty much everything that I find enraging about both the educational trend towards "brain-based learning" (*blech*) and the whole "gay brains" trope.
omorka: (South Park Jen)
Just finished a pair of books that contrast interestingly with each other.

The first is Elisabeth Lloyd's The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution. Is it a spoiler if it's a non-fiction book? )

The second book, Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha, gives Lloyd a brief, mostly negative mention - and similarly brief but far more positive ones of both Michael Pollan and Easton & Liszt, which made me feel as if they'd been reading my Amazon purchase list. Again, long review is long and behind the cut. )
omorka: (South Park Jen)
Just finished a pair of books that contrast interestingly with each other.

The first is Elisabeth Lloyd's The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution. Is it a spoiler if it's a non-fiction book? )

The second book, Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha, gives Lloyd a brief, mostly negative mention - and similarly brief but far more positive ones of both Michael Pollan and Easton & Liszt, which made me feel as if they'd been reading my Amazon purchase list. Again, long review is long and behind the cut. )
omorka: (Polyamory Is Love)
Finally finished a book I ordered well over a year ago, Anthony Ravenscroft's Polyamory: Roadmaps for the Clueless and Hopeful. It's the only Poly 201 book I've ever found.

Let me expand on that for a moment for those of you who aren't familiar with the mess that is the poly bookshelf. There are a lot of Poly 101 books, which range in quality from execrable to pretty good. The two best known in the poly circles I travel in are Deborah Anapol's Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits, which was groundbreaking when it was published but is mired in self-congratulatory verbiage and a muzzy newage mindset, and Easton and Listz's The Ethical Slut, which has actually held up pretty well, considering. Celeste West's Lesbian Polyfidelity is also pretty good on that front, although the focus, as you can guess from the title, is a little narrow (although she seems to consider open group marriage polyfidelitous). And, in fact, most of the poly books that exist are Poly 101s. They're also almost all evangelistic. They not only think poly is awesome, they want you, the reader, to discover how awesome it is. The few other books that exist tend to be how-to books for very specific relationship structures - often the FMF V-triad, but sometimes the two-het-couple quad. 313 courses, if you'll permit me to extend the metaphor a bit past the stretching point.

Ravenscroft claims not to have read any of the three books I mentioned above. This might be one of the reasons his book is different; not knowing what ground has already been trod, he doesn't feel any pressure not to wander past it. And while the book does share some of the same territory as Ethical Slut, for the most part it's that rarity, a general poly book that gets past the "This is awesome! You should try it!" evangelical mode and the very basics, and actually deals with the nitty-gritty of living poly - a 201 course.

Remainder of the review behind the cut to spare your friends page )
omorka: (Polyamory Is Love)
Finally finished a book I ordered well over a year ago, Anthony Ravenscroft's Polyamory: Roadmaps for the Clueless and Hopeful. It's the only Poly 201 book I've ever found.

Let me expand on that for a moment for those of you who aren't familiar with the mess that is the poly bookshelf. There are a lot of Poly 101 books, which range in quality from execrable to pretty good. The two best known in the poly circles I travel in are Deborah Anapol's Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits, which was groundbreaking when it was published but is mired in self-congratulatory verbiage and a muzzy newage mindset, and Easton and Listz's The Ethical Slut, which has actually held up pretty well, considering. Celeste West's Lesbian Polyfidelity is also pretty good on that front, although the focus, as you can guess from the title, is a little narrow (although she seems to consider open group marriage polyfidelitous). And, in fact, most of the poly books that exist are Poly 101s. They're also almost all evangelistic. They not only think poly is awesome, they want you, the reader, to discover how awesome it is. The few other books that exist tend to be how-to books for very specific relationship structures - often the FMF V-triad, but sometimes the two-het-couple quad. 313 courses, if you'll permit me to extend the metaphor a bit past the stretching point.

Ravenscroft claims not to have read any of the three books I mentioned above. This might be one of the reasons his book is different; not knowing what ground has already been trod, he doesn't feel any pressure not to wander past it. And while the book does share some of the same territory as Ethical Slut, for the most part it's that rarity, a general poly book that gets past the "This is awesome! You should try it!" evangelical mode and the very basics, and actually deals with the nitty-gritty of living poly - a 201 course.

Remainder of the review behind the cut to spare your friends page )
omorka: (Default)
[Error: unknown template qotd]

Not as stated, no.

See, I think the idea of "the one" is silly. "There's only one girl in the world for you, and she probably lives in Tahiti." (And can I just point out that Mickey Dolenz singing those lyrics is all kinds if ironic?) Seriously, if that were true and souls were randomly distributed, most of us would have to go to China or India to find our lifemates.

I don't think I'm "half of something" (to skip to the Proclaimers, who also covered the song I just quoted). To the extent that I think anything like a soulmate exists, it would be the other people who share my matron and patron deities, and ours is a union of motive purpose, not of romance.

Now, I should qualify that. I don't actually think we're randomly distributed, and the idea that some of us have karmic links of some sort - that we appear in each others' lives over and over in different roles in different incarnations - is sort of both intuitive and comforting for me, although I admit I don't have a lot of evidence for it. But I don't think it's the same role every time. And I suspect that if you're lovers every single time, that that means you're Doing It Wrong, that there's something you're supposed to be learning from that role that you're failing to learn, so you keep doing it over and over until you get it right.

And I think of it (natch) as not being limited to a pair of people. I mean, that would be selfish and insular, almost solipsistic. I suspect that there are groups of souls that find themselves together over and over again, siblings in one life, lovers in another, co-workers in a third, liege-lord and faithful servants in yet another.
omorka: (Default)
[Error: unknown template qotd]

Not as stated, no.

See, I think the idea of "the one" is silly. "There's only one girl in the world for you, and she probably lives in Tahiti." (And can I just point out that Mickey Dolenz singing those lyrics is all kinds if ironic?) Seriously, if that were true and souls were randomly distributed, most of us would have to go to China or India to find our lifemates.

I don't think I'm "half of something" (to skip to the Proclaimers, who also covered the song I just quoted). To the extent that I think anything like a soulmate exists, it would be the other people who share my matron and patron deities, and ours is a union of motive purpose, not of romance.

Now, I should qualify that. I don't actually think we're randomly distributed, and the idea that some of us have karmic links of some sort - that we appear in each others' lives over and over in different roles in different incarnations - is sort of both intuitive and comforting for me, although I admit I don't have a lot of evidence for it. But I don't think it's the same role every time. And I suspect that if you're lovers every single time, that that means you're Doing It Wrong, that there's something you're supposed to be learning from that role that you're failing to learn, so you keep doing it over and over until you get it right.

And I think of it (natch) as not being limited to a pair of people. I mean, that would be selfish and insular, almost solipsistic. I suspect that there are groups of souls that find themselves together over and over again, siblings in one life, lovers in another, co-workers in a third, liege-lord and faithful servants in yet another.
omorka: (Default)
Large image behind the cut )

Edit: and the in bed lemming behind the second cut! )
omorka: (Default)
Large image behind the cut )

Edit: and the in bed lemming behind the second cut! )
omorka: (Lesbian Tea)
Any excuse for me to think about Proto-Indo-European roots and sex at the same time, right? I mean, we could get some number theory in there and we'd have everything I loved about college going on at once.

Linguistic putterings in Eros's courtyard behind the cut )
omorka: (Lesbian Tea)
Any excuse for me to think about Proto-Indo-European roots and sex at the same time, right? I mean, we could get some number theory in there and we'd have everything I loved about college going on at once.

Linguistic putterings in Eros's courtyard behind the cut )
omorka: (Scientology Pervert)
With all respect to George Clinton (and, for that matter, En Vogue), free your ass and your mind will follow. Good, hot sex that breaks a taboo is the best mind-expanding trip there is. Even better than sleep deprivation, caffeine, and too much sucrose, good as that is.

So someone said in an IM conversation:

It was very hard to be pro sex when I was surrounded by so many stories of women who couldn't enjoy themselves anymore. Or never could.


Of course, that precise situation is why I am rabidly pro-sex. The myriad tiny sexual assaults that every woman experiences every day, and the larger sexual assaults that so many of us are scarred by, are not what I mean by sex. Sex is a duet (or trio or quartet or . . .), an activity that can be merely as fluffy fun as a game of Scrabble or badminton, as simultaneously wild and structured as a jazz improv group, or as transcendent as the interaction between worshippers and their God/dess/e/s. But it is a verb, an action, and it requires multiple participants. One person using another as a sex toy is not sex, although it may be masturbation if the user successfully gets off on it and isn't just using it for the power thrill. And the best way to combat that is to promote good sex in all its forms. (Note, by the way, that I'm not in any way anti-masturbation; I'm opposed to using people.)

Sex is not an object, any more than dance is an object or jogging is an object. It is certainly not something that women 'own' and men can take by force, or even something that women give to men or men give to women or lesbians give to each other. Making sex an object seems very clearly related to making women objects, especially since the worst historical patriarchal cultures seem to associate women with nothing except sex and its consequences.

We need a better word, though. Cut to spare anyone who's at work from a large number of vulgarities and euphemisms )

This is the oppressor's language. These are the master's tools. Yet I refuse to believe that we cannot use them to dismantle the master's house; a hammer is a hammer is a hammer, morning or evening. Is there a word we can use? We have a few already - polyamory, polyfidelity, compersion - that the Down-Presser-Man's language didn't have before. Can we come up with a good one, an equal one, for sex-as-a-verb?


Footnote for the first cut )

Profile

omorka: (Default)
omorka

July 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
161718192021 22
23242526272829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 23rd, 2017 12:32 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios