Jack at Thirty-One
Got head from Jill while
Watching horror movies and
List’ning for the door
written by Jack
Dr. Anton Phibes’ Abominably Erudite, Musically Malignant, Cursedly Clever Halloween Horror Movie Quiz
I found this survey at Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule and decided to take part. I’m a die-hard horror fan, and as it’s nearly Halloween I thought why not? With the multitude of memes in which we take part each week, this blog has come a long way from its humble origins as a mere record of our sex life. If you don’t happen to fancy horror as a cinematic genre, I won’t take it personal if you decide to skip this entry. If you do – or if you’re willing to go along for the ride – you might get an idea as to what, beyond sexy naked women, makes me tick.
-Jack
1) Favorite Vincent Price/American International Pictures release.
While AIP is responsible for many of the horror films I love, including the eight Poe-flavored Vincent Price/Roger Corman films, without a doubt, my favorite film from this category is The Abominable Dr. Phibes. I read about this one in back issues of Famous Monsters of Filmland when I was a budding horror geek (I remember discovering that it was Vincent Price’s 100th film), and upon finally viewing it I was captivated, not only by Price’s performance, but by the character of Phibes himself, a disfigured madman hell-bent on revenge against the doctors he believes responsible for the death of his wife. Under the direction of Robert Fuest, The Abominable Dr. Phibes is as full of over-the-top action set-pieces as any big-budget summer blockbuster. The film climaxes with a heart-pounding scene involving an acid trap that seems almost like a precursor to the Saw movies. Watch the trailer:
2) What horror classic (or non-classic) that has not yet been remade would you like to see upgraded for modern audiences?
I am largely unimpressed by the recent spate of Hollywood horror remakes. I feel they are crass big-budget spectacles that almost totally lack the frequently small-budget charm of the originals. But Jack, you may say, your beloved Frankenstein was a remake. Well, technically not; Universal’s 1931 version of Frankenstein, directed by James Whale, is actually an adaptation of the Mary Shelley novel, and not a remake of the earlier Thomas Edison film, but I see your point. I don’t dislike all remakes; I simply miss the days when Hollywood may not have had any original ideas, but they did a better job of packaging them with new titles. Though technically not a horror film, the film that I think could actually stand a big-budget remake is Toho’s 1962 film King Kong vs. Godzilla. A legendary monster mash, I’ve enjoyed this film – a classic in my book, at least – for decades. It’s a film that could stand a more dynamic approach, ideally produced and directed by fans of the giant monster genre, but only if the monsters are realized practically. No CGI whatsoever. Watch the trailer for the 1962 film:
3) Jonathan Frid or Thayer David?
I’ve never watched Dark Shadows, but I’ll say Jonathan Frid as I am at least familiar with his character of Barnabas Collins.
4) Name the one horror movie you need to see that has so far eluded you.
I can’t think of too many horror essentials that I’ve yet to see, as I spent my formative years reading about so-called must-see horror movies and then tracking them down at local video stores or watching them on cable. I’m sure there are some newer horror films that sound good and which I’d like to check out, but no absolute musts, no movies that might make a fellow genre lover say, “You haven’t seen that one yet? Dude – get on that already!” The only one I can think of is, perhaps, Dan Curtis’ 1975 TV movie Trilogy of Terror, starring Karen Black and a Zuni fetish doll. I’m not sure why I haven’t seen this one yet; I’m pretty sure I have a copy around here somewhere.
5) Favorite film director most closely associated with the horror genre.
John Carpenter, whose filmography reads like a list of must-see horror films. Carpenter might still enjoy the “favorite” designation were his sole contribution to the genre 1978’s seminal slasher Halloween. In my opinion, Halloween is an essential modern horror film. Perhaps the essential modern horror film. It reinvented the horror genre, and gave rise to legions of inferior clones, including Friday the 13th. Without Halloween, the slasher movie cycle of the late ’70s and early ’80s may never have taken place. (Yes, I’m aware that 1974’s Black Christmas is considered by many to be the true father of the genre, but no less of an authority than Sean Cunningham has stated that it was Halloween that he was trying to rip off with Friday the 13th.) Additionally, the fact that Carpenter performed a variety of other roles in addition to directing, frequently writing, producing, acting and contributing memorable musical scores, makes him a very versatile jack-of-all-trades.
6) Ingrid Pitt or Barbara Steele?
Ingrid Pitt. While I am familiar with the work of Barbara Steele, especially her dual roles in Mario Bava’s 1960 film Black Sunday and 1961’s Roger Corman adaptation of The Pit and the Pendulum, I am much more familiar with Ingrid Pitt’s performances in Hammer’s early-’70s offerings The Vampire Lovers and Countess Dracula.
7) Favorite 50’s sci-fi/horror creature.
If I’m being absolutely serious, I’m going with the Gill Man, the title character of Universal’s classic 1954 film Creature From the Black Lagoon. What’s not to like? Millicent Patrick’s design is intricate and wildly exotic, the face managing to be both scary and sympathetic. Equally at home on land as underwater, the Gill Man attacks and kills humans only because they intrude on his territory, making this one akin to an early conservationist parable.
Watch the trailer:
If I’m being less serious, I’ll choose Ro-Man, the main baddie from the craptacular 1953 cult classic Robot Monster.
I am a fan of schlocky 1950s sci-fi and horror and I’ve seen many of the best-known and most-ridiculed films of this genre. However, none of them present a character as ridiculous as Ro-Man, an alien – or is it a robot? – invader portrayed by actor George Barrows wearing a gorilla suit and a diving helmet.
Watch the trailer:
8) Favorite/best sequel to an established horror classic.
Bride of Frankenstein. As a fan of the Universal horror films of the ’30s and ’40s, I was exposed to James Whale’s adaptation of Frankenstein at an early age. Though unquestionably a horror classic and quite fun to watch, this film is sadly very dated. Not just because it’s in black and white, as are virtually all films of the era; or because the entire cast (as far as I can tell) is dead, including then-seven-year-old Marilyn Harris, who played the young girl inadvertently drowned by Karloff’s childlike Monster. It’s dated because, at the time of its release in 1931, sound had only been a component of feature films for a few years. Frankenstein is a quiet movie that in some ways doesn’t quite live up to the potential of the sound era. Additionally, Whale’s extensive experience as a director of stage plays may have contributed to the film’s staid quality, which included many very straightforward, static camera shots. (A relative to whom I showed the film compared it to watching security camera footage, though I wouldn’t go quite that far.) Despite the fact that both Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein were directed by the same man, and that a mere four years passed between the films, Bride is the polar opposite of the original. Infused with jolts (no pun intented) of gallows’ humor, Bride of Frankenstein also makes the most of sound, featuring a memorable score by Franz Waxman; and there is much use made of lighting, camera placement, and overt symbolism and iconography. Additionally, the film features one of the most intriguing characters from the classic Universal pantheon, Ernest Thesiger’s Dr. Pretorius, not to mention Elsa Lanchester’s iconic turn as the Monster’s Mate.
Watch the trailer:
9) Name a sequel in a horror series which clearly signaled that the once-vital franchise had run out of gas.
The first movie that came to mind when I read this question was Alien Resurrection. Alien and Aliens are two of my all-time favorite sci-fi films, though I was underwhelmed by David Fincher’s 1992 follow-up Alien 3. While my enjoyment of Alien 3 has increased with repeat viewings, Alien Resurrection represents the series’ nadir. I don’t find the designs of the aliens compelling, and the plot contrivance of bringing Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley back as a clone simply doesn’t work for me. Watch the trailer:
I have similar feelings about Hammer’s 1970 film The Horror of Frankenstein.
I found Ralph Bates, who played the title role, to be a poor substitute for Peter Cushing, whose Baron Frankenstein had been a staple of Hammer’s Frankenstein films since the series’ inception. Additionally, I didn’t care for the way this film restarted the films’ continuity, and since the follow-up, 1974’s Frankenstein and the Monster From Hell, reinstates Cushing, it’s easy to overlook this one. Watch the trailer:
10) John Carradine or Lon Chaney Jr.?
Chaney by a mile. Although Chaney’s portrayal of Frankenstein’s Monster falls far short of Karloff’s (or even, arguably, Glenn Strange’s), the dual role that he came to regard as “my baby”, the Wolf Man and his alter-ego Lawrence Talbot, was solely his. He brought much pathos to the character’s five appearances, even in the series’ comedic swan-song Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. The one character both actors played to which I feel Carradine was better suited was Dracula, a role he played in Universal’s House of Frankenstein and House of Dracula, as well as William “One-Shot” Beaudine’s bargain-basement 1966 schlock classic Billy the Kid vs. Dracula. Though he can’t hope to match the authenticity of Bela Lugosi’s performance, Carradine’s Shakespearean background serves him well as the Transylvanian Count.
11) What was the last horror movie you saw in a theater? On DVD or Blu-ray?
Theater? Got me. We make it out to the movies pretty rarely these days, owing to our refusal to bring a young child into a movie theater for a kid-friendly movie, much less a horror film; as well as a scarcity of babysitters in our area and the extensive planning that must now go into theater-going. As parents, we are no longer able to spontaneously go see a movie. Accordingly we see most of our movies in the relative comfort of our own home, where the penalty for answering a cell phone during a movie is no more popcorn for you. The last movie we saw was Halloween III: Season of the Witch, which we watched last night once the baby had gone to bed. Of course, we’ve seen it many times; the most recent new horror film we saw was Scream 4.
12) Best foreign-language fiend/monster.
Godzilla, hands down. I’ve long been a fan of the King of the Monsters, and like James Bond, I enjoy watching the character develop and evolve – or at times devolve – through the course of a decades-long film series. And while I love the tone of the 1954 film Gojira, in which the monster’s attack on Tokyo is an allegory for the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as a child I had a soft spot for some of his more fantastical cinematic adventures from the 1960s and 1970s. Of particular interest to Little Jack was the abyssmal – and I mean abyssmal, even for me as a young child – 1973 offering Godzilla vs. Megalon, which introduced not only the subterranean cockroach monster Megalon, but also the multi-hued (and strangely mute despite his Jack Nicholson-esque grin) Ultraman ripoff Jet Jaguar. Watch the trailer:
13) Favorite Mario Bava movie.
I would have to say Black Sunday, though I also appreciate Twitch of the Death Nerve for its influence on the splatter films of the ’80s.
14) Favorite horror actor and actress.
It’s pretty difficult to choose just one from each category, as there are a lot of different factors that would make me choose one actor or actress in particular. For overall contributions to the genre, I would probably choose Boris Karloff, as he gave horror cinema many iconic performances, not the least of which are Frankenstein’s Monster and the Mummy Im-Ho-Tep in four Universal films in the 1930s; and Jamie Lee Curtis, who demonstrated in Halloween that women in horror films can do more than simply scream and wait for rescue, and set the trend of tough, plucky “final girls” that continues to this day. Were I choosing recipients for some sort of horror “lifetime achievement award”, I would select Christopher Lee for his extensive body of work; and Daniela Doria for a career of undignified death scenes at the hands of director Lucio Fulci. I would also like to mention four-time Jason Voorhees actor Kane Hodder, who is remarkably down-to-earth and personable despite his very intimidating signature role; and A Nightmare on Elm Street actress Heather Langenkamp, who may very well have been my first celebrity crush.
15) Name a great horror director’s least effective movie.
John Carpenter’s 1996 film Escape From L.A. As stated earlier, Carpenter is undoubtedly a great horror director; his career has been distinguished by such beloved genre classics as The Thing, Christine, and my personal favorite, the aforementioned Halloween. But the follow-up to his 1981 hit Escape From New York suffered from overblown action sequences, and generally feels forced in much the same way that Shock Treatment, the sequel to The Rocky Horror Picture Show is an attempt to catch lightning in a bottle. Watch the trailer:
16) Grayson Hall or Joan Bennett?
Again, not a big fan of Dark Shadows, so…
17) When did you realize that you were a fan of the horror genre? And if you’re not, when did you realize you weren’t?
I don’t know when I realized that I was a fan, though it must have been during my early childhood. I knew that I loved monsters, but I was unaware of the overall significance of this love. I wouldn’t have said that I was a fan of the horror genre; I just liked scary stuff. I had lots of monster toys, including Remco’s Universal Mini-Monsters action figures; I checked out all the horror-related reading material I could find at my local library, though I was particularly enamored with Crestwood House’s Monster Series books, the orange covers and spines of which were undoubtedly familiar to any child of the late ’70s and early ’80s; I watched as much horror as I could get my hands on, though at a very young age this proved difficult, and my horror-watching (as opposed to horror-admiring-from-afar) really took off in my pre-teen years.
18) Favorite Bert I. Gordon (B.I.G.) movie.
1957’s The Amazing Colossal Man. Like Phibes, I fondly remember reading about The Amazing Colossal Man and its pseudo-sequel, the following year’s War of the Colossal Beast, in well-thumbed and worn copies of Famous Monsters of Filmland during my youth. I first watched both films on VHS in the 1990s – not on Mystery Science Theater 3000, as I imagine many of my contemporaries did – when my obsessive horror fandom led me to buy them sight unseen. I found both to be campy, yet still thrilling and fun. The original film wins out as I have always preferred Glenn Langan’s take on the tragic title character over that of Dean Parkin; while the sequel’s interpretation of the lead character features extensive cool-looking prosthetics, Parkin’s lack of dialogue makes the character here less human, and thus less relatable. Watch the trailer:
19) Name an obscure horror favorite that you wish more people knew about.
Jack Sholder’s 1982 slasher film Alone in the Dark, not to be confused with the indentically-titled 2005 Uwe Boll embarrassment. Overshadowed on its release by more prominent slasher films including genre giant Friday the 13th Part 3-D, the film concerns a quartet of mental patients who escape the psychiatric facility to which they’ve been remanded, and terrorize their new doctor who they believe murdered his predecessor. The film is an intriguing study of the fine line between sanity and insanity, and features strong performances by Jack Palance, Martin Landau, and Donald Pleasance. Watch the trailer:
Also, the 1981 film Dead & Buried, written by genre greats Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, tells a bizarre story of murder and resurrection. As the sheriff of a Rhode Island town investigating strange goings-on, James Farentino comes to learn that the people he thinks he knows best – including himself – may not be what they seem.
Watch the trailer:
20) The Human Centipede— yes or no?
Yes, I’ve seen it. At first, knowing what I did of the film’s premise, it struck me as something I had to see to believe. After seeing it, I was convinced that it was intended less as an over-the-top gross-out horror film and more a tongue-in-cheek comedy. I mean, the surgeon who constructs the title creature is played by an actor named Dieter Laser. You can’t make this shit up.
As God is my witness, the guy’s name is Dieter Laser.
21) And while we’re in the neighborhood, is there a horror film you can think of that you felt “went too far”?
There are certainly films that are difficult for me to watch. I found A Serbian Film to be deeply disturbing (despite the at-times bargain-basement special effects) and a film I doubt I’ll re-watch. Likewise the Japanese torture porn opus Gurotesuku (Grotesque), known for its ban in the U.K., is a mean-spirited collection of brutal special effects sequences, though its most egregious offense is the negligible excuse for a story that links said sequences. But to say that I feel any film goes too far is inaccurate. I don’t concern myself with violent action taken by a viewer supposedly because of a violent film, and as long as no one was actually harmed on-screen I don’t see a problem with extreme imagery. Wait. I take that back. Perhaps Cannibal Holocaust, which depicts the actual killing and mutilation of animals, went too far. But then again, I own a copy.
22) Name a film that is technically outside the horror genre that you might still feel comfortable describing as a horror film.
Darren Aronofsky’s Requiem For a Dream. The film deals with addiction, obsession and insanity, and features some of the most unsettling subject matter and downright horrific imagery I’ve ever seen in a non-horror film. The prospect of watching Jennifer Connelly – Cliff Secord’s Jenny! – go ass-to-ass with another comely heroin addict may sound alluring, but the film is grueling and leaves the viewer in need of detox afterwards.
I have no idea whether Jennifer Connelly did her own stunts.
Watch the trailer:
23) Lara Parker or Kathryn Leigh Scott?
Um…hello? Is this thing on?
24) If you’re a horror fan, at some point in your past your dad, grandmother, teacher or some other disgusted figure of authority probably wagged her/his finger at you and said, “Why do you insist on reading/watching all this morbid monster/horror junk?” How did you reply? And if that reply fell short somehow, how would you have liked to have replied?
I watched Fred Dekker’s 1987 horror comedy The Monster Squad the other night, and this question reminds me of the severe dressing-down given two of the main characters by their school principal. The only time I remember being lectured about my love of all things horrific, I just stood there and took it. Rather than providing an intelligent, perfectly-worded counterargument, I looked down at the floor in shame. Then, in the middle of the night I got a woodcutter’s axe from the toolshed in the backyard, draped myself in plastic bags, and chopped to pieces everyone in the house. (Ironic considering that the person who had earlier lectured me wasn’t someone who lived in my house.) Then I threw the bloody remnants into a conveniently-located acid vat. Actually, I don’t think I was ever chastised for my horror fandom. It was something that my parents saw as largely harmless; indeed, my mother had grown up watching Hammer’s 1950s and 1960s horror output. If anyone disapproved, whether grandparents, teachers or clergy, they kept it to themselves.
25) Name the critic or Web site you most enjoy reading on the subject of the horror genre.
I don’t actually read any of these. I’m familiar with websites like Bloody Disgusting, Dread Central, Shock Till You Drop, and the like. And I can think of no real reason why, but I’ve never actually gone to one of these sites to browse, only if I’ve followed a link from elsewhere. And while I’ve been known to peruse the odd horror-related publication in part for reviews, there is no critic whose work I can say I particularly enjoy or look forward to.
26) Most frightening image you’ve ever taken away from a horror movie.
The final shot of The Omen, wherein Damien turns to smile devilishly at the camera while attending the funeral of his parents. That the film ends with the Antichrist victorious, and the general public unaware of his existence, is suitably scary, as well as bleak, for the end of a horror film.
Additionally, Aunt Harriet, made up to look like the deceased brother Tony in Paranoiac is something that still disturbs me. I’d seen a still in a book when I was younger, it made me want to see the movie immediately.
27) Your favorite memory associated with watching a horror movie.
There’s no way I can pick just one. My childhood alone is packed with such memories: Seeing Frankenstein during an elementary school Halloween party. Gathering with friends at somebody’s house to watch American Werewolf in London and hearing a chorus of “Rewind it!” during Jenny Agutter’s shower scene. Being afraid to look out my bedroom window during a late-night viewing of Night of the Living Dead.
28) What would you say is the most important/significant horror movie of the past 20 years (1992-2012)? Why?
Without a doubt, the answer is Scream. Prior to its release, the horror genre was dying, or at the very least in decline, with big budget costume dramas like Bram Stoker’s Dracula and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein seemingly the order of the day, while ’80s horror franchises continued to breed uninspired sequels. As far as influence over the future of the genre, I don’t believe anything else comes close. While I am hesitant to say whether this is a negative or a positive, horror as a whole would be nothing like it is today had Scream never been produced. Much like Halloween eighteen years earlier, Scream gave rise to a legion of lesser films, notably I Know What You Did Last Summer, and the prominence of so-called torture porn in the last decade seems to be an answer to the wave of lightweight PG-13 horror films released in its wake. Additionally, though Scream wasn’t the first self-aware horror film, it was more successful at exploiting this hook than, for example, Wes Craven’s New Nightmare. After growing up in the Reagan ’80s and being told that modern horror was the lowest common denominator, lower even than porn, I can admit that I initially resented the fact the same critics who’d savaged the films I enjoyed growing up now loved Scream because it was tongue-in-cheek. Watch the trailer:
29) Favorite Dr. Phibes curse (from either film).
I’m going to go with the locusts that devour – quite literally picking her flesh from the bones of – Susan Travers’ character.
30) You are programming an all-night Halloween horror-thon for your favorite old movie palace. What five movies make up your schedule?
A middle-of-summer horror-thon would feature five camping-themed films: Friday the 13th (1980), The Burning (1981), Madman (1982), Sleepaway Camp (1983) and The Blair Witch Project (1999). A horror-thon made up of Amicus’ 1970s horror anthologies – The House That Dripped Blood (1970), Tales From the Crypt (1972), Asylum (1973), Vault of Horror (1973), and From Beyond the Grave (1973) – would also be fun as I enjoy all of these films. I would also enjoy programming a “Awful or Out-of-Continuity Installments of Popular Horror Franchises”-themed horror-thon. It would include any five of the following films: Halloween III: Season of the Witch (1982), A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985), Friday the 13th: A New Beginning (1985), Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989), Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation (1994), Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994), Hellraiser: Bloodline (1996), Halloween Resurrection (2002), and any installment in the Child’s Play or Leprechaun series.
Flash Fiction Friday: Succubus
(Source image: “Battire” by Gernot)
She was pale, gaunt, clad in a dusty burial shroud. The men watched in wide-eyed fascination as she rose from the tenebrous depths of an open grave and approached the crypt. She focused on none of them, but rather stared blankly, staggering ever closer. As she entered the crypt she doffed the shroud. The tattered corset she wore revealed breasts unsuited to a freshly-risen corpse, and the shiny black bat wings extending from her arms were clearly store-bought. The stiletto heels that she wore may have helped her stagger so convincingly.
Music began to play, and she started her dance. Such theatrics! she thought. That’s what I get for working a bachelor party on Halloween. (115)
-Jack
I’m a horror fan, and have been all my life. In fact, I’ve spent the last couple days working on Dr. Anton Phibes’ Abominably Erudite, Musically Malignant, Cursedly Clever Halloween Horror Movie Quiz, and plan to post my answers here on Saturday. This week’s Flash Fiction Friday, which required a maximum word count of 120, and use of the word “tenebrous”, was right up my alley. However, that’s not to say that the prompt didn’t provide a few challenges. Though I had the vampire stripper idea in mind pretty much as soon as I saw the prompt picture , and though this week’s word limit was the highest since October 7, my first draft was much longer than I’d hoped it would be. Given the various details in the prompt picture that begged mention, from the physical qualities and attire of our vampiress (her bare breasts, wings, pale complexion, stockings and heels) to the scenery (the desolate-looking cemetery backdrop and the marble column against which she leans), I knew there wouldn’t be sufficient space to do everything justice and include anything but the most rudimentary story.
In the end, I was able to shave off a few excess descriptive words and in doing so I allowed myself enough room to deliver the twist ending, revealing that our beautiful revenant is actually an exotic dancer working a horror-themed bachelor party. Originally, rather than stating that she was performing on Halloween night, I considered that the bachelor was, much like myself, a fan of horror movies, but that proved too hard to convey given the word limit. “That’s what I get for working a bachelor party on Halloween” fit perfectly, so I went with that instead.
As always, I am unable to post the prompt picture in high-resolution without truncating it. If you’d like to see it in higher quality, take part in the fun, or see who else participated this week, check out Erotic Flash Fiction Friday.
While We’re on the Subject of Ignorant People Talking About Sex…
Professionals attack the BBC for putting teachers at risk after its decision to broadcast a clip during Sunday Morning Live that compared sex education teachers to paedophiles“I think parents have the absolute right to protect their children from this sort of education which is so unhelpfully obsessed with destroying childhood innocence, in a way that’s reminiscent of paedophilia. To me, anyone who wants to talk dirty to little children is a danger to them.”These words, from the lips of “family values” campaigner Lynette Burrows, were broadcast last weekend as part of a pre-recorded video package on the BBC‘s Sunday Morning Live show to kick off a “debate” about sex education.The comments were left unchallenged, and the show continued with a studio discussion in which Burrows was joined by a historian and a neoconservative lobbyist, rather than, say, a sex education professional or similar expert. The lack of a qualified speaker in the studio removed the possibility of any informed discussion, and things veered downhill from there.Other guests were piped in by phone or webcam. The only person with professional experience relevant to the debate, sex education teacher Alice Hoyle, was given seconds to “justify why I am not a paedophile on national TV” before being cut off in favour of a Rabbi (decent, to be fair), and a spokesman from the Campaign for Real Education who ranted unpleasantly about homosexuality in schools. It wasn’t a debate so much as a festival of ignorance.Burrows’ comments were idiotic, but so was the decision to broadcast them unchallenged, and the BBC have some serious questions to answer about their editorial judgement. One viewer complained to Auntie, and their response to her was as depressing as it was tediously predictable:“We make no editorial comment or judgement on the views expressed by contributors to our programmes, and our aim is simply to provide enough information for viewers to make up their own minds.“This may include hearing opinions which some people may personally disagree with but which individuals may be fully entitled to hold in the context of legitimate debate.”Firstly, if you give more exposure or weight to one side of the discussion, or you fail to include experts in the debate, then you are making an editorial judgement whether you mean to or not. You can’t choose which views to provide a platform for – doubtless there are many the BBC wouldn’t air – and then pretend that this somehow doesn’t involve making a judgement about their legitimacy. Especially when you go on to describe them as “legitimate”.Secondly, not all opinions are equal, or legitimate. The BBC’s position here is a kind of anti-journalism, what Jay Rosen termed “the view from nowhere”. As Rosen once explained, “it places the journalist between polarized extremes, and calls that neither-nor position ‘impartial’.”Of course it isn’t impartial, merely cowardly. Repeating every conceivable opinion without challenge is not being objective, neither is setting up a debate with the premise that both points of view are equally valid – that road leads us to creationists on David Attenborough specials.Thirdly, the segment failed to enlighten or inform at even the most basic level. No experts were included in the studio discussion to explain their field, no substantial discussion of the evidence occurred, and the segment didn’t even attempt to explain what sex education is, or what it involves.Meanwhile Burrows was free to claim variously that teen pregnancies are rising, that teachers “want to talk dirty to little children”, and that “it is now generally accepted that [sex education] hasn’t worked.” These aren’t matters of opinion but claims of fact, and for the presenter to leave them unchallenged is an abdication of professional responsibility.The BBC’s viewers may have been seriously misled by their shambolic approach to the topic, and thousands of dedicated professionals have not only had their work grossly misrepresented, but have been subjected to vile and unfounded smears that may even put them at risk. As lecturer and researcher Dr Petra Boynton put it to me today:“Their play at impartial broadcasting actually allows them to let a guest be accused of something that’s not only false, but is objectionable and could potentially have a far-reaching impact on their career, family life and personal safety.”Dr John Lloyd, policy adviser of the PSHE Association, which represents those teaching personal, social, health and economic education, echoed Boynton’s concerns, telling me:“The PSHE Assocation, the subject association for personal, social, health and economic education (of which sex and relationships education is a key component) says that it is very concerned that such extreme language puts those teaching SRE at risk.”The Family Planning Association have also condemned the show in a statement released online today which condemns Lynette Burrows’s views as “a gross distortion of what relationships and sex education is”, asking broadcasters to “stop giving air time to the minority who deliberately seek to distort what sex and relationships education is.”The failure of programmes like Sunday Morning Live to deal with these issues responsibly leaves professionals wondering why they should bother to engage with the media on these topics at all. Alice Hoyle, the teacher who was briefly allowed to respond via webcam, has been left shocked by the experience, and discusses it at length in a series of blog posts. “Equating me to a paedophile is actually the most foul, upsetting and disgusting thing that has ever been said to me.”Why go back? As Dr Boynton told me:“We’re constantly being told as practitioners and academics that we must ‘engage’ with the public via the media, but there is little or no support for us when we bravely do this (knowing how controversial sex/relationships issues are) and face abuse and ridicule. The constant focus on discussions as ‘false debates’ as well as the media’s lack of understanding of basic sex ed issues means we’re having our time wasted at best, but being personally and professionally abused at worst.”It’s a situation that helps nobody, least of all those the BBC is supposed to serve and inform.
The issue here seems to be free speech versus journalistic responsibility. We’re all for personal freedoms – anyone who’s read much of this blog should have already figured that out – and we would certainly defend the right of the press to print or broadcast something controversial. At this point, though, isn’t it just a “coulda versus shoulda” argument? In other words, just because you can, does that mean you should? I live in the United States, the home of Fox News, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of one-sided media coverage. In our opinion, narrow-minded people who wear their willful ignorance as a badge of honor are the real problem, but even in present-day, with seemingly everyone beholden to special interests, a responsible media outlet owes it to all parties, especially its audience, to cover all sides of a story rather than furthering a preconceived agenda.
Do You Masturbate? This Guy Says You’re Gay
The Christian Right has much to say about homosexuality. Fred Phelpsl [sic] says God hates them and stages protests at the funerals of American soldiers to bring attention to his hatred. An anti-gay Christian Right wing activist recently said there wasn’t any proof that LBGT people exist. And most recently, a conservative crowd booed a gay soldier during a GOP Debate. Now a “pastor” on the Christian Right is saying that masturbation is a form of homosexuality.“Pastor” Mark Driscoll says that men need to stop masturbating because it’s a kind of homosexuality. In a booklet titled Porn-Again Christian: A Frank Discussion on Pornography & Masturbation for God’s Men, Driscoll of the Seattle-based Mars Hill Church says, “First, masturbation can be a form of homosexuality because it is a sexual act that does not involve a woman. If a man were to masturbate while engaged in other forms of sexual intimacy with his wife then he would not be doing so in a homosexual way. However, any man who does so without his wife in the room is bordering on homosexual activity, particularly if he’s watching himself in a mirror and being turned on by his own male body.”In sermons offered at this website, Driscoll also says that Christians should judge gay people like Jesus. “If you leave this church, you can go to another church and they will tell you if you are living together and not married, that’s okay. They’ll tell you if you’re gay, that’s okay. They’ll tell you if you’re married and you’re into porno and wife-swapping and open marriages, that’s okay. God is displeased with that conduct. …. Christians therefore must be judgmental like Jesus.”Driscoll is a poor excuse of a pastor. This supposed “man of God” should know that Jesus was not judgmental, and he certainly frowned upon Christians judging others. “Judge not lest ye be judged,” Jesus said to a group of men who were judging an adulterer. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” The Bible says that the only sexuality we should be concerned with is our own. I’m certain this “pastor” sins on a daily basis and has probably masturbated a couple times in his life. Interestingly enough, he isn’t saying anything about female masturbation. He’s probably okay with that.
Well, duh. Female masturbation is fucking hot.
For the record, there is no connection between masturbation and homosexuality. Sure, gays masturbate, but so do straight people and we can say this with 100% confidence because we’re straight people and we masturbate. In fact, we are thinking of masturbating as soon as we post this. Mark Driscoll would probably claim that the fact that we masturbate means we are gay. Hey, that’s great, Mark. But admit it, you’ve masturbated like one of those red-assed monkeys at the zoo being paid by the fluid ounce. Maybe you don’t anymore; maybe the shame and the self-hatred you feel for having masturbated at one point in your life forced you to kick the habit. If that’s the case, then we feel sorry for you, because masturbation is awesome. It’s the one kind of sex that the most repulsive members of society can be assured of experiencing, and you should know. But if it makes you feel better to say that we’re all gay, then that’s fabulous.
Fisting is Fun!
As stated in our blog entry posted Wednesday, today is International Fisting Day. For those of you unfamiliar with the practice, Wikipedia defines fisting as “a sexual activity that involves inserting a hand into the vagina or rectum.” It sounds pretty straightforward, but there is nothing simple about fisting. It is potentially one of the most enjoyable experiences in the entire sexual spectrum, combining a deep, frequently emotional, connection between the fister and the fistee with an often face-to-face intimacy and an intensity that we have found to be all but unmatched elsewhere in our sexual repertoire.
Fisting is also one of the most misunderstood sex acts; witness, in Kevin Smith’s 1997 film Chasing Amy, Ben Affleck’s wide-eyed overacting – sorry, incredulity – when told by Joey Lauren Adams’ character that she enjoys it on occasion. I suppose that the fact that the film was released and is set almost fifteen years ago is partially to blame for the urban legend-like mystique with which Affleck’s character seems to view fisting; today his general ignorance seems outdated, even quaint.
The fact that the depiction of fisting in pornography is extremely rare may be responsible for the mythic status that continues to surround it. As stated in the article we shared on Wednesday, fisting was included in a 2001 document known as the Cambria List, which was created as a direct response to the election of George W. Bush, and which circulated through the adult film industry listing sex acts – as well as specific camera shots – that were best omitted from pornography in order to avoid obscenity lawsuits or prosecutions. Though the list is vague – two different sex acts are deemed “OK if shot is not nasty”, whatever in hell that means – it is clear that the industry was seeking to guard itself against a crackdown in George W. Bush’s ultraconservative America.
In addition to fisting, the Cambria List made verboten such themes or shots as interracial sex, BDSM, bisexuality, transsexuals, squirting, and “two dicks in/near one mouth”. Though I am far from an adult industry insider, it seems that the government’s crusade against obscenity was in actuality a crusade against LGBT performers, women in general, and any other sort of pornography that defied traditional values (as misplaced as that phrase seems to be in a discussion of adult entertainment). While you may be shocked by this blatant attack on the sexual freedoms of consenting adults everywhere – ironic, considering the way the Bush administration used the concept of freedom to justify the War on Terror – it’s important to remember that this is the same nation that collectively shat itself at the sight of Janet Jackson’s nipple during Super Bowl XXXVIII.
In the last few years the adult industry has relaxed its self-imposed ban on most of the items on the Cambria List, but in mainstream pornography at least, fisting is still unheard of. That such an erotic, exhilarating act remains taboo is both perplexing and disappointing, especially in light of the fact that other acts – spitting, for example – are more widely accepted and in fact seem to be growing in popularity. Nothing against anyone who has successfully managed to incorporate spitting into a healthy, committed relationship, but we don’t find your particular kink appealing. At the risk of making a blanket statement without any real evidence, I suspect that the prominence of spitting in mainstream pornography – as well as the scarcity of fisting – is due to the fact that most commercially-avaiable porn is marketed toward men as opposed to women or couples.
I was the first person to fist Jill. She was not the first person I ever fisted. Prior to meeting her, I’d had some experience with ex-girlfriends, though I only inserted my hand to the base of my thumb. As I was under the impression that, in order for the act to qualify as fisting I needed to be wrist-deep, I was always hesitant to identify what I was doing as such. However, according to porn star and fisting advocate Courtney Trouble in the San Francisco Bay Guardian article we reposted on Wednesday, the wrist is not the minimum requirement; as long as four fingers and a thumb are inserted past the knuckles, fisting has taken place.
The first time Jill and I experienced fisting together, our relationship was still fairly new. I was stimulating Jill’s clit with my thumb while stroking the anterior wall of her pussy with my index and middle fingers. When I found her G-spot, she asked me to insert another finger, and then another. Without varying my rhythm, I moved my thumb off of her clit, and replaced it with my other hand. As I softly strummed my fingers against her clit, I withdrew my fingers from inside her – much to her dismay – and put my hand into a position sometimes colloquially referred to as “duck bill”.
Thanks to Jill’s advanced state of arousal she accepted my compactly-arranged fingers and thumb without resistance, and after a few minutes of what she later told me was the most emotionally-intense sexual experience she’d ever had (something with which I am inclined to agree), she indicated that she was very close to orgasm. I continued to massage her G-spot, by now lapping steadily, hungrily, at her clit with my tongue. As her orgasm built, the moans she uttered were unlike any I’d heard before. Likewise, to say that she squirted upon reaching her climax would be an understatement. When her orgasm had passed, she lay there, panting as the waves of euphoria slowly receded. We held each other for almost an hour, not kissing, not speaking, not even touching beyond our mutual embrace. We listened to each other breathing, felt our hearts beating in unison. I had never felt so in sync, physically and emotionally, with another person. Was it then that I knew I would marry Jill? It may have been.
We appreciate the efforts of Courtney Trouble in creating International Fisting Day. With any luck, she will bring attention and understanding to – and in the process remove the unfair taboo from – this most enjoyable sexual act.
Flash Fiction Friday: Aural Sex
(Source image: unknown title by Beau Monde; website link broken)
His disembodied voice filled her ears as her movements reached their frantic culmination. She gave her clitoris one last stroke and climaxed in a paroxysm of pained delight. As her heartbeat slowed to normal she removed her headphones and placed them on her knee. Tears formed in her eyes and began to spill down her cheeks, her panting breaths becoming tortured sobs as she remembered him. When her eyes were dry she deleted the recording from her computer. (79)
-Jack
When I first saw the prompt for this week’s Flash Fiction Friday, I was stunned by the 38-98 word limit, and recalling the challenge presented by the previous two weeks’ higher count, I was surprised by just how easy this week’s story was to write. Like last week, I had a pretty clear idea of just how much space 98 words should take up, and adjusted my mindset accordingly. I’ve written extremely short fiction in the past, and it maxed out at approximately twenty-five words, so in retrospect 98 words was, by comparison, extravagant. Thus, this is the first time in the three weeks that I’ve been participating that I completed my story before Thursday night.
The body language of the model in the prompt photo suggested conflict, perhaps pain or grief, and as observed by Tame, wistfulness. Among the details in need of interpretation were the model’s post, especially the placement of her hands; her nudity; and easily the most curious aspect of the photo in my opinion, the placement of the headphones on her knee. Obviously there are many valid reasons why one might place a pair of headphones on her knee in this fashion, but combining this with the other elements of the photo in a compelling fashion was where I found the challenge.
As with last week, I chose not to address the hair color of the model. Last week, was I allowed a few more words, I would have mentioned the purple highlights, as well as the tattoo, in describing how the narrator viewed Vivianne as a free spirit. With a much smaller limit this week I knew I’d have no words to spare on the ruby-red hue, although it’s a shame as her hair is possibly the most immediately-striking aspect of the prompt photo. Admittedly I have no idea what I might have said about it given ten or fifteen additional words, save to merely mention it in passing.
I considered titling the story “Grief”, but decided to leave the fact that the woman pictured is mourning a lover who is either deceased or otherwise absent a surprise only revealed at the end.
Once again, I attempted to post the prompt photo in high-resolution, but Blogger didn’t want to play ball. (That, or I have no idea how to make the image fit.) If you want to see our lovely crimson-haired model in higher quality, take part in Flash Fiction Friday, or see who else participated, head over to Flash Fiction Friday.
A Funny But Inconsequential Article; Or, Proof Positive That Most People Have Their Heads in the Gutter
…Not that that’s a bad thing, necessarily. From Huffington Post:
“Magen, tell me something you put in your mouth but don’t swallow.” Before the question left “Family Feud” host Steve Harvey’s lips, he knew he had stumbled into sticky territory.After innocuously getting the answer “gum” during the initial round, Harvey walked over to the Forsythe team and posed the same question. But Magen, the girl he asked (and a pastor’s wife to boot), gave him an incredulous look that summed up what most viewers were likely thinking (assuming that, like us, most viewers have the sense of humor of a 12-year-old boy).Harvey immediately spirals into a half tirade/half lecture about how such a question — and such an answer — could potentially harm the squeaky-clean legacy that “Family Feud” has enjoyed for decades.How does Magen eventually answer? Does she tiptoe around the question? Is “Family Feud” off the air after an advertiser revolt against swallowing? You may be surprised.
For the record, I’ve never given much thought to the wives of pastors and such. Nothing against them as a whole, but were I to think “pastor’s wife” I would probably think quiet, demure, sexually repressed and frustrated, and probably not in favor of the majority of the values for which I stand. But Magen seems to prove otherwise. I found her pretty cute, and the fact that she was confident enough to say what I’m guessing the majority of her team, the studio audience, and the home audience was thinking was hot. The fact that her answer was not on the board indicates that the people surveyed were probably not as honest or confident as she.
I’m actually a bit disappointed in Steve Harvey. He seemed threatened by Magen’s answer (if not by Magen herself), though I’m guessing (or hoping) based on what I know of him that this was for show in order to protect Family Feud’s “squeaky clean legacy”. I actually find Harvey’s description of the show as “Christian entertainment” (likely meant facetiously) to be highly dubious, as I’m not the only viewer who remembers Richard Dawson and his penchant for forcing himself on female contestants. (In order to avoid upsetting the legions of fundamental Christians who frequent our blog, I’ll avoid suggesting that forcing oneself on a woman is consistent with Christian values.)
Now that I think of it, Family Feud is not broadcast live. If Magen’s answer was so problematic that the host of the show had to disavow it, why was the segment allowed to air? Why not just replace the offending question with another, more family-friendly one? For that matter, why bother asking the question in the first place? Obviously if most people hear “Name something you put in your mouth but don’t swallow” and think of something sexual, I imagine that at least one of the show’s producers does as well. Therefore I’m guessing that the question was included on the show precisely because of the possibility of a sexual reference being made – perhaps not one as explicit as “sperm” – with Harvey instructed to visibly disapprove. Lame.
Now that I think of it, I wonder if Magen’s answer wasn’t on the board because the hundred people surveyed actually prefer to swallow.
A Ridiculous Petition; or Won’t Somebody PLEASE Think of the Children?
I learned of this petition through the Tumblr account of adult retailer Babeland, and immediately felt an angry rant boiling up inside me. I decided that rather than divide my thoughts into approximately one hundred 140-character Tweets, I’d instead post them here. The petition, which comes to us from a website called One Million Moms.com, is aimed at forcing major drugstore chains Walgreens, Rite Aid, and CVS to remove “v*br*tors, d*ld*s and other s*x toys” (censorship theirs) from their websites. Here is the text of the petition.
Adult Toys Sold on Pharmacy WebsitesThere is a problem when websites for drug stores start looking like adult fantasy stores instead of a place for medical needs. We are highly concerned when adult toys are being sold online in the least likely places. Online filters may not catch this, and children are stumbling onto these sites by accident.One of our supporters reported that her child found this on Rite Aid’s website. After checking around, our research proved Rite Aid is not the only offender. Walgreens and CVS (not nearly the quantity as the other two) are also at fault. When is it ok to sell v*br*tors, d*ld*s and other s*x toys on a drug store’s website? (An asterisk ‘*’ is used to ensure our emails get through to those who have signed up for our alerts. Otherwise specific words referenced would be blocked by some internet filters.)At these sites, there is not a warning of any kind. These websites have online shopping available, and under “Sexual Wellness” or “Sexual Well-Being” there are pages of adult toys offered on the Rite Aid and Walgreens sites. CVS had one, and you have to type in the search box to find it.TAKE ACTIONPlease send an email letter to Rite Aid, Walgreens, and CVS requesting they no longer sell adult toys on their websites. Urge them to remove all s*x toys immediately or you will be shopping elsewhere.Send Your Letter Now!NOTE: If you see a commercial or program which is offensive, email us the information. Many of you have done this, and it is very helpful.
First off, I feel that the women in charge of One Million Moms.Com, or at least this petition, would greatly benefit from a vibrator, preferably one designed for G-spot stimulation. Ladies, it’s far too obvious that you are sexually frustrated. A vibrator may not bring you flowers or cuddle with you afterwards, but it also won’t mention the weight you’ve gained since you bought it, or fall asleep before you’ve gotten off. In the remotely slim chance that anyone involved in this petition, from writer to signer, is reading this, let me emphatically repeat my point: Vibrators, dildos, butt plugs, nipple clamps and other toys marketed toward adults (i.e. not your children) are a good thing. They make the world a better place. I suggest you buy a couple, and I suggest you buy them from Good Vibrations, Babeland or Smitten Kitten, as these three stores are reputable, ethical, and above all, sex-positive. Which, now that I think of it, might be a problem for you.
I take issue with the first sentence of the petition. Adult fantasy store? Unless I can buy a gimp mask, a flogger and a dismembered replica of some random porn star’s genitalia and anus, I refuse to think of my neighborhood Walgreens as an adult fantasy store. Because let’s face it, if all they carry are vibrators, dildos and the like, they don’t qualify; when most people think of vibrators, etc., they probably don’t think “exotic fantasy”, but instead think “attainable reality.” And who’s to say that a sex toy isn’t a legitimate medical need? I know that when I go more than a day without an orgasm I come dangerously close to snapping, and in the case of the ladies of One Million Moms.Com, sexual frustration has obviously caused their heads to recede up their own asses, which is probably very dangerous. If they’re going to try and make the argument that a sex toy is not a medical need, I demand that they present their medical degrees to me in person so that I may tell them to their faces how full of shit they are.
They also state that “children are stumbling onto these sites by accident.” Seriously? Kids are stumbling onto drugstore websites? While I find this unlikely, I will play along and pretend that this is something that could be happening en masse. Let’s say, just for the hell of it, that Walgreens’ website is one or two letters away from a popular children’s website. I’m too lazy to make one up; please come up with something similar to “Walgreens” that would appeal to children as I’ve literally got nothing. So all of these fat-fingered children are making the same typographical error that leads them to one of three major chain drugstore websites. What I can’t pretend, however, is that said children are accidentally stumbling upon sex toys once they’re there. I would have assumed that when kids mistakenly find themselves at a website that holds little to no interest for them, they would just retype the web address until they get it right, but apparently a popular activity amongst children is to type the word “dildo” into any search box they encounter.
At this point I need to note that there is no language in the petition about removing these items from store shelves. Walgreens, Rite Aid and CVS do not carry adult products of this nature in their stores. And if they did, while I wouldn’t particularly care nor would I support a petition to remove them from the shelves – remember, commerce is voluntary, at least in the United States – I might think that the people behind this petition were less batshit insane than I do right now. My daughter is still a baby, but I imagine that at some point in the future Jill or I (hopefully Jill) will have to explain to her what a vibrator is, though I hope that this occurs after we see one in a movie, or even in a drug store, and not when she finds one of Jill’s many toys in her nightstand drawer, or in the shower, or perhaps on the sink in the master bedroom where it’s undergone post-usage cleaning but hasn’t yet been put away. But we’ll certainly have that discussion if and when it becomes necessary, because the alternative, advocated by One Million Moms.Com, is to make sex toys less available, and this isn’t something with which we are comfortable.
I could almost be okay with this petition if the motivation was different, i.e. if rather than trying to protect our children, they were trying to protect the old folks of the world, such as our parents and grandparents. Older people are much more likely than children to browse a drugstore website, don’t you think? I think that including sex toys on a retail website that my parents – or my grandparents, if I had any still alive – might browse poses a real risk. I take comfort in my relative certainty that if my Mom somehow stumbled upon a vibrator while looking for some sort of anti-inflammatory ointment, she would most certainly never bring this fact to my attention, but the truth is that my biggest nightmare is having to, for whatever reason and under whatever circumstances, view a sex toy that my parent or parents are also viewing. This one trumps all the traditional nightmares. Naked in public? No big deal, I’ve been there. Forgot to study for a test? Yes, frequently when I was in college. Maniac with razors on his fingers chasing me through a boiler room? Hasn’t everyone been through this? But if I’m walking past an adult store with my parents, and sex toys are visible, I don’t want to live anymore. There’d better not be a uniformed cop anywhere in the vicinity, because I’m grabbing something shiny and running toward him or her full-speed.
I was hoping to avoid ranting about personal responsibility when it comes to raising and communicating with one’s children, but it needs to be said: Parents who bitch about what their children see and do online need to do a better job monitoring their kids’ web surfing habits, or at the very least fostering a safe and open environment in which the child knows that communication is encouraged. It is your responsibility, and if you truly believe that your child glimpsing a vibrator, out of context on a retail website, is going to cause him or her irreparable damage and turn him or her into some sort of hairy-palmed, Hell-bound chronic masturbator, then the onus is on you to prevent him or her from looking, even though by doing so you are almost certainly causing more harm than good. Parenting means occasionally talking to your child and answering questions. You owe it not only to your child, but to the legions of consumers who would like to buy a sex toy from Walgreens, Rite Aid or CVS, and who would be impacted negatively by your refusal to take responsibility and be honest. It’s this attitude that is partially to blame for the backlash against marriage equality. Comedian Louis CK said it better than I ever could:
Like when you see someone stand up…on a talk show and say, like, “How am I supposed to explain to my child that two men are getting married?” I don’t know. It’s your shitty kid. You fucking tell him. Why is that anyone else’s problem? Two guys are in love but they can’t get married because you don’t want to talk to your ugly child for fucking five minutes?
The fact is, your children could stumble upon these sites. But they probably won’t. If your kid is deliberately going to Walgreens, Rite Aid, or CVS’s websites, I suggest you find out why. When I was a kid, nothing was more boring than a chain drugstore, even before they took out the ice cream counters. The toys were overpriced, and the magazines were out of date. Those were literally the only two sections of the drugstore that I found even slightly interesting. If your kids are deliberately going to one of these websites, it’s a safe bet that they are looking to buy over-the-counter drugs in bulk in order to sell them at school. What’s more, they are using your credit card to pay for them. But take comfort in the fact that your kids are probably just ordering the drugs and then going to another website; chances are they aren’t sparing a moment to look at sex toys. Alternately, I suppose they might be going to these websites in order to search specifically for dildos and vibrators, but if that’s the case Walgreens and the others are not to blame.
Note the final two lines of the petition:
NOTE: If you see a commercial or program which is offensive, email us the information. Many of you have done this, and it is very helpful.
While I am tempted to point out that someone who actively monitors the airwaves for something to get offended by is the worst sort of time-wasting parasite I can imagine, I would really just like to state that one may only exercise his or right to be offended as long as it doesn’t impact someone else’s rights, be it the right to sell sex toys, or the right to purchase them.
In the process of writing this entry, I actually went to Walgreens, Rite Aid, and CVS’s websites to confirm that they carry the “offending” products. Given these three chains’ mainstream, middle-of-the-road reputations, I expected to see a few back massagers of the sort that can be repurposed for intimate use. I typed “dildo” into Walgreens’ search box and six items came back! Granted, there were none of the traditional phallus-shaped latex, silicone rubber or Cyberskin dongs I am used to seeing in adult toy stores, and a couple of them were battery-operated, i.e. vibrators. One item, the Tantus Alumina Pace, was a very nice looking butt plug that is, according to the website, equally suitable for vaginal use. I read the following under the product description: “Putting Pace in a cup of hot water before playing is an amazing sensual surprise.” When was the last time you got advice like this from a drugstore? Thank you, Walgreens!
All told, Walgreens’ website features, in addition to the aforementioned six dildos, 327 vibrators (!), eighty-four massagers, and four “intimate massagers”. Searches for “erotic massagers” as well as butt plugs returned no results. CVS, on the other hand, features six vibrators, fifty-four massagers, one “erotic massager” and eleven “intimate massagers”. Again, no butt plugs, and a search for “dildo” returned no results but they did ask if I was trying to type “did.” Rite Aid, on the other hand, was a total boner-killer. Searches for dildos, vibrators, butt plugs, massagers, intimate massagers, and erotic massagers all returned zero results. Just to make sure their website was working correctly, I typed in “Ibuprofen” and got two results. I wonder if they never carried these items, and One Million Moms.Com went off half-cocked and assumed they did after seeing sex toys at the other two sites; or if they carried them and, bowing to pressure from terrified Middle American soccer moms, stopped.
After doing some browsing, I found that both Walgreens and CVS carry a variety of items from adult manufacturer Lelo. I considered ordering myself a Lelo Bo, but decided I’d be better off getting it from one of the reputable, ethical and sex-positive companies I mentioned earlier.
-Jack
Flash Fiction Friday: Post-Coital Musings of an Art Aficionado
Vivianne is curvy and sensual, with the grace of a Botticelli goddess. Despite her insistence on kinky sex, she is the least chaotic person I know. She’s the kind of person who could settle agitated, churning waters with a gaze. Right now she sleeps peacefully beside me, her form a beautiful still life painted upon Egyptian cotton. Her perfect breasts rise and fall, an enigmatic smile threatening to upturn her lips. When I first saw her I felt like Bacchus beholding Ariadne. I want to put her in a frame and hang her on my wall.
Someone’s here. Her husband! His first punch turns my face into a Picasso.
-Jack
Though the 208-word limit imposed last week was difficult, I found this week’s 112-word cap much easier. And although I checked out this week’s prompt on Monday, I really didn’t think about it too much until Thursday afternoon, at which point I wrote my extremely short story in just under an hour. After last week, I had a better idea of how fast the words add up, and a sense of how many lines 112 words should be. My first draft exceeded the limit but I compromised on some word choices, and deleted a couple extraneous passages. The photo prompt, featuring a woman kneeling behind a picture frame (seen above) initially had me at a loss, but I decided to write from the perspective of an art lover who is so captivated by a woman’s beauty that he wishes to frame and display her in his home.
I’d like to take advantage of this space to note the various art references in my story. The narrator’s comparison of Vivianne to “a Botticelli goddess” refers to The Birth of Venus by Sandro Botticelli. Mention of Vivianne’s “enigmatic smile” is a subtle reference to the Mona Lisa. Mention of Bacchus and Ariadne refers to the Greek god Dionysus, who beheld the princess Ariadne on the island of Naxos and wedded her, though the narrator is likely considering Bacchus and Ariadne by Titian. And of course, the darkly comic closing line refers to the influential Spanish cubist Pablo Picasso.
Additionally, I attempted to post the prompt photo in high-resolution, but it was apparently too wide and Blogger truncated the right-hand edge. Should you care to see a larger version of the image, or for that matter if you’d like to take part in Flash Fiction Friday, head over to Erotic Flash Fiction.