|
|
The Sex Blog Of Record
March 12th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
Back in 2015 we shared Beauty Revealed, a unique 1828 self-portraiture of artist Sarah Goodridge’s breasts that she gifted to Daniel Webster. Now in A Relationship Revealed, author Cassandra Good gives us considerable analysis of what that says (or doesn’t) about the relationship between Goodridge and Webster:
Goodridge traveled to Washington in 1828 to give Webster the unusual image soon after Webster’s wife died. It is possible that with Webster now single, Goodridge felt more comfortable acknowledging an existing or budding sexual attraction. Goodridge could have easily painted a conventional self-portrait miniature to give to Webster on that 1828 visit, knowing that even such a gift would signify to him (and anybody who became aware of the gift) a romantic relationship. But the work she created and named “Beauty Revealed” was groundbreaking both in terms of art and social norms. This miniature, too, could be held close, but it was openly sexual. It clearly attested to an erotic and possibly sexual relationship between Webster and Goodridge.
…
We can only speculate about what this image meant to Goodridge and Webster. The gift of only a part of her body, one that is both sexual and maternal, might have gestured to Goodridge’s continuing command over her own body. As a friend or even lover, Webster did not have the unfettered access to her body that a husband would. Goodridge could choose what to reveal to him, and how much to give. But for all the sexual intimacy of this image, it still appears that the pair’s relationship was primarily one of friendship. It seems unlikely that the pair considered marrying. Goodridge would have had to give up her artistic career, independence, and home in Boston. Less than two years after his wife’s death, Webster married a woman fifteen years his junior, but his friendship with Goodridge continued another two decades. They were rarely in the same place, so much of their relationship would have been conducted through letters and was thus by necessity not at most times a physical one. The miniature’s revelation is thus all the more surprising.
Similar Sex Blogging:
March 11th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
Back behind the ferns, there’s plenty of pussy to be found. And always has been, if you knew when and where to look! Via Vintage Lust:
Similar Sex Blogging:
March 10th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
If, like me, you’ve been puzzled by the rise of “cuck” as a sort of all-purpose insult among the American alt-right, you might have been focusing too closely on its sexual connotations, and especially on its origins in the word “cuckold”. This could be an especially easy mistake to make if your exposure to cuckoldry has primarily been to cuckoldry-as-a-porn-genre. When a political partisan cries “cuck!” in 2017, it’s an entirely different insult he’s making. He’s making an insult about power, which may be the source of your confusion.
Let’s put this in terms that might be easier to understand. There’s an old saying among poker players. At every poker table, there’s a chump. When you sit down, look around. If you can’t spot the chump, the chump might be you.
What does this have to do with cucks? Well, let’s listen to Jessica Crispin explaining Why They Need The Cucks at The Baffler:
In the mythology of 4chan, there are many different kinds of men: the snobby alpha males and the wronged beta males, for starters, and then a thousand variations from there. Cucks are considered the worst of the lot: soft, overripe men who have lost their power and control, like failed presidential candidate Jeb Bush or any man who shows an interest in feminism.
That the word “cuckold,” fusty and ringing of Shakespeare, was first brought back into popular discourse via a category of pornographic fetish videos is less important than you would think. Those videos won’t teach us anything we don’t already know.
…
The categories of embattled manhood now trafficked by the cuck-trashing, immigrant-bashing men of Breitbart or 4chan are shifting but ultimately exacting; they obsess over finer and finer distinctions. Their aim is not to elevate one idealized version of masculinity, but to break masculinity into a more perfect pecking order, so almost everyone can look down a level at the scum below. This new order relies on the traditional markers of manly achievement — a girlfriend, sexual partners, money, power, and, most importantly, control — but none of those matter as much as the act of division itself. It’s a coping strategy. Yes, the 4chan men like to make jokes about living in their parents’ basements, but those jokes are only funny if they can point to someone even lower than themselves.
Here, then, is the task of the twenty-first-century American man: making hierarchies that don’t put him at the bottom. The bottom is where the cucks are — because “cuck,” in its current incarnation, is an insult aimed not at men who are betrayed by women (or even men who are betrayed by women and really, really like it), but at men who don’t have anyone to control.
That’s it, then. Can you spot the cuck at the table? No? Then the cuck might be you — especially if you don’t have anybody to control. Darn!
Similar Sex Blogging:
March 9th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
This is old, but the deeper you read into the 2008 essay Gay marriage: the database engineering perspective, the more profound it gets:
The real question from my perspective is how you store a marriage in a computer. Altering your database schema to accommodate gay marriage can be easy or difficult depending on how smart you were when you originally set up your system to accommodate heterosexuality only. Let’s begin…
I fell off the hay-wagon about half-way through the ride due to inadequate comprehension of mathematics and databases, but it was still worth my time. It might be worth yours too.
March 8th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
Via Kinky Delight, these women in black hoods appear to be punishing a man for adultery. It’s not entirely clear from the expression on his face whether he might have been willing to pay for the the experience:
Artwork turns out to be from the cover of the April 1962 issue of Man to Man magazine, where a fuller version of the art appears:
Similar Sex Blogging:
March 7th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
Journalists, be very careful when calling out Facebook about problematic images of children. It appears Facebook may have recently baited pesky English journalists into a legal trap with the false promise of an interview.
Here’s how the apparent ruse went down. Facebook promised an interview to BBC journalists if the the journalists would first “provide examples” of problematic content (what the BBC terms “sexualised images of children”. Once the BBC did so, Facebook reported the BBC to the police for distribution of the images from its own system. Of course the promised interview never happened.
In the BBC’s own careful words:
[Facebook] encourages users to report inappropriate content via its “report button”.
The US firm says it has improved this system since an investigation by the BBC last year.
To test Facebook’s claim, the BBC used the report button to alert the company to 100 images which appeared to break its guidelines.
…
Of the 100 images only 18 were removed.
Next step:
The BBC first asked Facebook for an interview about its moderation system in late-2015, and repeated the request following this follow-up investigation.
The social network’s director of policy Simon Milner agreed to be interviewed last week, on condition the BBC provided examples of the material that it had reported, but had not been removed by moderators.
But that appears to have been a trap:
The BBC did so, but was reported to the UK’s National Crime Agency as a consequence.
The promised interview? Not forthcoming:
Facebook later provided a statement.
“We have carefully reviewed the content referred to us and have now removed all items that were illegal or against our standards,” it said.
“This content is no longer on our platform. We take this matter extremely seriously and we continue to improve our reporting and take-down measures.
“It is against the law for anyone to distribute images of child exploitation.
“When the BBC sent us such images we followed our industry’s standard practice and reported them to Ceop [Child Exploitation & Online Protection Centre].
“We also reported the child exploitation images that had been shared on our own platform. This matter is now in the hands of the authorities.”
Here’s the BBC director of editorial policy, commenting with true British understatement:
“One can only assume that the Facebook executives were unwilling or certainly reluctant to engage in an interview or a debate about why these images are available on the Facebook site.”
Similar Sex Blogging:
March 7th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
I was already unimpressed by the salacious tabloid treatment of the hoarder in Japan found dead in his apartment along with his giant porn collection; there are just too many gratuitous and unsourced adjectives that were clearly placed in the story just to make the man a figure of unhappy fun. So I didn’t trust the story. Nor was I impressed by the “you had one job” leakage of the story by a worker on the team hired to discretely clean up the mess by the embarrassed family — or such was the tabloid implication.
But then Violet Blue pointed to a Gizmodo story pointing out that the tabloid treatment (widely viralized everywhere) was pretty much totally fake, especially in the most lurid detail, which had the man crushed to death by his own porn collection. Gizmodo has the original Japanese-language news link and I’m relying on their reading of it reinforced by Google’s machine translation, but the real story appears to be:
1) The man was a hoarder and he did own six tons of porn magazines;
2) He died of cardiac arrest;
3) He fell on top of a thick scattering of magazines or magazine clippings, such as you would expect in any hoarder house you would see on one of those notorious TV shows;
4) No magazines fell on him;
5) He was not crushed or buried by porn or by anything else.
Hoarding is a terrible disease in its worst manifestations, and sometimes it does kill. But this was not one of those times. The porn was just a salacious detail in a local “Lonely man dies alone of cardiac arrest” story.
Similar Sex Blogging:
|
|
