An astonishingly long time ago, back in 2002, I blogged an amusing story about a woman who…well, you really should see for yourself what she did with the jawbreakers.

Her blog was named I, Asshole, and sadly the link went dead at some point after that. “Gloria Monday Goes Bye-Bye” and all that.

So, imagine my surprise when Always Aroused Girl twittered a link to a post about vagina cosmetics, and up popped the very same blog. Eight years later, and the lady’s still putting (what turns out to be) food in her vagina. But this time, it’s for science!

For those of you not yet familiar with the product, My New Pink Button is there for us ladies who feel that their junk needs some pinkening up due to age, hormones, or ethnicity. I have not really thought about the color of my ladyparts, well, ever, and I have probably not done the Our Bodies, Ourselves hand mirror thing since before I had children. I feel that anyone who has an opinion about the color of my junkdrawer can take their disco sticks elsewhere, but I was curious about this product for the sake of SCIENCE.

I considered as an alternate post title “Oh God, it BURNS!”, because when she applies the product according to package directions:

I put the product on and let it sit as the instructions advised. Things were okay for a few seconds, and then…THE BURNING! I have certainly felt worse, but it was very noticeable. The instructions assure me that this burning is “due to the ingredients reacting to your bodies own PH balance which is normal and will go away upon rinsing off the colorant.”

Rinse it off I did, and did I notice a difference? I did not. I will confess to you I took before and after pictures for my own scrutiny. Well hello there my vulva. Long time, no see. Sorry about the burning sensation.

As you might expect, there’s more.

If there were ever going to be a gay bondage porn version of The Biggest Loser, it might look something like this:

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Because That's What Good Friends Do
• The Fisting Rodeo
• Romario: "Kiss My Ass"
• Now That's A Stress Position!
• Bound Gods

One doesn’t have to look very deep into American pulp fiction to find all manner of lurid mistreatments of American Indian imagery. These steamy details from the back cover of a thirty-five-cent pulp novel (Savage Cavalier) don’t even match the jacket copy, much less, I am sure, the deathless prose inside:

She stood in the firelight, her coppery, moon-breasted body bared to his unbelieving eyes. She was Princess Adiawando of the warring Senecas. He was Lt. Jeff Wyatt, her prisoner. But Wyatt had been spared torture and death — for a night. Spurred by her hot, primitive desires, the Princess had chosen Wyatt as her partner in the weirdest love rite known to history…

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Happy In Paradise

I’ve long been hostile to the idea of “sex addiction” because it strikes me as nonsense on its face. Sex is a core biological imperative, like breathing or excreting, making a “sex addiction” as nonsensical as a “crapping addiction”. Pathologizing normal behavior is something I recognize as a tool of control, a way to twist people up inside so that you can more easily guilt them into changing their behavior (joining your church, giving you money, working longer hours, whatever.) Thus, for me, concerned talk of “sex addiction” is a red-flag warning that the speaker is likely to be a sex-negative culture warrior or a woo-woo-therapy-selling charlatan.

I’m pretty good at being dismissive of nonsense, but I’m not always so good at patiently explaining why it’s nonsense. “Suffering fools gladly” equals a skill I was behind the door when they were passing them out. Fortunately, we have Annie Sprinkle to bear what I cannot, and she’s written a nice article succinctly explaining the nonsense that is sex addiction prattle. There’s lots, but this paragraph fragment is exemplary:

Sex addiction often makes a disease out of what is often quite reasonable sexual behavior. It emphasizes negative aspects of sex. It takes away some of the personal responsibility for sexual choices and blames problems on a ‘disease’. It offers simple solutions to complex problems. Marty Klein points out that, “Sex addiction legitimizes sex-negative attitudes and supports sexual guilt.” It can make people feel badly if they simply have an active and varied sex life. Sex addiction can be used as a way to put down socially disapproved of behavior.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Citizen Science In The Public Cervix
• Economics in One Lesson

I enjoyed the movie Black Snake Moan when it came out, mostly because of Samuel L. Jackson’s strong performance. But Christina Ricci chained up didn’t hurt the picture, and the movie posters to that effect just might have influenced my decision to go and see the film. Here she is returning from an unscheduled and unauthorized walkabout:

Via Bondage Blog.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Hercules In Chains
• Women In Prison Movies, Done Better
• Man In Chains
• High Fashion Bondage
• Carrie Fisher In Chains

Ever since Faustus wrote this post, I’ve been on the lookout for more Savita Bhabhi comics. Finally, some came rolling in via alt. binaries. pictures. erotica. cartoons:

“Hot Bhabhi” indeed!

I got in some trouble in this post about the political protesters who (briefly) called themselves teabaggers before they started getting mocked for their sexual and cultural ignorance. Several commenters (the two visible, plus several more who were incivil or explicitly partisan) claimed that, no, they never did call themselves that, it was their opponents who started it. Some quick Google-and-link sorted that out.

Well, now Rachel Maddow (whom I ♥ more than The Nymph approves of, even though it’s the safest possible celebrity crush) has twittered as follows:

And if you follow her link, you’ll see this, published with approval at Free Republic:

Most of a year later, some of them still haven’t gotten the memo.

Update: Doh! Rachel tweets a “maybe” semi-retraction (based on a newspaper article suggesting the guy with the sign was a union man twitting teabaggers for being too wealthy to empathize with unemployed) and “reverts to previous evidence“.

I actually find this more fascinating, because it points out just how dangerous one-liners are to misinterpretation. What you see depends on where you stand. I see the tea partiers (as they now call themselves) as being conservatives of a generally-low economic status, so it never occurred to me that they might be mocked from the working left as being too well-off to understand the plight of the unemployed worker.

I’ve learned by bitter experience that discussions of this sort go partisan and ugly extremely fast if not closely moderated here on ErosBlog, and I’m not going to be at my computer much for the next couple of days (although some posts are pre-scheduled). So, I’ve disabled comments on this post. I’ll try to remember to turn them back on when I get back.