This is as posed as any other porn, but it’s at least a couple of decades old and the couple seems (to my eye, at least) do be doing a better-than-usual job of simulating passion:

I can’t shake the sense that these are bigger-name porn stars, so if you recognize them, please chime in!

Via alt. binaries. pictures. erotica. pornstar.

I knew at an intuitive level that there was something lame and false about the recent “scientific” news from Italy, where researchers supposedly determined that some women don’t have G-spots. I said nothing, counting on the fact that Violet Blue, author of The Smart Girl’s Guide to the G-Spot, would be along eventually to set things straight. Which she now has done. It turns out, the Italian dudes were a bit confused, and were using what Violet calls the “two-hands-and-a-flashlight” research method:

News flash to news outlets: The vagina ceased to be a mystery at least 40 years ago. The G-spot is a real, tangible thing, and you can even see it if you have a bio-vagina, or know someone who will let you take a G-peep. It is a real place inside the body, and you don’t need ultrasound to find it. And again, I’ll contradict the reporting and say that yes, some women find it to be incredible for orgasms, while others don’t like the sensation so much. It isn’t a “magic button” for all girls: But that in no way means a woman cannot have, enjoy, or break windows all the way down to Twin Peaks and back screaming in joy from vaginal orgasms.

Myths about the G-spot you’re seeing in these mainstream news sources:

* Not every woman has one.

* Every woman likes G-spot stimulation.

* There’s a test to find it, and only one “right” way to touch it.

* Touching it will make you incontinent, and female ejaculation is urine. (It is not.)

* Any other orgasms are inferior to a G-spot orgasm.

If you’re squeamish about female anatomy, skip the next two paragraphs, but if you want to know what the hell a G-spot is or why anyone wants to find one, read on…

I am enamored of the concept of electric lingerie, in the best high-Victorian quack medical style of course. These garments probably did not have the beneficial effects advertised, but I have no doubt they delivered one hell of a jolt! That’s how you could tell they were “working”:

From the Electrosex Blog.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Pretty In A Corset
• Electric Sex
• Christians Take Off Brass Corsets

Everybody loves a sweater girl, especially when the sweater comes off:

This has got to be absolutely the tamest / cutest photoset I’ve ever seen in the pages of Taboo magazine, which has been happily notorious for explicit bondage sex photography since well before anybody (well, it was Kink.com, actually) dared to do it on the web. But not in this photoset! Nope, this is just a fine lady and her maid, prepping for another hard day of languishing around the manor in outfits of loosely-arranged lace:

“Why, you careless hussy! You caught a tangle and hurt my pretty head! I ought to…”

The remonstrances continue: “You indolent wench! I’ll rip off your lingerie and slap some sense into your silly head!”

“Bah, slapping isn’t enough for course slatterns like you! Bend over, I’ll pretend to spank you with my silver hand mirror while secretly using it to peer at your pussy!”

And, then, inevitably, there has to be the kissing on the ear and the whispering of sweet nothings:

How else are they going to segue into the inevitable hot-and-sweaty lesbian makeup sex?

Pictures are from the August 2004 edition of Taboo magazine.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• What A Cleaning Lady!
• Illustrating The Patriarchy
• Getting Your Silver Polished

Apologies to those who find this too graphic, but there’s so much censored manga out there, it’s almost refreshing to find some so explicitly uncensored:

Via alt. binaries. pictures. erotica. anime.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Sticky Face
• Purely Symbolic Censorship
• A Little Guy Fun With Ropes
• A Little Manga Blowjob
• Losing Track Of The Plot

I’ve long felt that public fears (mostly among folks who aren’t particularly computer-literate) about internet sex predators were mostly press-fueled frenzy — the normal sensationalism that we get served with any new technology, where the press tries to “sell papers” (or whatever it is they are selling these days) by taking a tiny tiny handful of crimes that involve the new technology and turning that tiny handful into an endless parade of breathless handwringing and fear-mongering. All of which is eagerly devoured by the sort of casual Luddites who don’t much like the new technology and sort of wish it didn’t exist because then they wouldn’t have to deal with.

Well, it turns out I was right. Research by sociologists at the Crimes against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire in Durham has debunked several widely-believed myths:

Myth: Internet predators are driving up child sex crime rates.

Reality: Sex assaults on teens fell 52 percent from 1993 to 2005, according to the Justice Department’s National Crime Victimization Survey, the best measure of U.S. crime trends. “The Internet may not be as risky as a lot of other things that parents do without concern, such as driving kids to the mall and leaving them there for two hours,” Wolak said.

Myth: Internet predators are pedophiles.

Reality: Internet predators don’t hit on the prepubescent children whom pedophiles target. They target adolescents, who have more access to computers, more privacy and more interest in sex and romance, Wolak’s team determined from interviews with investigators.

Myth: Internet predators represent a new dimension of child sexual abuse.

Reality: The means of communication is new, according to Wolak, but most Internet-linked offenses are essentially statutory rape: nonforcible sex crimes against minors too young to consent to sexual relationships with adults.

Myth: Internet predators trick or abduct their victims.

Reality: Most victims meet online offenders face-to-face and go to those meetings expecting to engage in sex. Nearly three-quarters have sex with partners they met on the Internet more than once.

Myth: Internet predators meet their victims by posing online as other teens.

Reality: Only 5 percent of predators did that, according to the survey of investigators.

Myth: Online interactions with strangers are risky.

Reality: Many teens interact online all the time with people they don’t know. What’s risky, according to Wolak, is giving out names, phone numbers and pictures to strangers and talking online with them about sex.

Myth: Internet predators go after any child.

Reality: Usually their targets are adolescent girls or adolescent boys of uncertain sexual orientation, according to Wolak. Youths with histories of sexual abuse, sexual orientation concerns and patterns of off- and online risk-taking are especially at risk.

Thanks to Bruce Schneier for the link.