|
|
The Sex Blog Of Record
Saturday, April 13th, 2024 -- by Bacchus
The meme that marriage is a trap for the unwary bachelor has a deep history. Grose’s 1811 Dictionary Of The Vulgar Tongue includes “the parson’s mousetrap” as a synonym for marriage. This Wallace Wood cartoon from Screw magazine is a more visceral take on the same notion:
Similar Sex Blogging:
Wednesday, January 10th, 2024 -- by Bacchus
Today’s moment of joy:
I’m not a big fan of those shit-stirring vids on TikTok where some wife or girlfriend asks her man an impossible question where all the answers are dangerous. A recent one is “would you be able to pick out my hoo-ha from a lineup of 100 hoo-ha photos?”
The most joyous thing I’ve seen today was the absolute king who looked his red-headed wife dead in the eye and with a wide smile he replied “Oh, yeah, no problem. It’ll be the big red hairy one.”
What all these memes have in common is a woman looking for a fight (a playful one, hopefully) by putting her man in an impossible defensive situation and then tormenting him once he’s stuck there. He usually can’t deny her the fight, but he can always seize the tactical initiative, go on offense, and avoid getting bogged down in the lowlands. Extra points if he can keep the twinkle in his eye while he does it.
Similar Sex Blogging:
Saturday, March 28th, 2015 -- by Bacchus
This is entirely unverified; I don’t even know who these people on this forum are. But it’s interesting:
Facebook won’t let us run ads for our dating app at people who are listed as “married” in their profiles.
They made a mistake a few weeks ago and our ads ended up being displayed to married people, and our signups tripled. Then they “fixed” it and it dropped down again.
Fuck Facebook and their 50’s morality bullshit.
I knew that Facebook exercises rigid control over what products and services its advertisers are allowed to promote, but this is the first I’ve heard that they control distribution based on the status settings of the people seeing (or not seeing) the ads. “No dating apps for married people” — how petit bourgeois is that? Facebook doesn’t want married people subjected to temptation? Or Facebook thinks married people don’t date? What about poly married people, how are they supposed to find unicorns without dating apps? Sheesh!
It’s also fascinating — though perhaps an unrelated coincidence — that our reporter experienced a dramatic increase in signups when Facebook temporarily did show the dating app ads to married people.
Similar Sex Blogging:
Monday, March 9th, 2015 -- by Bacchus
Here’s a touching essay about the old familiar story of mismatched libidos in marriage. From his perspective:
There had to be the perfect confluence of events for sex to happen. My wife’s requirements were that her job had to be going well, the children didn’t need her attention, the house had to be clean, the temperature had to be between 76 and 84 degrees, and the Democrats had to control at least one branch of government.
Then his wife developed a medical condition and the drugs she was forced to take came with a known side effect of obsessive behavior. Luckily, she didn’t become a problem gambler or a compulsive shopper. Nope! Instead:
Her former parameters for sex became somewhat more generous. Now she merely had to have a job, the children had to be alive, the house had to be standing, the temperature had to be between 0 and 104 degrees and the Democrats had to control at least one branch of government. The combination of those things happening all at once occurred with great frequency.
You know that wasn’t going to last, and it didn’t. He crumbled under the pressure:
I started to fade. Whether it was the excessive demand, an aging libido or psychological stress (knowing that if I didn’t perform, she would have to go to other medications with potentially worse side effects), I was no longer able to consistently please her. Sex became more obligation than joy. I looked for ways to avoid it. In two short years we had completely switched roles.
Doh!
Similar Sex Blogging:
Wednesday, January 11th, 2012 -- by Bacchus
Times change, and so do attitudes. A platitude, but we forget. Until we are reminded.
Here’s a description of how Thomas More (who brought us the word “Utopia” and was considered oh-so-progressive because he educated his daughters as well as his son) helped Sir William Roper decide which of More’s daughters he’d like to marry:
Roper calls one morning and tells More that he wishes to marry one of More’s daughters–either one will do–upon which More takes Roper to his bedroom, where the daughters are asleep in a truckle bed wheeled out from beneath the parental bed. Leaning over, More deftly takes “the sheet by the corner and suddenly whippes it off” … revealing the girls to be fundamentally naked. Groggily protesting at the disturbance, they roll onto their stomachs, and after a moment’s admiring reflection Sir William announces that he has seen both sides now and with his stick lightly taps the bottom of sixteen-year-old Margaret.
Found at Hermione’s Heart.
Update: I was going to post the above as-is. But then I thought, let’s chase this deeper into the original material. What I found was the following from John Aubrey’s Brief Lives, c. 1690:
Memorandum that in [More’s] Utopia, his lawe is that young people are to see each other stark-naked before marriage. Sir William Roper came one morning pretty early to my Lord, with a proposall to marry one of his daughters. My Lord’s daughters were then both together in a bed in a truckle-bed in their father’s chamber asleep. He carries Sir William into the chamber, and takes the sheet by the corner and suddenly whippes it off. They lay on their backs, and the their smocks up as high as their arme pitts; this awakened them, and immediately they turned on their bellies. Quoth Sir William Roper, “I have seen both sides”, and so gave a patt on her buttock, he made choice of, saying,” Thou art mine.”
Here was all the trouble of the wooing.
Saturday, February 19th, 2011 -- by Bacchus
Thanks to the German Historical Institute we learn of a woodcut from the second half of the seventeenth century by one Abraham Bach, said to be part of a then “rapidly growing literature on the conditions of a happy marriage and on codes of behavior reinforced gender roles.”
“In the first scene of this two-part woodcut, a man beats his wife for being proud, impious, lazy, and drunk”:
“In the second scene, a woman beats her husband for gambling, drinking, gluttony, and chasing pretty girls.”
It’s a veritable 17th century Spencer Spanking Plan, I tell you!
Similar Sex Blogging:
Friday, November 19th, 2010 -- by Bacchus
Don’t pay any mind to the dude in the background. Look at our lovers. He’s caressing her face, they’re gazing deep into each other’s eyes, she’s a little breathless, her mouth open anticipating a kiss…
It could be straight off the cover of your average semi-pornographic bodice-ripper romance. A proposal of marriage within twenty pages, a duel by the end of the chapter, eventually a wedding after necessary complications, happily ever after in due course.
Except, I cheated. I cropped creatively, and rotated the frame a little bit. Because what’s actually going on here is, she’s strapped down to a bondage table with her legs apart and he (it would seem) is taking ruthless advantage of her helpless situation:
Not that she minds. Indeed, I’d say they’re pretty into each other.
Her girlfriend / partner in crime is getting the same treatment in the background (on the floor!) from his buddy. The story is, the girls are druggies who got caught by a pair of rogue cops. Supposedly it’s all very exploitative and the ladies are being kidnapped and turned into “whores” for the bad evil corrupt cops, but everybody seems to having too much fun to remember the nominal humiliation/degradation agenda.
Similar Sex Blogging:
Tuesday, September 21st, 2010 -- by Bacchus
From TXTS FRM LST NGHT:
she gave me a handjob in the middle of the night and my stomach growled so she walked out totally naked and came back 5 minutes later with two sandwiches. who the fuck says getting married is awful?
Saturday, March 20th, 2004 -- by Bacchus
From time to time I can’t help revisiting Why Your Wife Won’t Have Sex With You (although I do it in the same spirit as a man goes to the racetrack to watch a demolition derby). The prevailing view over at Why Your Wife on this too-frequent lament of the modern American husband tends toward the “try acting more like a woman and she might … just might, so don’t get your hopes up … decide to have sex with you again someday” variety.
Like the flying squirrel said, “Aw, Bullwinkle, that trick never works.”
On the other hand, there’s a comment over in a “Sex And Marriage” post by Quiver. Quiver gives some potentially useful advice to a man in those unhappy sexless straits, only to have a commenter share a rather more robust strategy:
“If all else fails (or if you prefer, before trying anything else) put her over your knee and with one arm firmly around her waist to hold her in place, yank her knickers down and spank her bare bottom very hard until she howls. Then spank her vigorously again until she begs at the top of her voice to be allowed to spread her legs and offers her pussy (which will probably be glistening wet by now). Then allow her to service your cock in whichever way you please. A woman who has just been spanked often sucks exquisitely well, and on her knees doing it she can look deliciously beautiful, so that may be a good starting place.”
Kids, don’t try this at home. Enormous downside potential if it doesn’t work — complete with sirens and handcuffs and a well-deserved orange jumpsuit.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
|
|
