skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The use of lubricants during unprotected anal intercourse may indirectly raise the risk of HIV transmission in the receptive partner, among both men and women, new research warns.
And all along we were taught to use lube because it meant less risk of anal tissue tearing. Lube still does that very well, but a new potential risk has been found.
Concern about the possibility is being raised in the form of two new studies, and revolves around the fact that HIV infection risk rises if other infections are already present in the rectal lining of the receptive partner, the study authors noted.
In that light, indications that some lubricants may contribute to a generally increased risk for sexually transmitted infections, and therefore in turn for HIV, are scheduled for presentation this week in Pittsburgh at the International Microbicides Conference.
The use of lubricants may make anal sex more comfortable, but they may also increase the risk of spreading sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, researchers said yesterday. Many experts have been concerned about the potential effects of such lubricants, but there have previously been virtually no studies about how they affect disease.
[...] A partial explanation for the increased risk may have been provided by Charlene Dezzutti, a reproductive science specialist at the University of Pittsburgh, and her colleagues. They studied the effects of six of the most popular lubricants on rectal cells and tissues in laboratory dishes. They found that many of the products had high concentrations of dissolved salts and sugars that draw water out of cells, weakening and even killing the cells. Some of them even stripped away significant portions of the surface epithelial cells on the rectal tissue, the layer of cells that serves as a protective barrier. They also studied the effect of the lubricants on beneficial bacteria in the rectum.
So which lubes are the safest? "PRE and Wet Platinum, were shown to be safest for the cells, while Astroglide was the most toxic to cells and tissue. KY Jelly had the worst effect on rectal bacteria, essentially wiping out the entire colony. ID Glide and Elbow Grease had intermediate effects, the team found. None of the lubricants was found to have measurable anti-HIV activity."
Conducted between 2006 and 2008, one study – which focused on approximately 900 residents in the Baltimore and Los Angeles region – observed that men and women who use lubricants in general are three times more likely to have some form of a rectal sexually transmitted infection. The finding held regardless of gender, HIV status, condom use, and the number of sex partners the study participants had had in the prior month.
Although no specific lubricants were identified as particularly problematic, most study participants said they used a water-based lubricant (76 percent), while 28 percent used silicon-based products, 17 percent oil-based lubricants, and 6 percent said used a numbing lubricant.
The second study – led by Charlene Dezzutti of the University of Pittsburgh and the Microbicide Trials Network – looked at five of the most popular over-the-counter and/or mail-order lubricants, identified as such through a survey of 9,000 men and women living in 100 different countries.
All the lubricants were water-based, except for one silicon-based product.
The research team – including collaborators from International Rectal Microbicide Advocates (IRMA) – did not examine the effect of lubricant use during actual sex. However, in laboratory testing, some of the lubricants were found to have a toxic effect on cells and rectal tissue, perhaps as the result of the dissolved salts and sugars the products contained.
"We know we can't make any conclusions based on this one small study," cautioned IRMA lubricant safety advocate Marc-Andre LeBlanc, in a news release. "Further research is absolutely necessary to understand the potential role of sexual lubricants in HIV transmission. We should be able to provide consumer guidance regarding lubes that are found to be safer than others."
"Some lubes are probably better than others, but we don't know where any of the currently available products fall along the spectrum from good to bad," added IRMA chair Jim Pickett.
"We must ensure that existing lubes don't facilitate HIV transmission," he added. "People have a right to this kind of information, and it's very past due."
Conference organizers pointed out that in the United States, 90 percent of men who have sex with men – whether self-identified as gay or not – engage in receptive anal intercourse. Between 10 percent and 35 percent of heterosexual women have done so at least once. And in either instance, condoms are often not used, while lubricants are.
It seems clear by now but let’s say it again: DO NOT HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX! That message continues to be underscored with every sex study, regardless of the focus. Unless your partner has had sex testing that they have shared, do not risk it – ever. Anal sex, standard sex, whatever sex, DO NOT RISK IT!
— The Curator
For a significant number of fathers, the birth of a baby is followed by a plunge into depression, according to new research that challenges the medical dogma that the "baby blues" or postpartum depression solely afflicts new moms.
A study appearing in today’s Journal of the American Medical Association found that large numbers of men DO suffer from post-natal depression and their feelings can be just as debilitating as women’s.
Maternal prenatal and postpartum depression is a well accepted phenomena, but the prevalence, risk factors and effects of depression among new fathers is not well understood, and has received little attention from researchers and clinicians, according to background information in the article.
James F. Paulson, of the Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Va., and co-author Sharnail D. Bazemore, M.S., of the Eastern Virginia Medical School, conducted a study that documented depression in fathers between the first trimester and the first postpartum year, and identified 43 studies involving 28,004 participants for inclusion in the analysis.
In a paper published in the May 19 issue of the JAMA the researchers report:
– About 10 percent of fathers experience depression between the first trimester of their wives pregnancies and the first year after the birth, compared to only about 4.8 percent of men in the general population.
– Men were most likely to become depressed in the first three to six months after the baby's birth, when the rate was 25.6 percent.
– U.S, men are more likely than those in other countries to experience depression. The rate is 14.1 percent in the United States, compared to 8.2 percent internationally.
Estimates of how many women suffer from the condition range from 10 to 20 per cent, although it is feared that the true figure could be even higher because many women suffer in silence.
Typical symptoms include feelings of helplessness or extreme anxiety about their child. Women also often describe feelings of guilt that they do not love their child enough.
But the condition is highly variable and can range from mild depression to thoughts of suicide.
While clinicians and researchers talk a lot about the very serious effects depression can have on women and their families while they're carrying a baby and in the postpartum period, there's little understanding on the impact of fathers who struggle with depression, the report explains.
Even less is understood about why fathers struggle with depression after the birth of a child. Researchers think the reasons are similar to why mothers get depressed – financial stress and sleep deprivation among others. It is believed that while men do not undergo the physical changes of pregnancy and labor, the upheaval caused by a new baby or by feelings of apprehension towards fatherhood can contribute to the development of depression.
But there may be other issues particular to dads, just as mothers have their own concerns, including hormonal changes.
It has long been believed that depression in new mothers is due to hormonal changes, says study co-author Paulson, who is a clinical psychologist and associate professor of pediatrics.
"If you put 100 per cent of your chips on that bet, then really, there's nothing left that you would expect with dads. If moms are getting depressed because of hormone changes, why would dads get depressed? They don't go through the same hormone changes – they don't have to be pregnant, they don't have to deliver the baby. That bias has had a lot do with what people think," Paulson says.
"The fact of the matter is that the evidence of hormone theories and pre- and post-natal depression is pretty inconsistent, and it's not as strong as the evidence on psychosocial factors – things like changes in the relationship, financial stress, social support and social stress, which are reasonable things to expect to affect fathers."
Other studies have found that men's hormones do also change, both late in a partner's pregnancy and during the first three months after the child's birth. Those hormonal changes include decreases in testosterone and increases in levels of estrogen, says Will Courtenay, a California psychotherapist and founder of a website and online forum for men experiencing postpartum depression.
Scientific theory is that the change in men’s hormone levels is evolutionary, to make them more nurturing to their off-spring.
Studies have shown that post-natal depression in new mothers can affect their child’s development.
Babies are less likely to bond as closely, and more likely to be withdrawn or demanding, if their mother has the condition.
Recent studies have also found that post-natal depression in new fathers can have long-term psychological consequences for their children.
The babies of depressed men were twice as likely to suffer from behavioral problems, including hyperactivity, as they grew older as those whose fathers are not depressed.
Until now, research into postpartum depression in men has been scattered and inconsistent. For their analysis, the Virginia researchers pulled every article they could find that reasonably documented the phenomenon. They included studies that looked at depression in dads between the first trimester of pregnancy, through to the first year after the baby was delivered.
Across all time points, the overall rate of depression was 10.4 per cent – twice the rate of depression among men in the general population. "This isn't something that's just a fluke. This is a significant problem," Paulson says.
In terms of timing, fathers experienced the highest rates of depression – 25.6 per cent – when their babies were three to six months old, according to the study.
That needs to be interpreted cautiously, because it's based on only three studies. But sleep deprivation is one of the major causes of postpartum depression, in both women and men, and sleep deprivation is cumulative.
By the time babies are three months old, "the bloke's gone back to work, he's probably disrupted, he's probably not getting a lot of sleep, he's probably got competing priorities, things are shifting," says John Oliffe, an associate professor in the school of nursing at the University of British Columbia.
"Just disrupting that – for want of a better term – 'type A' fellow, it can be enough to push someone into a different space, and get them feeling down."
Oliffe suspects the true rate in men is likely higher than 10 per cent. "There are a lot of guys who don't get diagnosed with depression, who don't necessarily participate in studies, or necessarily arrive at clinical practice to suggest that they might be feeling blue," he says.
The findings indicate a "significant public health concern" that a lot of doctors may be overlooking, researchers said. Further, depression can affect the entire family and the fact that fathers were likely to be depressed when mothers were, points to the need for screening both moms and dads for the blues, the study states.
The authors write:
The observation that expecting and new fathers disproportionately experience depression suggests that more efforts should be made to improve screening and referral, particularly in light of the mounting evidence that early paternal depression may have substantial emotional, behavioral, and developmental effects on children. The correlation between paternal and maternal depression also suggests a screening rubric—depression in one parent should prompt clinical attention to the other. Likewise, prevention and intervention efforts for depression in parents might be focused on the couple and family rather than the individual.
— The Curator
[Above: Carlos Morales, president of the Atheist Agenda, debates religion with fellow students at UTSA's Sombrilla Plaza. The club hosted an event called "Smut for Smut," encouraging students to pick up a pornographic magazine in exchange for a Bible or other religious text, which members say are filled with examples of violence and torture.]
Tired of that old Bible or Quran?
Atheist Agenda – a student organization present on the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) campus since 2005 – launched its annual 'Smut for Smut' campaign on campus. As outlined by MySA News, club members view religious texts as being on the same level as dirty pornography and thus freely exchange one for the other.
In addition to seeking nationwide media coverage and attention, the group is also hoping for a few faithless to convert to their cause and join the organization. Subsequently, the entire event is a means of opening the door to a dialog.
'Smut for Smut' is a yearly event that is always good for media attention, protesters and First Amendment debates. The UTSA student newspaper The Paisano points out that the porn for Bibles or other religious text exchange will continue until March 3. Atheists equate smutty porn with religious texts – although much of the criticism is aimed at the Christian Bible – because of the dangerous, hateful and misogynistic views the latter holds.
In a 2005 interview following the first 'Smut for Smut' campaign, the then-president of the Atheist Agenda discussed his beliefs with MSNBC. He considered religious texts as "tribal nonsense" that was "written...in tents."
As in the past, this year's campaign drew hundreds to UTSA's Sombrilla Plaza on March 2 to either cheer, protest or inquire about the event and to debate the role of religion in society.
By the Atheist Agenda's own admission, they collected a scant 10 religious texts on the first day of the Bible for porn campaign. Swappers were given print pornography, such as Playboy, Penthouse or Hustler. The group also garnered screaming protesters, Bible thumpers, those who would shake their heads, and most likely also feminist onlookers not too pleased at the porn being handed out.
The immediate religious counter-response in Texas and around the nation – though self-indicting – is that Atheist Agenda is unfairly cherry-picking from religious texts. According to The Paisano, throngs of religious – mostly Christian – believers showed up to form a counter-protest, shrilly condemning the perceived insult to their holy book, and playing right into Atheist Agenda's hands. Also, interestingly, a faction of professed 'agnostics' arrived to stand as a voice of reason separately between the two groups, both of whom they consider equally guilty of intolerance.
Some of the protesters maintained full respect for Atheist Agenda's right to speak. One student reportedly carried a sign that read, "Jesus loves the Atheist Agenda." Others were less lenient, and deemed Smut for Smut "inappropriate" and "offensive," with one reportedly ripping down a Smut for Smut campaign banner. Another student, Adam Zepada from nearby Saint Mary's University, told The Paisano, "I wanted to call up some homeboys and be like 'hey dawg, I wanna go up there and take care of it real quick.' But, because I'm saved and I gave my life to Christ in 2007, I don't live like that anymore."
"I don't understand how that equals at all..to the word of God..they're definitely opposites..." says Monica Coronado, a University of Texas – San Antonio freshman.
Coronado was one of many students who joined hands, denouncing the group's message. "Honestly God isn't just about killing people...He's about really righteousness...I just wanted to explain."
Others sided with Atheist Agenda. “It's a First Amendment right,” said Bradley Lewis, 18, a freshman from Pear-land who said he plans to join the Atheist Agenda. “If religious groups can put out missionaries and go knock on my door and wake me up at 7 a.m. on a Saturday morning, I can put a table outside of the college.”
Robin Lorkovic, 18, a freshman from Houston, disagreed. Lorkovic stood near the “Smut for Smut” table holding a cardboard sign that said “God Loves You! Keep your Bible and learn from it!”
“I don't really feel like that is appropriate at all,” Lorkovic said. “I am a Christian. I believe in God's love, and I am here to stand my ground and stand up for what I believe in.”
The debate spurred plenty of emotion from both sides, but some students took a different approach, supporting neither side, saying the debate accomplished nothing.
"They're going up against each other and what they stand for...what they believe in, is okay..but what they're doing today is something that fosters hatred," said Natalie Tenorio, who remained neutral.
The Atheist Agenda started at UTSA in 2005, and the group's first “Smut for Smut” campaign blew up into a national media sensation. Past President Thomas Jackson was deluged with interview requests, and he debated Tucker Carlson, the bow-tie-wearing conservative pundit, on MSNBC.
Police kept a watchful gaze over students involved in heated debates and did not report any violence.
“This is ultimately why this is going on,” Lewis said. “It's an icebreaker to get people talking about these things.”
According to a University spokesman, what the atheist groups' believe may not represent the majority of the student body. What they are doing is legal.
"As long as students are not violating laws or violating the Constitution, they have the freedom of speech and assembly." said David Gabler, Vice President of UTSA Communications.
Before I address the religious aspect of this account, a brief comment about pornography. I wish that Atheist Agenda had used a different vehicle to exchange with the religious texts – not for the sake of the faithful, but for the sake of porn. In a repressed society, we should be working toward a sex positive view, which includes acceptance of porn for the use and enjoyment of adults. I strongly support working to improve the image of women depicted throughout most porn magazines and DVDs. I also strongly support the women and men who work in the sex industry.
Now then. As long as the basic divide between adherents to the numerous world faiths, and those who adhere to none, remains irreconcilable, the area where we all can – and must – converge is blocked. There will be no way to actually have that important conversation. Violence or terror, most obviously, are unacceptable. But the milder form so often practiced by believers – a puerile refusal to allow one's ideas to be criticized at all – can be just as prohibitive to the conversation. Equally obstructionist was Atheist Agenda's jab at ancient texts many believe to be sacred. While they did not direct their apparent satire at any person, it was nonetheless hurtful. I respect every person's faith and will do nothing to belittle them, or those who follow their precepts. Ideas and sources must be open for criticism, but it must be constructive and NOT mean spirited.
— The Curator
[The above photo of Elena Kagan playing softball, while an assistant law professor at the University of Chicago in 1993, touched off a firestorm of lies in the media.]
It began, seemingly innocently enough, with a grainy black and white photograph of a woman smiling broadly and preparing to swing a bat in a game of softball. The picture was placed on the front page of Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and featured Elena Kagan, who the day before had been nominated by Barack Obama to join America's top court.
But from that single photograph, combined with a two-line caption, has sprung a welter of debate this week about Kagan's sexuality, and the specific question: Is she gay? The debate has been sadly revealing about the status of lesbians in U.S. public life in 2010.
Senior White House adviser David Axelrod told reporters earlier this week that he and President Obama agree. A nominee's sexuality "has no place in this process," he said. "It wasn't an avenue of inquiry on our part and it shouldn't be on anybody else's' part."
Senior White House officials told the media today that the chatter about Kagan's sexual orientation is bizarre for any number of reasons, primarily because her friends and colleagues say she's heterosexual.
Even the conservative media agree: “Let's move this debate off Kagan entirely. That issue remains closed here. She's straight,” wrote blogger Andrew Sullivan, who is gay, today.
But within hours of the Journal publishing the photograph, issues had been raised by gay bloggers and the mainstream media alike and continue to be raised.
Why was the respected newspaper putting a 17-year-old photograph of Kagan, currently the solicitor general and the nominee to replace John Stevens, who is retiring from the U.S. Supreme Court, on its front page?
And was it seeking to imply anything other than that she once played a game of softball?
Gay commentators suggested an ulterior motive, pointing out that there was some historical link in less tolerant times between the sport of softball and the lesbian community in America, who saw it as a welcoming social activity in a largely hostile world. "It clearly is an allusion to her being gay. It's just too easy a punchline," said Cathy Renna, a former official with the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.
The Journal's front page gave the New York Post, itself no stranger to intruding on the private lives of public figures, the excuse to rerun the photo across a double-page spread with the headline: "Does this photo suggest high court nominee Elena Kagan is a lesbian?"
Michael Wolff, a blogger with the Newswer website, wrote: "To say the obvious: it's the hair. She sure looks gay."
The Journal has responded to suggestions that it was playing a nudge-nudge-wink-wink game with derision.
"If you turn the photo upside down, reverse the pixilation and simultaneously listen to Abbey Road backwards, while reading Roland Barthes, you will indeed find a very subtle hidden message," was the sardonic comment of the paper's spokeswoman.
But Sarah Ellison, author of the new book War at the Wall Street Journal and a former reporter on the paper, said: "This is not a paper that is above visual gags. Journal editors should not be surprised or outraged that people question the photo."
The swirl of conjecture around Kagan's sexuality has been gathering pace for several weeks, and has come partly from the right, which has an obvious interest in implying, however surreptitiously, that Kagan has a personal agenda in her approach to the law ahead of what could be a testing confirmation process.
Ben Domenech, a former Bush aide, was one of the first to float the idea on a CBS News blog, although he later apologized for running a rumor.
The rightwing Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly also went on air saying: "Americans have a right to know if their supreme court justice has an orientation that may or may not dictate which way she votes on a vital issue."
Sadly complicating matters, similar points have been raised by commentators on the gay and lesbian side of the argument. Gay activists expressed dismay at the fact that the White House responded to Domenech with a flat denial that Kagan was gay, which they said implied that there was something to be ashamed about if she were.
Earlier Sullivan wrote that "this is preposterous – a function of liberal cowardice and conservative discomfort.
"Since it would be bizarre to argue that a justice's sexual orientation will not in some way affect his or her judgment [on gay rights], it is only logical that this question should be clarified."
So, let me understand. By all accounts a straight woman, very distinguished in her career and currently the Solicitor General, has been accused by innuendo and gossip of being a lesbian because she played softball 17 years ago! And, the gay community has attacked spokesmen for telling the truth: She is NOT gay. They claim that being gay is something she should be proud of and not ashamed. But...she is NOT gay!
What a shining moment in the history of yellow journalism.
According to conservatives and again some gay rights activists, the supposed sexuality of Ms. Kagan is “pertinent” to explore because gay marriage and associated issues may be addressed in the future by the Supreme Court. This of course, means that no heterosexual justice already sitting on the court has an orientation that would dictate the way they vote!
Ridiculous? Yes. Insulting to heterosexuals and homosexuals? Yes. Have they besmirched the stellar reputation of a talented woman? Yes. Have we learned anything of value from this whole mess other than lesbians are still geneally loathed and feared in our culture? Not one damn thing.
— The Curator
Hey listen up younguns: A lot of us older folks are having great, free, wild and satisfying sex – perhaps even more satisfying sex than you are having!
That’s the message from an AARP survey released last week that had questioned its members about their sex lives.
Here are two great articles regarding that survey and its results, the first from the Washington Post the second from the Baltimore Sun Times. They are included here in full, or go directly to their websites:
Folks 45 and older are loving sexual liberation, AARP survey finds
By David Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 8, 2010
We went out Friday afternoon with our copy of the new 105-page AARP sex survey and randomly flipped to some choice bits in search of reaction and comment:
Table 18: Frequency of Intercourse by Gender and Age.
"When I was 55, I was doing it seven times a week with my wife," said Ronald Militello, retired from the Air Force in Washington. Now, at 65, not quite so much. "You do it as much as you can."
The national study of folks 45 and older found, in fact, that 48 percent of those who are dating have sex at least once a week, while 36 percent of the married ones do.
Table 13: Attitudes Toward Sex by Age and Gender.
"I love sex," said Judy Lear, 66, national chair of the Gray Panthers, the intergenerational advocacy group for social justice and peace, when reached by telephone in New York City. "I thinks it's fun, I think it's great. I think it's a really positive thing. I'm single, divorced; I have a very nice gentleman here in New York City. I don't want to be married, I don't want to live together, but I do like to have sex. We have this wonderful relationship."
Lear could be the liberated-and-loving-it poster lady of a certain age for this new report, titled, "Sex, Romance, and Relationships: AARP Survey of Midlife and Older Adults," based on a survey taken in August 2009.
The researchers found that baby boomers, those sons and daughters – also older brothers and sisters – of the sexual revolution have gotten older, and their sexual mores have aged up with them. Key finding: The percentage who think you must be married to have sex has dropped by almost half in 10 years, from 41 percent to 22 percent.
That's not an endorsement of infidelity. Only one in five men and one in 10 women in this age group admit to cheating on a partner. Rather, it's an assertion of sexual freedom among widows, widowers, divorced people or folks who never married.
And yet, alas, all is not perfectly orgasmic either. In spite of the increased sense of permission to have sex, less sex is being had!
The researchers blame the lousy economy and related stress for undermining everyone's libido. The frequency of intercourse and general sexual satisfaction are down about 10 points since 2004, "while the frequency of self-stimulation and sexual thoughts and fantasies have not changed," the study found.
"The downturn is not a change in terms of liking sex or being happy with each other," said Pepper Schwartz, whose title at the AARP is Love and Relationships Ambassador. She also writes the group's online column, the Naked Truth. "That kind of stress, depression and angst don't do anything for a sex drive.
"The good news is that I would expect if we get a recovery, then we will have an increase in frequency and satisfaction when we do the next study five years from now."
Stimulus plan, anyone?
For young folks who might still think there's not much to look forward to after 45, the study is more empirical evidence that the older folks are fully invested in doing the wild thing whenever possible.
But of course! Susan Murany, executive director of the Gray Panthers, quoted the late founder Maggie Kuhn: "Learning and sex until rigor mortis," she said before she died at 89 in 1995.
A generation of women who no longer felt "the need to get married for financial reasons and sexual reasons" is carrying that belief into older age, said Murany, 55.
The many charts and tables in the study offer revealing nuggets about how the middle and older generations think and act sexually. About 54 percent of those surveyed were married, and 5 percent had same-sex partners.
Across most gender and age categories in the survey, folks actually place "a satisfying sexual relationship" behind other keys to quality of life, including, in descending order of importance: "being healthy," "financial security," "close ties to friends and family," "personal independence," "spiritual well-being," "good relationship with spouse/partner" and "being productive and contributing."
One exception is the youngest category of males, of course, age 45 to 49. They place good sex ahead of spiritual well-being. Overall, 85 percent of men and 61 percent of women said sex is important to quality of life.
In general, the men helpfully fulfill several stereotypes we always suspected were true. They have "sexual thoughts, fantasies, erotic dreams" more often than women. In fact, 21 percent of men age 70 and older fantasize more than once a day, compared with zero percent of women that age.
The favorite fantasy of men is sex with a stranger. Same with women. No. 2 for men is sex with more than one person at the same time. No. 2 for women is sex with a celebrity.
About two-thirds of men "always" have an orgasm. Fewer than one-third of women always do.
While most kinds of sexual activity, including kissing and hugging, have decreased during the recession, the frequency of oral sex has increased a bit.
And then there's this, another reason to diet and hit the gym: The healthiest people have the most sex.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let’s Talk about Older People and SEX
If Betty White’s recent “Saturday Night Live” hosting gig taught me anything, it’s that old people like to talk about sex. Or, rather, like to talk about sex when TV writers think it’ll be funny. I know, I know. You probably don’t want to think about older people having sex — or liking it. But it is my duty to report on how those 45 and older are enjoying their sex lives (a responsibility that I believe was outlined when I was hired at b). So, basically there was a huge AARP “sex survey” released. The Washington Post got hold of a copy, which thankfully was not sent to us. There are some boring stats in the survey, such as that 48 percent of those 45 and older who are dating have sex at least once a week, while 36 percent of the married ones do the same. And there’s some interesting stats as well, such as how 21 percent of men 70 and older fantasize more than once a day, compared with 0 percent (0!) of women that age. The newspaper decided to dig deeper into aged sexiness. “I love sex,” said 66-year-old Judy Lear, when contacted by the surely aghast Post. “I think it’s fun, I think it’s great. I think it’s a really positive thing. I’m single, divorced; I have a very nice gentleman here in New York City.” Aaaaaallll-right, Judy. Thanks. In summary, the Post found that “older folks are fully invested in doing the wild thing whenever possible.” As they point out, it’s just as Maggie Kuhn, the late founder of intergenerational advocacy group Gray Panthers, used to say (according to The Post): “Learning and sex until rigor mortis.” That would make a nice T-shirt for Grandparents Day.
DID WOMAN SLICE MAN WHO WAS BAD LAY?
Don’t mess with Michelle Thomas. She will cut you. Literally. (Allegedly.) Houstonpress.com reports that Thomas, 26, is facing up to 20 years in prison after allegedly scissor-slashing her common-law husband. Thomas says her unnamed husband came home drunk and tried to rough her up. But since she had no visible injuries, police are siding with the dude’s tale — that he was slashed for not giving her good sex. Since Thomas is clearly smirking in her mug shot, we tend to believe the husband’s tale as well.
FACEBOOK: SHARE AND SEX-SHARE ALIKE
We share a lot on Facebook. Perhaps too much. And, according to a new study, we like sharing sex. CBS News reports that Dan Zarella, a “social media scientist” (invented job fall-back option!) created an algorithm to analyze links of more than 12,000 Facebook posts. He came to the conclusion that users are 90 percent more likely to share sex-related links than any other type.
SURVEY: BRITONS' SEX HURTS SO BAD
Sex is pretty dangerous business in Britain, apparently. A survey has found that nearly one-third of the adult population in the country has suffered an injury during sex, U.K. paper Daily Telegraph reports. Pulled muscles were the most common injury, followed by carpet burns (sidenote: Carpet burns are considered injuries now?), back injuries, a pulled neck or bashing an elbow or knee. Understandably, 40 percent of those surveyed didn’t realize they were injured until the next day, quite possibly because, uh, they were having sex at the time. The survey also found the riskiest place to have sex, which, oddly, is the sofa. Other hazardous sex places for Britons: the stairs, the car, the shower and the kitchen table.
Jordan Bartel is assistant editor at b. Follow him on Twitter, @jordanbartel.
I am quite heartened by the above, except for the statistics on the number of senior women who always orgasm. Women of any age need to bring that statistic all the way up -- I know you can do it, as I am a woman and a card carrying member of the Always-Orgasm Club. A sex positive attitude is a way to achieve that goal.
I am already a senior and can confirm that there is definitely happy, freer sex as you age. So, maybe those of you in your 20’s and 30's should begin to look forward to the calendar passing with excitement instead of dread, or better yet, confer with us oldsters about ways to improve your own sex lives!
— The Curator
In a memorable article yesterday in the Guardian.co.uk, science writer Carole Jahme explains women’s fascination with the size of a man’s penis: Evolution!
Interestingly, several male friends of mine who read this article were quite...well...uncomfortable. I can understand completely. Women have been judged by their body parts ever since Eve lived in the garden – albeit briefly.
So, read all about it, as the entire article from “Ask Carole” appears below, or you can read it directly at the newspaper’s website:
Penis size: An evolutionary perspective
Carole Jahme shines the cold light of evolutionary psychology on readers' problems. This week: penis size
Carole Jahme
guardian.co.uk
Article history
Penis size is sexually selected only in ape species like chimps and humans where the female exercises mate choice. Above photo depicts a silverback male gorilla. Silverbacks by contrast, monopolize a harem of females and are poorly endowed. Photo: Getty Images/Dorling Kindersley
Anonymous, age and sex unspecified
Dear Carole, Why are women so obsessed with the size of a man's cock – wanting ones 6 inches and over and kicking others aside when they really should be concentrating on the emotional connection and love being shared, putting the size of the man's cock right out of her mind?
Carole replies:
The origins of the primate sex drive go back more than 60m years to the late Mesozoic era when the first primate evolved. A lot of sex has taken place since then, and a significant proportion has been motivated by female choice between rival males. [1] Female primates can experience multiple orgasms, and it has been theorised that ancestral hominid females sought out males who would sexually satisfy them. Through the mechanism of sexual selection, this will have increased penis size and altered structure.
Today, the average erect gorilla penis is 3cm (1.25 inches) long, the average chimp or bonobo penis comes in at around 8cm and the average human penis stands at around 13cm. Most primates, including chimpanzees, have a penis bone and achieve erections through muscle contraction.[2] The human penis has evolved the unusual system of vasocongestion to achieve erection, making the erect organ far more flexible than that of other primate species.
This unique adaptation is thought to have been selected through female mate choice, and by the time Homo erectus arrived on the scene, the hominid penis was significantly longer, fatter and more bendy than our ape cousins'. It has even been theorised that bipedalism evolved in humans to allow the fashionably new, larger, flexible penis to be displayed to discerning females.[3]
Interestingly, while the human penis is the biggest of all the ape species in length and girth, both in absolute terms and as a proportion of body size, the human testes are not. As a proportion of overall body size, chimp and bonobo testes are twice as large as human testes, whereas gorilla testes are half the size. Why?
Correlations can be found between primate mating systems and male genital anatomy.[4] In multi-male/multi-female groups, males must compete to reproduce and frequently the competition takes place inside the female reproductive tract. The more sperm a male produces and ejaculates inside a female the greater the probability that one of his will fertilise the ovum. Female chimps or bonobos in oestrus often mate with several different individuals, so males must reproductively compete in this way and larger testes will therefore confer greater reproductive fitness.
By contrast, female gorillas live in harems and don't often get a chance to exercise a choice between mates, though occasionally a female and a male from outside the group may risk it. The impressive 200kg (400lb) silverback gorilla does have the smallest penis and testes of all male apes, but his massive canines and biceps and his controlling, jealous temper allow him to intimidate and fight off potential competitors.
Human testis size indicates that males evolved under conditions in which their sperm competed inside females, but perhaps not to the same extent as chimp sperm. But the larger human penis suggests that hominids needed to keep females with choice sexually satisfied. Ancestral females would have experienced a sexual freedom denied in Western cultures today and it has been suggested that our ancestors went through a period of matriarchy and enhanced female choice.[5]
When compared with patriarchal chimps, the matriarchal bonobo is a far more sex-oriented ape. Enthusiastic females initiate both hetero- and homosexual activity, particularly when aggression begins to surface, resulting in satisfied, contented and peaceful bonobos. Patriarchy, on the other hand, correlates with a lack of openly displayed female choice.
Women with choice are not all "obsessed with the size of a man's cock". Women are as aware as men that to build a stable relationship you need trust, shared interests and the ability to keep each other amused. But a woman is not going to "put the size of a man's cock right out of her mind", because she can't. Females have an evolved interest in the size of a man's penis, which has been sexually selected for its size and shape. But humans are also selected for creativity – we are highly innovative, imaginative apes. Accordingly, women's minds can be aroused by creativity and being sexually imaginative can be physically arousing, adding satisfying metaphorical inches to one's love life.
References
[1] Dixson, A (2003) Sexual selection by cryptic female choice and the evolution of primate sexuality. Evolutionary Anthropology; 11 (S1): 195-199.
[2] Diamond, M (1980) The biosocial evolution of human sexuality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences; 3: 184-186.[3] Sheets-Johnstone M. (1990) The Roots of Thinking. Temple University Press.
[4] Harcourt, A, Gardiner, J (1994) Sexual selection and genital anatomy of male primates. Proceedings. Biological Sciences/The Royal Society; 255 (1342): 47-53.
[5] de Waal, F B M (1995) Bonobo sex and society, the behavior of a close relative challenges assumptions about male supremacy in human evolution. Scientific American, March 1995, 82-88.
Carole Jahme has a master's degree in evolutionary psychology and is the author of Beauty and the Beast: Woman, Ape and Evolution. In 2004 she won the Wellcome Trust's Award for Communication of Science to the Public.
— The Curator
Belle de Jour will once again trade in her trade-mark high heels for athletic shoes this time on Mother’s Day to participate in a famous 10k run in support of another great charity.
Belle de Jour had been the nom de plume of the famous British erotic author. Last year, Belle revealed she is Dr. Brooke Magnanti, of Bristol, England, a noted scientist. Brooke works at the Bristol Initiative for Research of Child Health, and is currently part of a team researching the potential effects on babies of their mothers' exposure to toxic chemicals.
But, from 2003 to late 2004, Brooke worked as a high-class call girl for a London escort service. She has written an award-winning blog and several books based on her experiences as a high-end call-girl in the sex industry.
On Sunday, May 9, Brooke will run in the renowned 2010 Bristol 10k race in her home town, Bristol, England. She announced her participation today on Twitter and also on her blog.
She is seeking sponsors for her participation in the run, and all of the money she raises will go to the non-profit Bristol Haematology & Oncology Centre. The charity is one of two featured in this year’s 10k race. Anyone interested in sponsoring Brooke should go to her race webpage that is dedicated to the event.
The race route is similar to the Bristol Half Marathon that Brooke participated in last month, when she raised money for a different worthy charity. This race also uses a car-free course, starting from At-Bristol, along the harborside, then follows the Avon Gorge and Cumberland Road, returning to At-Bristol via Prince Street Bridge. For runners also planning to take part in the half marathon, it offers a great training opportunity to experience a short version of the course.
The website of the 2010 Bristol 10k proudly proclaims: “Runners of all abilities, from novices to elite, are being invited to ‘runbristol.’”
On her sponsorship webpage, Brooke writes:
“I’d guess you'd say this is getting to be a bad habit...!
I'm running the Bristol 10k this month, because I clearly didn't learn my lesson at the Shef Half in April, when I was beaten by The Incredible Hulk, Radioactive Man, and a Puerto Rican chicken. Or any of the runs before that... even though to date I have been beaten at races by Scooby Doo, Buzz Lightyear, a giant kidney, and pipped to the post by a man in a banana suit.
I'm running to raise money for the Above & Beyond Charities CaRE Appeal.
Why? Well, because I used to work in the Bristol Haematology & Oncology Centre, until the renovations renovated us right out into another hospital. The BHOC is a good facility filled with caring, professional staff, and it needs updating. The fantastic work done by those who work there should be matched by equally excellent and up-to-date surroundings.
With 1 in 3 people being diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lifetime, it is a disease which affects nearly all families. The Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre (BHOC) opened in 1971 and cares for over 6,500 individuals diagnosed with cancer every year, with up to 1,000 visitors passing through the Centre each day.
You can help make a difference to patients and families by donating. And think of it this way – I'm running so you don't have to!
Thank you again for your support. I've seen firsthand the difference the appeal is already making, and know the goals of the appeal can be accomplished.
all the best
Bxx”
Brooke ran the Sheffield Half Marathon to benefit Sheffield Working Women’s Opportunities Project and posted on Twitter afterward on April 26:
‘Just under 2:06. Beaten by Incredible Hulk, Radioactive Man and a chicken. Not bad for no training though!”
You may still make a sponsorship donation to benefit the Sheffield Working Women’s Opportunities Project in Brooke's name.
(Note: The Above & Beyond Charities supports the work of the Bristol Royal Infirmary (BRI), Bristol Children’s Hospital, St. Michaels Hospital, Bristol General Hospital, Bristol Haematology & Oncology Centre, Bristol Eye Hospital, Bristol Dental Hospital, Bristol Homeopathic Hospital and Clevedon Hospital.
Above & Beyond Charities funds projects which touch the lives of the thousands of people cared for by University Hospitals Bristol and local community services each year.
Last year the Charity gave over £2.2 million in grants to make a real difference to healthcare in Bristol and the South West.
Please follow this link to support the 'CaREAppeal'.)
Since she disclosed her identity, Brooke has been able to bring her celebrity to worthy causes. She’s participated in the half-marathon before to support non-profit charities, but no one knew that she was also the illustrious Belle de Jour.
On April 27, Brooke announced she is “taking indefinite hiatus from Twitter and blog.” I expect she will return better than ever, with even more entertaining, thought provoking and unforgettable writing about anything and everything.
In the meantime, I continue to applaud Brooke’s charity endeavors and re-read her books, Belle de Jour: Diary of an Unlikely Call Girl
. Not only is she a talented and gifted writer, she is a woman with strong social convictions and true compassion. Cheers, m’dear!
— The Curator
