And we’re not talking Cheney.
This is public access tv host Alexyss K. Tylor discussing vagina power and penis addiction with her mother.
Seriously, would YOU talk to your mother like that? If I did, my mother would take notes!
Uh, this is really, really NSFW. Duh.
Lessons learned in this episode:
(Read AFTER you watch the video!)
– If the man ain’t comin’, he gonna be goin’ somewhere else, puttin’ his penis in someone else.– A lot of women will laugh and talk about a man if his penis is small.
– Just because a man is in love with your vagina doesn’t mean he’s in love with you.
– A lot of us get caught up on the dick.
– Dick will make you slap somebody.
– The penis is a heat-seeking missile, like a rocket. Information is encoded in it making it do what it do.
– Men launch their penis up in the vaginal canal. As a woman relaxes and breathes and sits on that penis and rock and move and rotate and find her rhythm and go up and down and back and forth and around in a circle, she starts getting her groove back.
– When the parts of penis hit them vagina walls, harmonizing and making them sing, a woman feels like she’s in church jumping and shouting.
– Dick’ll make you lose control.
Well, he will if you ask him nicely. And then you can slap him; he likes it that way.
But seriously, what kinda church does this woman go to? I think I saw an Emmanuelle movie like that once…
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
raincoaster 
my mother would be holding her hands over her ears if I initiated a conversation like this… but the conversations I have with my gay son about dick are way racier !!
Then you should get your own cable access show in the American South, just like this woman. Actually, if you put it on YouTube I would totally feature it.
I have had so many laughs from this woman’s stuff… I’m just baffled as to how the cameramen and crew can keep it together!
She must use robots. Please God she never hooks up with that creature from the Spirit of Truth ministry. This world couldn’t handle the Awesome.
I was in agreement untill the church bit.
What I want to know is.. if you’re not supposed to have sex before marriage (ideally, apparently) and if you get married to someone you think you love and want to be with, then get jiggy with it and it’s…… absolutely f***ing shit man, I mean sooooo boring you could watch paint dry and get an orgasm. And if you try all the usual guidance and effort and stockings and massage and you bloody sodding well name it, and it’s STILL absolutely just crap. And you split up because you just cannot face putting your body through that demeaning shit one more time (not that you hate the idea of sex, just sex with HIM) I mean where does that leave the whole sex before marriage debate?
Actually my Mum would happily talk to me about this. I have very wierd parents.
Phillipa: on the serious side, most churches feel that sex has some purpose within the context of marriage only, and therefore that the relationship should outlast the sex, as I understand it did in many instances before the invention of Viagra and internet porn.
As far as the church she goes to–I think I’m going to abandon my atheism and join!
I wasn’t going to admit it on MY blog but — I confess, I can totally relate to some of these statements. I mean, when that thing is gettin’ hit so good and you’re high and beamin’ you can’t help but mistake it for LOVE. I’ve been in so many bad relationships because the sex was SO GOOD.
Er, I take it back – a few. A FEW bad relationships.
Do you still have their phone numbers bychance? No reason I ask…
Philipa, it’s my understanding that married people often discover things they don’t like about each other over time, and that they learn to cope if they intend to stay married. Some people are married to dull people, and they have lots of friends who compensate for that by being interesting. Etc. Also, is it not your experience that if you’ve done more than hold hands you can get a pretty damn good idea how good it’s going to be later? Or am I just gifted with the second sexual sight?
Raincoaster, to paraphrase a stock market warning: Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Part of the issue is, just because a relationship starts out a certain way, doesn’t mean it will stay that way. Some of that can be the result of learning to see a new side of that person. For instance, after my sons became teenagers, I realized that women who were also mothers, in general, were more attractive to me than someone who looked identical, but had no children.
I have no idea what kind of biological or psychological thing is at work on that front. It *may* explain the popularity of MILF porn.
On the other side of the coin, some women seem to lose interest in physical and emotional intimacy after having children, where others see an increase. I remember a conversation at work where I made a remark about sex drive dropping off during the post-partum period. A far-too-attractive-for-my-own-good co-worker overheard this and said “BS… my husband and I were back at the OB-GYN at the six week stage wanting to know when it was safe to have sex again, because my drive was through the roof.”
At that point, I came to the sobering conclusion that, regardless of the similarity of equipment from one individual to the next, every woman is different. Men, sadly, seem to be largely the same.
Ultimately though, the owner of the dick usually gets slapped.
Oh, I know relationships change over time. And so does sexual desire. All I’m saying is that if you’ve fooled around it’s not that difficult to predict how someone will be at actual sex. I certainly know that the in-love-over-the-moon phase only last about two years and then the relationship has to change. And it changes again at about the seven year mark. People who aren’t prepared to allow it to change and STILL stay married shouldn’t get married.
I know a woman who got married and as I was helping her dress for the wedding she said, “Oh, he’s not the best I can do but he’ll make a good first husband.” Strangely, they’re still married more than a decade later, much to BOTH of their surprise.
Why are you so interested? No reason I ask…
I don’t know about ya’ll but my drive is always through the roof. I’m thinking of making a graph chart. I think I’ll start with yesterday.
Raincoaster, to paraphrase a stock market warning: Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
I’ll remember that.
Hmmm, I guess I DO have second sight then, because there have been no surprises for me.
Raincoaster, there’s also a 14 year mark, and a 21 year mark. Not that I would know from experience or anything…
Stiletto, I feel your pain. Men’s graphs are supposed to peak at age 25. For some reason, mine was on the upward portion of a bell curve, and I’m not sure it’s “topped out” yet. If it does, I’ll post a full report.
was I supposed to wait for 6 weeks after giving birth? uh oh.
raincoaster, I’m with you on the second sexual sight. You can definitely tell a lot from the way someone kisses.
has anyone read On Chesil Beach? pretty relevant to this thread…
Perhaps I could look it up at the library? Or does one need a “specialty” library for that?
Watch Alexyss Tylor next week when her special guest will be Jessica Delfino . . .
“Men’s graphs are supposed to peak at age 25”
Thanks Firm. I thought it was 18. I can now expand my age range.
(Cruising high schools was a wee bit dangerous you know). Although an alternate career as teacher did come to mind.
Actually, it IS 18, but I was trying to keep you out of trouble.
18 is probably peak for testosterone, but I believe (statistically) the frequency and interest rages on through the 20’s. Maybe the 25 peak that I’ve seen has something to do with opportunity, or maybe it has more to do with less drunken frat-party behavior. (Where the 18 year-old starts, but falls asleep before it gets good enough for her to slap him upside the head.)
Hmn, difficult to judge when you’re both ‘respecting’ each other so much. And how misleading that can be.
I just think my friend’s right when he says you never really know a person til you live with them. And I’ve known a few men whose attitude towards a ‘wife’ has completely changed from ‘girlfriend’. Like they no longer have to bother in a way, treating her like a stereotype. Of course by then the wives are stuck with them; performing daily in some kind of parody of a marriage instead of two people sharing their life.
My grandmother always said that if it’s alright in the bedroom, it’s alright. My parents have been happily married for 56 years so I’m thinking Mum probably got some good advice. And they communicate – in our home we can talk about anything, except voting Labour.
The wives are stuck with husbands with bad attitude, but the only thing that forces them to change their behaviour is their own consent to oppression. And then it’s not oppression; it’s choice.
I have little pity for people who delegate their own personal identities to someone else.
I think that’s a bit harsh – as you’re assuming the wives can do something about their husbands behaviour or if they can’t it’s because they didn’t try, hence if they put up with it, it’s consent rather than giving things time while you try other things. Expectation and sterotypes in a community can be very strong persuaders, and you are forgetting love. I know one wife in particular who does NOT consent to this behaviour, this oppresion. But try as she might, even to the point of trial separation, his behaviour improves for a while then slips back into unnacceptable. I think it is harsh to condemn her – they have children and she takes her vows seriously and loves him and wants to be with him. All was discussed and agreed beforehand and this situation was not expected by her (basically once junior came along, he found babies were boring and he wasn’t the centre of attention so found attention elsewhere). It is easy to judge from the outside and say she should bin him and get another, (she might have to, in time) but relationships; people, are not like buses – this is her husband and that means a great deal to her. She will keep on trying to fix this marriage until she has nothing left to give. Suggesting this is all her fault because she cannot change another persons behaviour is unfair. You can only change your own behaviour but I think it worth remembering that our behaviour does have an impact on those we come in contact with – even the sales girl can annoy us or leave no impact, it’s up to her. Saying that we can choose not to be affected by the community we live in is naive – we all are. And we cannot help but be affected by those we care about.
I don’t think it’s possible to misunderstand what I said any more than you have, Philipa.
I didn’t say she should expect him to change, or not expect him to change. Nor did I say it was the wife who always delegated identity. All I am saying is that if you find someone’s opinions about who you should be change and they are not what you consider appropriate, you don’t have an obligation to play along. The difference between expectation and reality is THEIR problem, not yours. If you like them, perhaps you can help them to understand that.
I have a cousin who married and as they were leaving the ceremony her husband turned to her and said, “So have you given notice at your work?” And she looked him in the eye and said “No,” and that was, of course, the correct response. He sprang this on her, hoping that she’d assume she was bound to the same stereotypes, but she was not. She married this man, and she chose to stick with him and try to make it work, but that didn’t mean accepting his word for who she was allowed to be. Did that make it more difficult in the short run? Yes. But it made the long run possible in the first place.
Raincoaster, the question I have is this:
Did she slap him later that evening?
FWIW (probably not much), I agree with what you’re saying, but I also recognize that many of the women who find themselves in abusive relationships (including those that aren’t physically abusive, but simply suppress their identity) do so because it’s the only way they know to live. Statistically, someone who’s been in an abusive situation during childhood is more likely to tolerate such treatment as an adult.
Breaking out of such a relationship, particularly if you’ve had your sense of worth beaten down all your life, is very hard, and therefore very rare. I think your friend’s response to her soon-to-be-spouse was outstanding, and I wish it were the case more. This reminds me of an appropriate joke:
On their wedding night, the burly husband removed his pants, and tossed them across the bed to his new bride. “Here, put these on.”
“I can’t wear those,” she protested.
He smiles and says “That’s right. Remember, I wear the pants in this family.”
She thought about this, removed her panties and tossed them across the bed to him. “Here. Put these on.”
He looked at her like she was crazy. “There’s no way I can get into your panties.”
“That’s right,” she said. “And that’s how it’s going to stay until you change your attitude.”
Later that evening, the dick was so good she had to slap him.
See, THAT is how you work things out.
I agree that a lot of people find it near-impossible to assert themselves or even to find themselves in the first place, and this is their tragedy. It’s not rare, unfortunately, but it should be. What I’m saying is that those people should be free, should stand up and make their own decisions and set their own boundaries. I fully recognize how difficult it is for them, coming from contexts that make those kinds of actions literally unthinkable.
Abuse is handed down in families. Boys who’ve been abused often (not always) become abusive adults, and women often become passive absorbers of abuse. They find each other and they have children. And they treat them just how they were treated. At some point, somebody’s got to be the adult, somebody’s got to stand on their hind legs and put a stop to it. It’s never easy. It’s even sometimes fatal (I knew a girl who was murdered when she tried to get out of the life she’d been leading). But you have to ask what kind of life that is, and if it’s worth keeping.
My friend took a risk at her wedding, but she and her husband and her marriage were ultimately a lot better off for it. Could have turned out very differently, but then she’d be a bitter, shrivelled woman in a suffocating marriage with a deluded man, and does the world really need more of that?
I think I could still be misunderstanding you and in that case please bear with me…
I’m including marriages that work, that are classed as good marriages in which both partners loved each other. They have an investment, an emotional investment as well as a financial and social one. In the case I cited, the problems are fresh and only surfaced when they had a child. Neither party could know how they would react to that event, it could not be predicted. But I’m also thinking of others where problems have surfaced much later. You said:
“I didn’t say she should expect him to change, or not expect him to change. Nor did I say it was the wife who always delegated identity. All I am saying is that if you find someone’s opinions about who you should be change and they are not what you consider appropriate, you don’t have an obligation to play along. The difference between expectation and reality is THEIR problem, not yours. If you like them, perhaps you can help them to understand that. ”
Which means what exactly?? (I was talking behaviour, not opinions) To me that meant an ultimatum – you either behave as I think you should behave, in a way that is acceptable to me, or I’m leaving. That really is what it comes down to, or you stay in an unhappy situation and are therefore, as you say, giving consent for the other party to treat you in a way you do not like.
I do not think you can divorce yourself from being emotionally affected by the treatment of someone you care about. And I think an ultimatum may be necessary, eventually. But I think it very harsh and blunt and selfish without trying all sorts of compromise first. Behaviour can be borne of perception: people behave in a certain way because they may feel neglected, or slighted or diminished in some way, or downright insulted. Or it could be because they are selfish and childish. It could be a matter of pride or male ego. Or it could be ambition. It could be that however hard you try the other person just doesn’t love you any more. That behaviour can be excused in many ways but is often demonstrated by no kissing and then no sex. Sex can be used as a power tool, which is wrong, but it happens. As complicated as people are, their relationships can be and I think it unfair to hand out glib judgements.
Of course I think there are situations where compromise would not be an option for me – anyone hitting me or harming the children and that would be the end of love. That then brings into question the other argument: that marriage is for life. No ultimatums there then, and even my preference for compromise and communication would fail.
I completely agree when you say:
“that a lot of people find it near-impossible to assert themselves or even to find themselves in the first place, and this is their tragedy. It’s not rare, unfortunately, but it should be. What I’m saying is that those people should be free, should stand up and make their own decisions and set their own boundaries. I fully recognize how difficult it is for them, coming from contexts that make those kinds of actions literally unthinkable.”
and I think social forces and expectations have a huge roll to play, especially social pressure from family and close friends.
Being alone is scary for many people, being utterly and completely alone. Seeking adult interaction on the internet, even through something as benign as blogging, can be scoffed at and seen as a marker of a sad life. I know a married couple who are Elvis fans and their entire house and wardrobe is given over to the adoration of this dead singer they’ve never met. But let a single woman write to an actor, or other public figure, and get annoyed at their, perhaps unkind response, and automatically she finds herself labelled as desperate and sad. Yet no-one thought she was wierd when she was in a relationship and got annoyed at the paper boy, or thought the company who installed the windows was rude, or was upset about the way the woman at the bank simply wouldn’t help. When I was at work I may have joined you at scoffing at someone being upset about such things, but in living a life that is barely punctuated by anything else, I can sympathise. I can sympathise with a womans fear of being alone with children. Some women are fine and are surrounded with help and support, but some are not. I see the women who look at me and say out loud that they are scared, that they wouldn’t want my life (gee I thought I was doing ok) so maybe fear is a factor for those in a marriage. The truth is though, that that fear would not exist if you threw enough money at it.
I think many problems would not exist if you threw money at them, even if it just so you could live a life in which it is possible to mostly avoid the other one and which, from the outside, people thought was perfect.
Money can’t buy you love but it can buy you a good aproximation of it, including lots of sex. Like you say, it all comes down to what you want, raincoaster. When I was offered sex yesterday (very nicely) I answered that I wanted more for myself than a roll in the hay, however tempting the offer. They reminded me not to get to aged 80 without having sex. Gee thanks. Some people really can just make your day.
You are reading a GREAT DEAL into this which isn’t there.
A) This isn’t about controlling other people.
B) Leaving is not the only alternative to controlling other people.
Can we at least agree on those two principles? Because you seem to have assumed both of those things.
Also, does your hound dog there not notice that you have two children?
“Later that evening, the dick was so good she had to slap him.
raincoaster said,
May 3, 2007 at 11:29 am
See, THAT is how you work things out. ”
Maybe I should have said yes.
Just read your comment; hound dog??
sorry, I’ll go.
What else do you call a man who gets all “so you better take it from me, cuz ain’t nobody else offerin’ honey!” on you?
Also, how the hell does any of this have anything to do with money? It has nothing more to do with money than it has to do with checkers.
At the risk of diving in where my opinion will only cause trouble…
First, there are marriages/relationships where one partner or the other changes in significant ways after the marriage. Some of those changes may be voluntary, some may not be. I may choose to become a chronic complainer. I may not have chosen to become a quadraplegic from a spinal cord stroke. In either case, I’ve changed, and my partner always has the option to leave.
I may have lost my interest in sex after our children were born, or I may develop a BDSM bent that neither of us saw coming (so to speak). Again, my partner always has the option to leave.
When we face these kinds of changes in any relationship, we have the option of staying or going. Rings, marriage certificates, peer pressure, shared financial responsibility, and legal responsibilities to children are all factors that may affect our willingness to go or stay. Regardless, we still have the option.
My previous comment was pointing out that for many people (most often women), leaving doesn’t appear to be a viable option. They may not have established credit on their own, they may not have job skills that match up well with the market, and so on. In short, they have (possibly unintentionally) bound themselves to their spouse/partner in such a way that they cannot continue to live in their current fashion without them.
Second, making broad generalizations about why relationships fail is probably a mistake. I’ve seen tons of reasons for marriages to fail, and seen marriages survive that went way beyond what anyone at the rehersal dinner might have expected. I’m now about to hit the 24th anniversary. Is it perfect? Hardly. Is it happy? Most of the time.
Why stay? Well, in my case, it’s a combination of commitment, realization that I’m no peach to live with, and the realization that there aren’t any perfect people out there (regardless of how they may appear). Would I feel differently if my personality were being squashed daily? No doubt. I’m not suggesting that anyone should stay in a relationship that is abusive or destructive.
At the same time, I think way too many people never get past “how good the dick feels” (or the converse biology), and completely neglect that all of their relationships are way too shallow, simply because they’re not willing to move past the “in love feeling,” and get to the point of real love.
Which brings me to a question that I will end this rambling diatribe with:
Can it be said that you truly love someone when you’re still feeling that “in love” ecstacy that breaks down your ego boundaries, and causes you to behave like an absolute fool?
Raincoaster, you’ve clearly never played Strip Checkers. :D
Not yet. Call me.
The best advice on marriage I ever got (and really, if I’d gotten GREAT advice, I might have married some poor sod by now) was that one day you’ll wake up, roll over, and think “who the hell is that ALIEN in my bed?” and you have to be prepared for that day before you get married. It will come. And if you’re the kind of person who should be married, you’ll stick it out, because one day later you’ll wake up, roll over to look at the alien and think, “Well you know, I am actually quite fond of the old fart after all.”
Side note: I helped put together a study on homelessness in Canada’s poorest neighborhood, and over 70% of women reported that they were in currently unhappy relationships and that concern over housing was one of the factors keeping them in those relationships. And having interviewed over 100 prostitutes for my book, I’m well aware of the tradeoffs women make with men for money. What I’m saying is that, however preconditioned to make those choices we may be, they are still choices. I have nothing but immense respect for the women who’ve pulled themselves up out of that life despite the risks. I am in awe of their courage, and cannot imagine how difficult it must have been for them. This is very different from “well if I want a nice house, I’ve got to find someone to buy it for me.” I live in what Americans would call The Projects, and I’m no stranger to the Food Bank, and I know you don’t die from it, so I have earned the right to say these things.
“Not yet. Call me.”
I think my King just got jumped.
There’s no point in bluffing me, Firmyboy. I will ALWAYS call.
In a coincidence that only Rod Serling could appreciate, as I was reading your last comment, my cell phone began ringing.
Yes ma’am.
Rod Serling and I, that is.
So it wasn’t me: you dodged a bullet there, trust me.
My 2¢–50% off today ‘cos I like your face:
It seems to me that RC is saying that one should behave in a relationship as one deems appropriate. The suitability of the other’s behaviour is not yours to change.
So if you’re a woman who wants to work outside the home, work. If the other half demands you quit your job, decide whether you’re willing to pay what it will cost you personally. If you find the cost is too high, keep working.
If he’s spending time snogging someone else when he should be helping muck out the diapers, take a stand. Anything else is surrender. He can choose to modify that behaviour or not, and how you react to that is your choice.
A good friend of mine had three kids. He was sterile. He knew, she didn’t. He said nothing because he loved her and he loved the kids and she was smart enough never to wave it in his face or the neighbourhood’s.
Changing my/your own behaviour because you/I find it unsuited to my/your tastes or inappropriate to the relationship will only work if the two of us can a) agree who’s wrong and b) find a way to make the changes easily and ideally without loss of public face.
When I got married, it wasn’t ‘cos I’d found the person I wanted to live with for the rest of my life. It was ‘cos I’d found the person I wanted to be found dead next to.
I’d found the person I could see myself looking up from the wheelchair and smiling at through the drug haze, dementia, or tears. Or possibly reinforced glass or bars.
Anything else is trivia.
On a related subject, Mme and I just bought life insurance. However this does not relieve her of the obligation to make it look like an accident.
No special reason I mention that here.
Now you SEE why you’re married? She couldn’t let that much sense get away.
I think this is totally hilarious. I say we must take that type of artistic expression with a grain of salt. I wouldn’t be that crude with my mom but we have a pretty open relationship when it comes to talking about sexuality. It is just bad sexual education through tackless entertainers.
Well again I have to say, this isn’t a bad education, although I’m glad I know nicer men than she does. Actually, I don’t know ANY men from Atlanta, so she could be right about all of them!