a lollipop and a blowjob

This is a curiously odd picture. It seems a third person might've been there to record the event, unless he used a timer. But what was so memorable about this particular moment that the photographer decided to snap this picture? The photo almost has a Diane Arbus sense to it, something that almost certainly was unintended.

Apparently he was in such a hurry he couldn't wait for her to finish her lollipop. For her part, she looks bored out of her mind or maybe stoned. Or maybe she doesn't like sucking cock and the candy was meant to distract her from the job at hand.

I've written before about how I don't understand why women don't like to give blowjobs. As long as he's clean and disease-free, what's the problem? Reciprocation, of course, is absolutely necessary. Something tells me that won't be happening with lollipop girl here. Maybe she didn't even know he was going to take the picture.

becoming fearless

I'm currently reading William Boyd's excellent Restless, his penultimate novel. One of the two main female characters says this about a past lover: "he taught me to be fearless, to be unafraid. I’m not fucking frightened of anyone, thanks to him -- policemen, judges, skinheads, Oxford dons, poets, parking wardens, intellectuals, yobbos, bores, bitches, headmasters, lawyers, journalists, drunks, politicians, preachers..."

That was a "ding" moment for me. I feel exactly the same way about a former lover. At a certain point in my life without even realizing it or having perceived I had been taught a lesson, because of him I discovered that I was fearless. I once could be intimidated or humbled but those days are long past. When people try to bully or bullshit me, I immediately dish it right back.

It's not a physical thing. It's not like I'm constantly in physically dangerous situations. But if I'm dealing with some bureaucratic idiot or some mindless drone or some tedious bore somewhere who becomes a problem, I just rip right into him or her on the spot with the sweetest smile. This doesn't require yelling or threatening. It just requires being fearless. And when your adversary sees you're fearless, usually he or she will back down and cease being a problem.

I don't think I'm adequately describing this, but I'll bet if you have the same realization, you'll understand exactly what I mean.

Here's an example: When I lived in Vegas, I once was getting ready to pull out and a cop car tried to cut me off while heading into a strip mall. He wasn't running his siren nor flashing his lights. I had to jam on my brakes and, like I would with any driver, I gave him some horn.

On came the flashing lights and he started getting in my face. When he was about a minute into his tirade, I cut him off and gave him an acerbic dressing down all the while beaming a smile at him. I figured out exactly what was up -- he was heading off duty to a meal and was driving carelessly. I called his shit. Needless to say, I did not receive a ticket and he apologized.

sexual addiction redux

The Daily Beast has a lengthy new piece up about sex addicts. The piece also serves as the cover story for the latest Newsweek magazine.

Some bits in the article don't jell. For example, we're told about a pseudonymous "Valerie" who purportedly was so consumed by sexual addiction that she ended up homeless and on food stamps. Later in the article, however, we learn Valerie checked herself into four months of treatment at an exclusive private hospital. So the money for that came from where?

The article writer presumes sexual addiction is on the rise because the number of therapists treating the malady has increased significantly. That, frankly, is an illogical assumption. That's akin to saying people's teeth are much worse today than one hundred years ago because many more dentists are practicing. Simply put, the number of practioners may or may not have any relation to the number of affected people; it only measures the number of people seeking treatment.

The writer also says, in regards to sexual addiction, "some of the growth has been fueled by the digital revolution, which has revved up America’s carnal metabolism." That statement is just dumped in the reader's lap without any proof whatsoever. Methinks the writer confuses his casual opinion with documented fact. Thesis plus evidence equals conclusion. Thesis sans evidence remains a thesis.

He also reaches a backdoor conclusion that porn is a gateway drug to sexual addiction. That's a theory peddled by certain self-help gurus with books to sell but, otherwise, the writer offers no clinical proof. He simply accepts it as a given fact.

The writer almost completely avoids the issue of whether sexual addiction is even a distinct condition or whether compulsive sexual activity is simply a symptom of another malady. He does not interview nor quote any of the many mental health professionals who believe sexual addiction is not a genuine illness in and of itself.

In sum, the rather long article offers nothing particularly new on the topic. It may end up selling magazines because of a provocative cover, but I don't think it really provides any new insights.

gang bang girl

I wrote an entry recently about feminists and raunchy porn. I happened on this video and this is exactly the kind of smut I like best.

I imagine feminist academics would have conniptions about porn like this. But if men -- and some women -- are satisfying their darker desires with this kind of stuff -- as opposed to involving flesh-and-blood women -- how exactly is that bad? You can't legislate away people's fantasies.

movie tattoos

These are large tattoos covering a significant portion of three different people's limbs -- arms on two and a leg on a third. They're all done by the same artist in Wales.

There's no denying this takes considerable talent to do something like this. I certainly couldn't do it.

At the same time, I find it a curious commentary that people want to turn themselves into a walking movie poster for the rest of their lives.

A movie is ultimately a piece of commerce. Yes, cinema is art, but a single image from a film is more about selling that movie than the whole art form. A great movie is made up of many images featuring memorable characters and unforgettable scenes. One shot is only a tiny fraction. It's a square-inch of a huge canvas.

Is there any different between slapping a movie poster on your body for the rest of your life or slapping on an ad for a breakfast cereal or a brand of car? Unless you created the original movie, you're really promoting someone else's creation with a tattoo like this. Hence, you're advertising it. More commerce.

Yes, you're expressing you like the movie. But a tattoo is necessary for that? Why not hang a print on your wall? Or a mural? Or wear a T-shirt? Something that's a little less permanent, so when you grow out of it, you can tuck it away quietly or paint it over.

I always end up wondering, when tattoos go out of style, how will their owners deal with this? As to whether or not they will go out of style, I think they will. We live in an age of quick trends and fads. The social history fabric of humanity shows an endless rise and fall of trends and fads. I can't imagine why tattoos would be any different.

It's your body and your life. Go for it if you love it. But check back in twenty years and tell me if you're still ecstatic about it.

she's ecstatic but he's bored

I featured this photo on my Tumblr page. (Yes, I know, shameless plug.) She's definitely getting a good workout for her thighs, squatting up and down like that.

This photograph both aroused and annoyed me. She's obviously ecstatic as she takes a orgasmic ride on his fat meat pole. But he looks bored out of his mind or even asleep. Let's see, I have the two o'clock with Thompkins, then the merger meeting at three. I hope traffic's not too bad on the way home tonight. Mustn't forget flowers for the wife.

This looks like it could be the work of one of the photographers for Penthouse from back in the 1980s or so. When I was around eleven or twelve, I found my brother's Penthouse stash in the attic. I learned years later he had a pretty complete run from about 1975 to 1995 that he had bought from a friend.

A considerable portion of my early sexual education was courtesy of Bob Guccione. The female nudes usually bored me but the couples shots were always of great interest as were the sex confessions letters -- I think those were in a column called "Forum."

salt print hnt

I've been fooling around with effects for a forthcoming Half-Nekkid Thursday entry, trying to reproduce the look of a nineteenth century salt print, a close cousin of the calotype. You can read about these early forms of photography at this very interesting webpage.

This shot today didn't quite end up mimicking the salt print look. I think the reason lies in the original photo used for manipulation. It didn't quite have the right tonalities. Nevertheless, I like how some parts of it clearly looks like a photograph while other elements seem much more painterly.

las vegas in 1972

The Atlantic magazine runs an almost daily and always fascinating picture story with three or four dozen large, higher-res photos on a single topic. The shot below of Las Vegas in 1972 appeared in a series depicting pollution in the 1970s.

What I found particularly amusing is the fact that most of the motels you see advertised here are still in Vegas. It's right about at the 2000 block of Fremont Street. For a while, I used to live right around the corner until I moved to a somewhat better part of town.

patently offensive

My husband teases me that I could get deported for having something like this. Fortunately, no one in his family is a royalist so I don't have to worry about offending them.

The sweet old lady for whom we long-term house sit is very much a royal supporter, however, so the house has a fair amount of HRH bric-a-brac. James talks to them on occasion with very irreverent asides.

raunchy porn and feminism

Salon has a new item up now as part of their ongoing "Am I Normal?" column: a woman writes in to say she considers herself a strong feminist but admits her darkest secret -- she enjoys porn that demeans women.

The columnist responds that she shouldn't beat herself up because nothing is wrong with her. Porn is about fantasies and the forbidden, so it stands to reason she's attracted to raunchier stuff. She writes: "There’s more friction, more heat there for you than for someone who thinks that sexual inequality is no big thing."

Several women write in the comments that they, too, are attracted to raunchy porn. I didn't post a comment but I'm certainly one, too. I find myself drawn to the edgier stuff, and while I don't know if I'm a card-carrying feminist, I certainly think women are equal to men. That doesn't stop me from enjoying the harder hardcore smut.

Certain kinds of submissive porn particularly turns me on, while other raunchy stuff definitely does not. Intense pain, torture, piercing, that sort of thing seems creepy. But a woman roughly gangbanged by four or five muscular men will definitely get my motor purring. Bondage and begging is very hot, too, if rough sex is a part of it.

I guess I draw the line between teasing and torture -- if the woman seems secretly to get off on what's happening to her, then that's perfectly okay. If, after it's all over, she's not bruised or bleeding or in pain, then that's all right. If she's physically damaged in any way or still in pain, then that's too much.

anal sex mishap

This made me laugh, maybe because I was in a silly mood. I've never had a mishap like this, but I did once see outtakes from a porno where the female performer had a serious accident after the male pulled out. That caused the cameraman to throw up while the male performer just laughed himself senseless.

in a parallel universe

I'm sure there's a rational explanation why he's wearing a woman's slip and urinating in public. I can't think of what it might be, however.

why women don't like nice guys

An online magazine called Ask Men is running a new piece titled "Why Women Don't Like Nice Guys." I think it fails for a number of reasons.

To begin the item doesn't successully define what a "nice guy" is. Based on what they've written, they seem to be talking about wimps, not nice guys.

As well, the piece includes no reference or any kind of substantiation that women don't like nice guys -- provided they are actually nice and not wimps. The various points the item tries to make, with ten "top reason" picture slides, often seem silly and not well reasoned.

For example, we're told "nice guys have hidden agendas." Wow, talk about a sweeping generality. And your proof for that is where?

Based on my experience, men as a rule have some nice qualities, some more than others. No man is 100 percent nice. Some men have very sweet personalities but they're irresponsible and lack focus. So is it the "niceness" that might turn a woman off or is it the heedlessness?

I think the piece ultimately fails because it assumes women are all the same. Some women aren't selective and will settle for anything with a zipper. Others are extremely selective. Some want only a man who will indulge them, so "niceness" is critically important -- they're looking for a doormat who will worship them.

The Ask Men site seems to be a sort of Cosmo for guys with grooming and relationship advice. Scanning some of their editorial content, the site seems more directed at clueless men who can't think for themselves.

golden days hnt

I love a sunny day at the beach where it's warm, windy, and dry. At the end of the day, the sun sets in a golden blaze into a serene, breezeless evening. You feel so refreshed and relaxed. Heaven must have beaches, otherwise it can't be heaven.

let's recall some senators

I've written here before about how I dropped out of high school at sixteen. I pretty much tuned out school for the last two years I attended, so whatever you learn beyond seventh or eighth grade, I don't have a clue. I did pass the GED when I was twenty and a lot more grown up.

Suffice to say I am more of the self-educated type. I've always been a voracious reader and still am. So when the class was being compelled to memorize the periodic tables or the dates when states were admitted to the union, I had a paperback tucked into my textbook so I could read anything from Flaubert to Vonnegut, from Anaïs Nin's autobiography to Victor Klemperer's diaries.

As a result, I learned a lot not on any curriculum while I was not learning a lot of other stuff most people learn. Algebra and geometry are completely beyond me. I'm an incredibly bad speller.

I was reading a political article the other day with voluminous reader comments at the end of the piece. Someone posted a comment about how "the time has come to recall a lot of senators." Someone else wrote about what a good idea that was an how they should get the recall petitions started. Several others chimed in with support.

Where did these people go to school?

You cannot recall a United States senator. Even I learned that somewhere in my very inadequate schooling. You have to wait until the next election. If he or she isn't impeached, tough darts.

What amazes me about all this is that the people were interested enough to read at least part of the article about politics and contribute an opinion. So why didn't they educate themselves some more about the process? That's sort of reading and posting about basketball but not even knowing the basic rules of the game. "They should just kick the ball!"

nasty porn

I was surfing quickly through a porn sharing site the other day and noticed one odd clip. It featured two women blowing a man. When the guy was about to pop his load, one woman forced the other woman's eyes wide open, and he ejaculated directly into her eyeballs, full blast.

That has to hurt.

I guess that's the whole point of the scene, to inflict lasting pain on the woman. Now it was consentual so I'm not saying it should be banned. I believe you should have the right to nail your own hand to your front porch if that rings your chimes.

I did a little quick online research and learned quite a few scenes are out there with men deliberately cumming in women's eyes. In fact, an entire series of DVDs is filled with nothing but these kinds of scenes. You could program a whole film festival with just porn featuring men deliberately cumming in women's eyes. And, entire websites are devoted to this sort of porn when you can spend to your heart's content.

I have to wonder about the kind of man who gets off on this stuff. I'm sure you could find a woman who might let you take a belt sander to her, but just because she says "yes" doesn't mean you should do it. Personal freedom doesn't mean you have to toss personal responsibility out the window.

Porn is often about subjugation of women, even humiliation. That's how the facial was born, allegedly. But if smut crosses the line into the viciously cruel, you have to wonder maybe that invites draconian anti-porn measures. When censors start screaming about porn, they point to the edgiest stuff. By keeping smut from going right to the edge, producers might invite less scrutiny of their industry. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to be obnoxious and invite repercussions.

I guess it all comes down to dollars. If you go right to the very edge, you'll sell it. Viewers, who presumably are mostly men, will buy and watch. Those are the people who might want to step back and ask themselves, "is it really healthy for me to be watching this?" To answer my own question, however, I imagine very few ever do.

deliberately homely

This photo appeared recently in a Vogue fashion layout. I think they really went out of their way to make her appear as unattractive as possible.

With that gaunt look and shadowed eyes, she looks like she was recently released from an internment camp. And what's with those teeth? Why do high-earning models refuse to get their teeth fixed? The hairstyle is particularly unflattering, too, while the outfit would look perfect on a woman twice her age.

ready for inflight porn?

RyanAir, a low-cost airline based in Ireland, is considering a plan to offer porn as inflight entertainment on its planes.

Now I like porn. And I like flying. I also like waterskiing. But waterskiing does not belong on planes. Porn doesn't either.

RyanAir execs say the porn wouldn't be available on a large screen or seat-back screen. Well thank goodness for that. It would be downloadable to iPads, laptops, and smart phones.

The airline apparently doesn't understand that porn is a private thing. One watches it at home or someplace similarly discrete like a hotel room. One often stimulates oneself while watching. It's often watched alone.

A plane has to be one of the least private places in modern life. If you're watching Anal Strapon Lesbians VII on your iPad, the twenty people nearest to you on the plane will damn well know it. And probably not like it.

Ergo, folks will probably not buy porn on planes unless they're complete skanky pervs. No one likes to embarrass themselves deliberately in public. That's why the entrance to many strip joints is somewhere way off to the side, under a large awning, out of public view. (Something I learned my first week on the job.)

the sagging

You'll never guess how this ends. Be afraid, very afraid.

I have no connection to the source. I just thought it was interesting. You can see another one here.

11-11-11

No matter how you write dates in your part of the world, it's all the same today -- 11-11-11.

Most people didn't put much stock in numbers like this until 9-11. Now it's always a little scary. You hope no wackjob terrorist decides to make some kind of nonsensical point simply because the horological odometer happens to come up all cherries.

The Husband will be doing a gig on the water that doesn't involve going into Sydney. If it was any other day, I might go into the city, but today I will stick close to home. No sense tempting fate.

Be safe wherever you are today.

motivational hnt

I've been going through a folder with some of my favorite past Half-Nekkid Thursday images and I'd forgot I'd done this one, back in mid-2009. So I figured if I had forgotten it, maybe some of my readers had either never seen it or forgotten it, too.

he's serious now

This is one of those pictures I found on the internet that was accompanied by no information. It defies explanation. I don't want to know what he did next if whoever received this didn't believe he was actually serious.

jism in a cup

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

bleak lawsuit

If you've ever read Charles Dickens's Bleak House, you'll probably remember the lawsuit at the heart of the novel. It drags on endlessly decade after decade for no good reason, costing a fortune and eating up an entire inheritance at the heart of the dispute.

The New York Times recently ran an article about a lawsuit underway that seems Dickensian in the extreme. A man is suing a photographer for missing some of his wedding photos. He wants his fee returned plus $48,000 to restage the wedding so it can be photographed again.

A number of details make the case truly bizarre. First, he waited six years to sue. Second, he's been divorced for several years from the woman he married in the photographs. Third, he doesn't even know where his exwife is -- somewhere in Latvia -- so she might not consent to recreate the wedding with him, that is if she's ever found.

Talk about not being able to let go.

As a sad commentary on the American legal system, the case has cost the photographers $50,000 to defend, notwithstanding most grounds of the suit have been dismissed.

It's no wonder the woman divorced the guy and fled the country.

babel porn

I often find porn more erotic when I can't understand the language in which it was filmed. I speak only a few words of tourist German, thus I have no idea what they're saying here in this video.

So there's no moronic dialog getting in way of the eroticism. No pornstar screaming "ram your big huge cock in me" or any of the other hundred standard porn lines.

beyond surreal

He may look familiar to you. He was arrested a few years ago for attempting to run over his landlord with a minivan. His mugshot was widely seen on various blogs.

I found this more recent picture of him. Those ridges were made by branding. Yes, someone burned deep scars all over his scalp. Repeatedly. I'll bet that smelled just lovely.

If I was about six years old and I saw him walking down the street toward me, I know I'd scream bloody murder, as my grandmother used to say. I wouldn't sleep for a week. I wonder how many children react the same upon seeing him.

dangerous liaisons

The Husband and I watched Dangerous Liaisons on DVD last night. He had seen it once or twice before, but I've seen it many times. It's one of my favorite movies.

With some favorites -- like The Godfather and Citizen Kane for me -- repeat viewing somewhat lessens the impact of the movie. I start to notice the flaws more and more.

Dangerous Liaisons is different. It's sort of like Alien is for me; it gets better each time I watch it. Granted, a year or two may go by since I saw it last, but I still appreciate the film more with a new viewing because I see new meanings and things I've missed before. With Dangerous, I also understood the duel scene and I don't think I did before.

Part of what makes Dangerous Liaisons so fantastic for me is the acting, particularly all the female characters. They just completely inhabit their roles and find all the subtleties that make the hypocrisies of that era so vivid.

I also like how sex transforms the female characters. Society tells them they mustn't but their desires tell them otherwise. Once they've been to the well, they keep having to go back for more water.

I wonder what I would've been like had I lived in that era. Would I have been a masterful player or would I have been too careless and garnered a scandalous reputation? I'd like to think the former but my attraction to risk and impatience may have resulted in the latter.

The great shot below was made behind the scenes during the filming of Dangerous Liaisons when the actors were taking a break.

beach hnt

My brother in Illinois and my cousin in Pennsylvania both sent emails over the weekend commenting about their rare Halloween snowstorm. I wrote back and said we went to the beach but the water was a little cold. Here's a shot as I ventured into the water but not too far.

I've always loved the sensation of ocean water washing over your feet. I imagine most people do. It's so restorative. It's like that perfect beach sound. There's nothing better for making you feel relaxed and calm. I know when I was living in Los Angeles and had stresses from a crazy ex-boyfriend, I used to go to the beach to wash away my fears. It always worked.

kim kardashian's absurd divorce

I am impressed at the utter shameless gall of fake celebrity Kim Kardashian. She repeatedly plunges to new depths in her relentless quest to whore herself before the entire world.

While we mere mortals would cringe if we had her absurd lack of common decency and inability to feel embarrassed, she gladly and proudly parades herself in the media glare with the tireless repetition of a continuous-flush toilet.

Only 72 days after her absurd spectacle of a wedding costing millions of dollars, she's now divorcing. At least she had the good taste to wait until after the four-hour televised special about the event had aired. After all, she was paid nearly $18 million by various media outlets for the "exclusive" rights to her nuptuals.

Somewhere PT Barnum must be laughing.

did ruth madoff know?

I watched the Madoff interviews on the CBS website. Usually the network blocks their primetime program streams for overseas visitors to their site but not 60 Minutes. (The block is easily vaulted with a proxy anyway.)

Some people are convinced Ruth knew her husband was a crook. Others are convinced she's innocent. The only thing that's certain is that we'll probably never know one way or the other.

If she indeed did not know, she's paying a terrible price. Yes, she's not living on the sidewalk, but her life is in shambles. One of her sons is dead. If she did not know, she was horribly betrayed.

Some people are astounded she continued to stand by her husband after the truth was revealed. That doesn't surprise me. Based on her interviews, she struck me as something of a space case. I've met women like her before -- they're caught up in their own little worlds and they don't see the forest for the trees. So she's utterly dependant on her husband. Even with him behind bars, she still needed him. Independence is alien to her.

It's also hard to unlove someone. He betrayed her horribly but he also treated her well while betraying her. He gave her a very nice life. So she can't just unlove him because he's a criminal. Many a spouse has sat in the courtroom when their husband or wife has been convincted. The innocent spouse does not forgive the criminality by continuing to love the criminal.

I know I would continue to love my husband if it was revealed he had committed some horrible crime. I love him for who he is, faults and all, even if they are faults I cannot see.