Search Results: August 3

You are browsing the search results for august 3

The Erotic Mind of Logan Kowalsky — Podcast #350 — 10/15/12

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestTumblrShare


Hey sex fans,

Holy cow! We haven’t had an edition of The Erotic Mind series since early August. That simply won’t do! I don’t know about you, but really need to get into the head of another erotic artist, because finding out what makes these marvelous characters tick is sheer pleasure.

So just when I though I would have to do without a little longer I miraculously discovered an amazing talent who is at the top of his game. And now we are about to meet this genius together. But first we must travel to the outskirts of Paris, France, where I know the one and only Logan Kowalsky is expecting us.

Logan is an artist, illustrator, craftsman and comic book maker par excellence. He has a charming sense of humor and his deep French accent will make you weak in the knees.

Logan and I discuss:

  • Being a total sex maniac;
  • His work reflects the influences of many who have gone before him;
  • Mastery comes only through very hard work;
  • How he’s improved on his earlier style;
  • The importance of storytelling in his comic books;
  • His use of color;
  • His signature style of larger than life characters;
  • How he became Logan Kowalsky;
  • Why he calls himself a craftsman;
  • Thinking in pictures and words;
  • Anatomy and perspective in comic book art.

For more of Logan, be sure to visit his site HERE! Buy his comic books HERE! Look for him on Facebook HERE! And be sure to follow him on Twitter HERE!

Click on the thumbnail images below to see a slideshow of some of Logan’s work.

BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!

Check out The Lick-A-Dee-Split Connection. That’s Dr Dick’s toll free podcast voicemail HOTLINE. Don’t worry people; no one will personally answer the phone. Your message goes directly to voicemail.

Got a question or a comment? Wanna rant or rave? Or maybe you’d just like to talk dirty for a minute or two. Why not get it off your chest! Give Dr Dick a call at (866) 422-5680.

DON’T BE SHY, LET IT FLY!

Look for my podcasts on iTunes. You’ll find me in the podcast section, obviously, or just search for Dr Dick Sex Advice. And don’t forget to subscribe. I wouldn’t want you to miss even one episode.

Today’s Podcast is bought to you by: The Perfect Fit Brand!

A handy history

Condemned, celebrated, shunned: masturbation has long been an uncomfortable fact of life. Why?

by Barry Reay

A handy history

The anonymous author of the pamphlet Onania (1716) was very worried about masturbation. The ‘shameful vice’, the ‘solitary act of pleasure’, was something too terrible to even be described. The writer agreed with those ‘who are of the opinion, that… it never ought to be spoken of, or hinted at, because the bare mentioning of it may be dangerous to some’. There was, however, little reticence in cataloguing ‘the frightful consequences of self-pollution’. Gonorrhoea, fits, epilepsy, consumption, impotence, headaches, weakness of intellect, backache, pimples, blisters, glandular swelling, trembling, dizziness, heart palpitations, urinary discharge, ‘wandering pains’, and incontinence – were all attributed to the scourge of onanism.

The fear was not confined to men. The full title of the pamphlet was Onania: Or the Heinous Sin of Self-Pollution, and all its Frightful Consequences (in Both Sexes). Its author was aware that the sin of Onan referred to the spilling of male seed (and divine retribution for the act) but reiterated that he treated ‘of this crime in relation to women as well as men’. ‘[W]hilst the offence is Self-Pollution in both, I could not think of any other word which would so well put the reader in mind both of the sin and its punishment’. Women who indulged could expect disease of the womb, hysteria, infertility and deflowering (the loss of ‘that valuable badge of their chastity and innocence’).

Another bestselling pamphlet was published later in the century: L’onanisme (1760) by Samuel Auguste Tissot. He was critical of Onania, ‘a real chaos … all the author’s reflections are nothing but theological and moral puerilities’, but nevertheless listed ‘the ills of which the English patients complain’. Tissot was likewise fixated on ‘the physical disorders produced by masturbation’, and provided his own case study, a watchmaker who had self-pleasured himself into ‘insensibility’ on a daily basis, sometimes three times a day; ‘I found a being that less resembled a living creature than a corpse, lying upon straw, meagre, pale, and filthy, casting forth an infectious stench; almost incapable of motion.’ The fear these pamphlets promoted soon spread.

The strange thing is that masturbation was never before the object of such horror. In ancient times, masturbation was either not much mentioned or treated as something a little vulgar, not in good taste, a bad joke. In the Middle Ages and for much of the early modern period too, masturbation, while sinful and unnatural, was not invested with such significance. What changed?

Religion and medicine combined powerfully to create a new and hostile discourse. The idea that the soul was present in semen led to thinking that it was very important to retain the vital fluid. Its spilling became, then, both immoral and dangerous (medicine believed in female semen at the time). ‘Sin, vice, and self-destruction’ were the ‘trinity of ideas’ that would dominate from the 18th into the 19th century, as the historians Jean Stengers and Anne Van Neck put it in Masturbation: The Great Terror (2001).

There were exceptions. Sometimes masturbation was opposed for more ‘enlightened’ reasons. In the 1830s and 1840s, for instance, female moral campaign societies in the United States condemned masturbation, not out of hostility to sex, but as a means to self-control. What would now be termed ‘greater sexual agency’ – the historian April Haynes refers to ‘sexual virtue’ and ‘virtuous restraint’ – was central to their message.

Yet it is difficult to escape the intensity of the fear. J H Kellogg’s Plain Facts for Old and Young (1877) contained both exaggerated horror stories and grand claims: ‘neither the plague, nor war, nor smallpox, nor similar diseases, have produced results so disastrous to humanity as the pernicious habit of Onanism; it is the destroying element of civilised societies’. Kellogg suggested remedies for the scourge, such as exercise, strict bathing and sleeping regimes, compresses, douching, enemas and electrical treatment. Diet was vital: this rabid anti-masturbator was co-inventor of the breakfast cereal that still bears his name. ‘Few of today’s eaters of Kellogg’s Corn Flakes know that he invented them, almost literally, as anti-masturbation food,’ as the psychologist John Money once pointed out.

The traces are still with us in other ways. Male circumcision, for instance, originated in part with the 19th-century obsession with the role of the foreskin in encouraging masturbatory practices. Consciously or not, many US males are faced with this bodily reminder every time they masturbate. And the general disquiet unleashed in the 18th century similarly lingers on today. We seem to have a confusing and conflicting relationship with masturbation. On one hand it is accepted, even celebrated – on the other, there remains an unmistakable element of taboo.

When the sociologist Anthony Giddens in The Transformation of Intimacy (1992) attempted to identify what made modern sex modern, one of the characteristics he identified was the acceptance of masturbation. It was, as he said, masturbation’s ‘coming out’. Now it was ‘widely recommended as a major source of sexual pleasure, and actively encouraged as a mode of improving sexual responsiveness on the part of both sexes’. It had indeed come to signify female sexual freedom with Betty Dodson’s Liberating Masturbation (1974) (renamed and republished as Sex for One in 1996), which has sold more than a million copies, and her Bodysex Workshops in Manhattan with their ‘all-women masturbation circles’. The Boston Women’s Health Collective’s classic feminist text Our Bodies, Ourselves (1973) included a section called ‘Learning to Masturbate’.

Alfred Kinsey and his team are mainly remembered for the sex surveys that publicised the pervasiveness of same-sex desires and experiences in the US, but they also recognised the prevalence of masturbation. It was, for both men and women, one of the nation’s principal sexual outlets. In the US National Survey (2009–10), 94 per cent of men aged 25-29 and 85 per cent of women in the same age group said that they had masturbated alone in the course of their lifetime. (All surveys indicate lower reported rates for women.) In the just-published results of the 2012 US National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior, 92 per cent of straight men and a full 100 per cent of gay men recorded lifetime masturbation.

There has certainly been little silence about the activity. Several generations of German university students were questioned by a Hamburg research team about their masturbatory habits to chart changing attitudes and practices from 1966 to 1996; their results were published in 2003. Did they reach orgasm? Were they sexually satisfied? Was it fun? In another study, US women were contacted on Craigslist and asked about their masturbatory experiences, including clitoral stimulation and vaginal penetration. An older, somewhat self-referential study from 1977 of sexual arousal to films of masturbation asked psychology students at the University of Connecticut to report their ‘genital sensations’ while watching those films. Erection? Ejaculation? Breast sensations? Vaginal lubrication? Orgasm? And doctors have written up studies of the failed experiments of unfortunate patients: ‘Masturbation Injury Resulting from Intraurethral Introduction of Spaghetti’ (1986); ‘Penile Incarceration Secondary to Masturbation with A Steel Pipe’ (2013), with illustrations.

‘We are a profoundly self-pleasuring society at both a metaphorical and material level’

Self-stimulation has been employed in sexual research, though not always to great import. Kinsey and his team wanted to measure how far, if at all, semen was projected during ejaculation: Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy, Kinsey’s biographer, refers to queues of men in Greenwich Village waiting to be filmed at $3 an ejaculation. William Masters and Virginia Johnson recorded and measured the physiological response during sexual arousal, using new technology, including a miniature camera inside a plastic phallus. Their book Human Sexual Response (1966) was based on data from more than 10,000 orgasms from nearly 700 volunteers: laboratory research involving sexual intercourse, stimulation, and masturbation by hand and with that transparent phallus. Learned journals have produced findings such as ‘Orgasm in Women in the Laboratory – Quantitative Studies on Duration, Intensity, Latency, and Vaginal Blood Flow’ (1985).

In therapy, too, masturbation has found its place ‘as a means of achieving sexual health’, as an article by Eli Coleman, the director of the programme in human sexuality at the University of Minnesota Medical School, once put it. A published study in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology in 1977 outlined therapist-supervised female masturbation (with dildo, vibrator and ‘organic vegetables’) as a way of encouraging vaginal orgasm. Then there is The Big Book of Masturbation (2003) and the hundreds of (pun intended) self-help books, Masturbation for Weight Loss, a Womans Guide only among the latest (and more opportunistic).

Self-pleasure has featured in literature, most famously in Philip Roth’s novel Portnoys Complaint (1969). But it is there in more recent writing too, including Chuck Palahniuk’s disturbing short story ‘Guts’ (2004). Autoeroticism (and its traces) have been showcased in artistic expression: in Jordan MacKenzie’s sperm and charcoal canvases (2007), for example, or in Marina Abramović’s reprise of Vito Acconci’s Seedbed at the Guggenheim in 2005, or her video art Balkan Erotic Epic of the same year.

On film and television, masturbation is similarly pervasive: Lauren Rosewarne’s Masturbation in Pop Culture (2014) was able to draw on more than 600 such scenes. My favourites are in the film Spanking the Monkey (1994), in which the main character is trying to masturbate in the bathroom, while the family dog, seemingly alert to such behaviour, pants and whines at the door; and in the Seinfeld episode ‘The Contest’ (1992), in which the ‘m’ word is never uttered, and where George’s mother tells her adult son that he is ‘treating his body like it was an amusement park’.

There is much evidence, then, for what the film scholar Greg Tuck in 2009 called the ‘mainstreaming of masturbation’: ‘We are a profoundly self-pleasuring society at both a metaphorical and material level.’ There are politically-conscious masturbation websites. There is the online ‘Masturbation Hall of Fame’ (sponsored by the sex-toys franchise Good Vibrations). There are masturbationathons, and jack-off-clubs, and masturbation parties.

It would be a mistake, however, to present a rigid contrast between past condemnation and present acceptance. There are continuities. Autoeroticism might be mainstreamed but that does not mean it is totally accepted. In Sexual Investigations (1996), the philosopher Alan Soble observed that people brag about casual sex and infidelities but remain silent about solitary sex. Anne-Francis Watson and Alan McKee’s 2013 study of 14- to 16-year-old Australians found that not only the participants but also their families and teachers were more comfortable talking about almost any other sexual matter than about self-pleasuring. It ‘remains an activity that is viewed as shameful and problematic’, warns the entry on masturbation in the Encyclopedia of Adolescence (2011). In a study of the sexuality of students in a western US university, where they were asked about sexual orientation, anal and vaginal sex, condom use, and masturbation, it was the last topic that occasioned reservation: 28 per cent of the participants ‘declined to answer the masturbation questions’. Masturbation remains, to some extent, taboo.

When the subject is mentioned, it is often as an object of laughter or ridicule. Rosewarne, the dogged viewer of the 600 masturbation scenes in film and TV, concluded that male masturbation was almost invariably portrayed negatively (female masturbation was mostly erotic). Watson and McKee’s study revealed that their young Australians knew that masturbation was normal yet still made ‘negative or ambivalent statements’ about it.

Belief in the evils of masturbation has resurfaced in the figure of the sex addict and in the obsession with the impact of internet pornography. Throughout their relatively short histories, sexual addiction and hypersexual disorder have included masturbation as one of the primary symptoms of their purported maladies. What, in a sex-positive environment, would be considered normal sexual behaviour has been pathologised in another. Of the 152 patients in treatment for hypersexual disorder in clinics in California, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Texas and Utah, a 2012 study showed that most characterised their sexual disorder in terms of pornography consumption (81 per cent) and masturbation (78 per cent). The New Catholic Encyclopedia’s supplement on masturbation (2012-13), too, slips into a lengthy disquisition on sex addiction and the evils of internet pornography: ‘The availability of internet pornography has markedly increased the practice of masturbation to the degree that it can be appropriately referred to as an epidemic.’

Critics think that therapeutic masturbation might reinforce sexual selfishness rather than sexual empathy and sharing

The masturbator is often seen as the pornography-consumer and sex addict enslaved by masturbation. The sociologist Steve Garlick has suggested that negative attitudes to masturbation have been reconstituted to ‘surreptitiously infect ideas about pornography’. Pornography has become masturbation’s metonym. Significantly, when the New Zealand politician Shane Jones was exposed for using his taxpayer-funded credit card to view pornographic movies, the unnamed shame was that his self-pleasuring activities were proclaimed on the front pages of the nation’s newspapers – thus the jokes about ‘the matter in hand’ and not shaking hands with him at early morning meetings. It would have been less humiliating, one assumes, if he had used the public purse to finance the services of sex workers.

Nor is there consensus on the benefits of masturbation. Despite its continued use in therapy, some therapists question its usefulness and propriety. ‘It is a mystery to me how conversational psychotherapy has made the sudden transition to massage parlour technology involving vibrators, mirrors, surrogates, and now even carrots and cucumbers!’ one psychologist protested in the late 1970s. He was concerned about issues of client-patient power and a blinkered pursuit of the sexual climax ‘ignoring … the more profound psychological implications of the procedure’. In terms of effectiveness, critics think that therapeutic masturbation might reinforce individual pleasure and sexual selfishness rather than creating sexual empathy and sharing. As one observed in the pages of the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy in 1995: ‘Ironically, the argument against masturbation in American society was originally religiously founded, but may re-emerge as a humanist argument.’ Oversimplified, but in essence right: people remain disturbed by the solitariness of solitary sex.

Why has what the Japanese charmingly call ‘self-play’ become such a forcing ground for sexual attitudes? Perhaps there is something about masturbation’s uncontrollability that continues to make people anxious. It is perversely non-procreative, incestuous, adulterous, homosexual, ‘often pederastic’ and, in imagination at least, sex with ‘every man, woman, or beast to whom I take a fancy’, to quote Soble. For the ever-astute historian Thomas Laqueur, author of Solitary Sex (2003), masturbation is ‘that part of human sexual life where potentially unlimited pleasure meets social restraint’.

Why did masturbation become such a problem? For Laqueur, it began with developments in 18th-century Europe, with the cultural rise of the imagination in the arts, the seemingly unbounded future of commerce, the role of print culture, the rise of private, silent reading, especially novels, and the democratic ingredients of this transformation. Masturbation’s condemned tendencies – solitariness, excessive desire, limitless imagination, and equal-opportunity pleasure – were an outer limit or testing of these valued attributes, ‘a kind of Satan to the glories of bourgeois civilisation’.

In more pleasure-conscious modern times, the balance has tipped towards personal gratification. The acceptance of personal autonomy, sexual liberation and sexual consumerism, together with a widespread focus on addiction, and the ubiquity of the internet, now seem to demand their own demon. Fears of unrestrained fantasy and endless indulging of the self remain. Onania’s 18th-century complaints about the lack of restraint of solitary sex are not, in the end, all that far away from today’s fear of boundless, ungovernable, unquenchable pleasure in the self.

Complete Article HERE!

A Farewell to a great man

Dear sex fans,

I realize this is a bit off topic for this blog, but I want to acknowledge the death of famed British neurologist and author, Oliver Sacks.

1993: Portrait of British-born neurologist and author Dr Oliver Sacks standing in the admittance driveway of Beth Abraham Hospital with his arms crossed over his chest, New York City. (Photo by Nancy R. Schiff/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

1993: Portrait of British-born neurologist and author Dr Oliver Sacks standing in the admittance driveway of Beth Abraham Hospital with his arms crossed over his chest, New York City.

In February, he wrote an op-ed in The New York Times revealing that he was in the late stages of terminal cancer, after earlier melanoma in his eye spread to his liver.

“It is up to me now to choose how to live out the months that remain to me,” he wrote. “I cannot pretend I am without fear. But my predominant feeling is one of gratitude. I have loved and been loved; I have been given much and I have given something in return; I have read and traveled and thought and written. I have had an intercourse with the world, the special intercourse of writers and readers.”

Earlier this summer I read Dr Sacks’s memoir, On the Move.  I love it.  It’s an interesting memoir by a fascinating personality.  And while reading I discovered that we had a dear friend in common, Thom Gunn.  What a small world!  So I decided to send him a note.

Dear Dr Sacks,

I just finished reading your memoir, On The Move.  What an amazing life you’ve lived.on-the-move-by-oliver-sacks

Of all the marvelous things you’ve done and all the fascinating people you mentioned in your book nothing surprised me more than your close friendship with Thom Gunn.  I was a friend of Thom too and I lived directly across Cole Street from him.  I moved to the flat at 1207 Cole Street in 1979.  At the time I was working on my doctorate in clinical sexology at the Institute For The Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco.

I didn’t know Thom well at first.  However, I would regularly see him walking both in our neighborhood and elsewhere in town.  He was always in his leathers, rain or shine, and used to think to myself, “What a mensch!”

It finally dawned on me that he lived across the street from me.

Once he saw me in my roman collar.  (I was ordained a catholic priest in 1975 at the age of 25 in Oakland, CA.  I had come out to my local superiors; I was a member of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, before I was ordained.  Like I said, I was working on my doctorate to become a sex therapist and prepare for an upfront gay ministry.)  Thom smiled at me when he saw me; I blushed and told him what I just told you.  He was fascinated, but I also believe he thought I was a twit.  He probably was right.

I knew nothing about Thom other than he was my neighbor.  Then one day I was in a bookstore on Haight Street and there was a photo of Thom in the window advertising a reading.  That’s when I started asking around about him.  Despite his cult status within the gay community, he was the most unassuming person.  I was honored to have a personal connection with him.small_front

I finished my doctorate in 1981.  My dissertation, Gay Catholic Priests; A Study of Cognitive and Affective Dissonance was directed by Wardell Pomeroy.  A firestorm of media attention followed.  The media branded me as THE gay priest, as if.  I think Thom read about me in the New York Times because next time he saw me he clapped me on the back and said, “Well done.”

No sooner did I complete my doctorate, and because of the media attention my public coming out caused, the leadership of my religious community in Rome began a process of dismissal against me.  I was devastated and lost.  I was even getting death threats.  Thom was always so supportive and encouraging.

I fought the church for the next thirteen years in an effort to save my priesthood and ministry.  Alas, the writing was on the wall back in 1981 and it was only a matter of time till they had their way with me.  I wrote about the travail in a book that was published in 2011, Secrecy, Sophistry and Gay Sex In The Catholic Church: The Systematic Destruction of an Oblate Priest.

Thom was always so solicitous about my wellbeing.  He knew how difficult life had become for me.  And both of us found ourselves on the forefront of caring for friends who were dying of AIDS.  One of my landlords died in 1986.

Thom introduced my housemate and I to Augie Kleinzahler and his girlfriend, Caroline Lander, who lived only a few blocks from us in Cole Valley.  We all became great friends and copious amounts of strong drink were consumed.  I wonder, do you know Augie?

When Thom turned sixty I surprised him with a homemade German chocolate cake.  I told him he was the oldest person I knew.  This made him laugh and he called me a whippersnapper.

In 1992 the surviving landlord sold the Cole Street duplex and I and my housemate moved to Oak and Ashbury.  Sadly, I didn’t get to see Thom as much as before.  I move up here to Seattle in 1999 because I could no longer afford to live in SF.  I was deeply saddened to learn of Thom’s death in 2004.  He was such a great guy, what a marvelous soul.

Again, thank you for your memoir; it was grand getting to know you on a personal level.  I read The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat when it came out in the mid-eighties and loved it.  But I never guessed you and Thom knew each other or that you actually visited him when I lived across the street from him.  What a small world.  I wish I had known you back then.

Anyhow, thank you for the bringing me this unexpected flood of memories of Thom.  I wonder what he would have made of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision (Obergefell v. Hodges).  I contend that we got marriage equality only because we walked through AIDS first.  I think Thom would have agreed with me.

All the best,
richard

Richard Wagner, M.Div., Ph.D., ACS

To my astonishment, Oliver wrote back; I mean that literally, a handwritten note.  Apparently, he never used a computer.

Dear Dr. Wagner (can I say Richard?),                                                          6/60/15

I am greatly interested and greatly moved, by your letter — your courage in being honest and forthright, at a time and on a subject bound, sooner or later, to cause your ejection from the priesthood. In another few years perhaps, with Pope Francis at the helm, these last bastions of Catholic bigotry may have fallen.

I like to think of you as living across the street when I visited Thom, and glad to know that he appreciated you and your works. I still miss him deeply — there were not too many people with whim I could be entirely open — and I like to think that his ghost is pleased that my title came from his poem. (I find it a huge relief being open now to all and sundry {Oliver came out earlier this year} — I am so glad I completed my book before I became ill).

And what a liberation, an affirmation for us all that the Supreme Court voted as it did. I suspect that Ruth Bader Ginsberg, quite ill now, stayed on to ensure the 5/4 decision.

Thanks for your letter and my very best wishes,

Oliver

Oliver Sacks01     Oliver Sacks02

Click on this link to see a copy of Oliver Sacks’s note.

Thank you Dr Sacks and farewell!

CAUTION — Happy Holes Ahead

Hey sex fans!

It’s our first Product Review Friday of 2014! And this week we feature yet another innovative product from the creative folks at Perfect Fit Brand. As you all probably know the Perfect Fit Brand is responsible for The Best Product or Toy for Men for both 2012 and 2013. This is unprecedented.

To keep track of all our PFB reviews use the search function in the header of DrDickSexToyReviews.com, type in Perfect Fit Brand, and PRESTO!

Dr Dick Review Crew members, Glenn & Hank are here to tell us about their new find.

Perfect Fit Brand Hump Gear —— $59.00

Glenn & Hank
Hank: “Happy New Year everyone! It’s good to be back with the crew for yet another year of sex toy reviews.”
Glenn: “This marks the beginning of my 7th year with the Dr Dick Review Crew. I did my first review in October on 2007.”hump gear01
Hank: “And I joined Glenn in August 2008. We’ve had the pleasure of introducing you to many remarkable products, including The Best Product or Toy for Men back in 2012 — The Fat Boy Cock Sheath.”
Glenn: “I know it’s only January and there are probably lots of great products to come in the new year, but what we have here, Perfect Fit Brand’s Hump Gear, is sure to wind up on the short list for The Best Product or Toy for Men 2014.”
Hank: “Damn straight! Perfect Fit Brand is churning out the world’s most innovative toys for men. Each year they outdo themselves. And the adult product world is sitting up and taking notice. They are racking up awards all over the globe. Listen, if you’ve got a cock and balls and/or an asshole, and you don’t have at least a couple of their products, I can assure you that you are missing out on a ton of fun.”
Glenn: “Let’s get down to it. Hump Gear is a fuckable butt plug. See if you can rap your head around that. It is made of the Perfect Fit Brand’s proprietary material called SilaSkin. It’s a revolutionary blend of silicone and TPR (thermoplastic rubber). It is unbelievably stretchy and irresistibly soft and it is phthalate-free. Hump Gear come in both black and clear.”
Hank: “Let me go back to the fuckable butt plug thing, ok? Because this is exactly what makes Hump Gear so freakin’ amazing. Is everyone clear about what a butt plug is and what it does? If not, let me turn you on to a little tutorial titled: Butt Plug Crash Course.  OK! Here’s how Hump Gear works. The top, that would be me, lubes up his dick and slips the Hump Gear on his cock. You can use any type of lube you want with this baby. hump gear02In this respect, Hump Gear is a lot like the Fat Boy Cock Sheath. But where the Fat Boy is tubular, Hump Gear has a flared lip near the extra-wide base. When Glenn is ready for the ass-ult I lube up his hole and slide my cock, covered in the Hump Gear, into his ass. My first thrust inserts the Hump Gear and his anal sphincter closes around the flared lip near the base. And there it stays.”
Glenn: “Like the Fat Boy Cock Sheath, Hump Gear is ribbed on the inside of the sleeve for the top’s (Hank’s) pleasure. And for me, the bottom, I get this filled up filling. Hump Gear stays in place, as Hank mentioned, so even though he pulls out the ‘plug’ stays put. Now, for all you bottoms out there who wish your top had a bit more girth, Hump Gear is for you. And for all you tops out there who wish your bottom had a tighter hole, Hump Gear is for you.”
Hank: “But there’s more; Hump Gear can be used solo too. It’ makes an ideal stroker, like its cousin the Fat Boy. And if you’re alone and you want to punish your hole Hump Gear is there for ya. Simply slip it over a dildo and put it where the sun don’t shine.”
Glenn: “I’m an insatiable bottom, so when I have an ‘itch’ I can wear Hump Gear for hours on end till Hank gets home and ‘scratches’ it. And by the way, the super soft and stretchy SilaSkin adds to my pleasure, but never chafes my hole like some of the bigger toys we use.”PFB_Christopher_Diesel_013_large
Hank: “I love the feeling of Hump Gear as it slides over my cock. And I can do some heavy piston-pounding without ever worrying about wear and tear on Glenn’s ass lips because I’m fuckin’ the Hump Gear, not his hole. The squishy sound my dick makes inside the sheath adds to our piggy play.”
Glenn: “If you’re like me, and you’re into a little DNA play, then you will love Hump Gear too because it’s like a giant condom. It catches Hank’s jizz in its tip and I can slather it all over myself after he shoots his wad.”
Hank: “Clean up is always a snap. No matter how messy things get, and god know we like our fucks to be messy, some warm water and mild soap takes care of everything. Cleaning it is easy because the SilaSkin material is nonporous and so stretchy you can actually turn the blasted thing inside out. And once thoroughly dry the sheath isn’t the least bit sticky or tacky, like a lot of similar materials get after use. We both give this product and A+ rating.”
Full Review HERE!

ENJOY

Me love you long time!

Hey sex fans!

It’s Product Review Friday. You probably noticed that we took a much longer than expected hiatus from our reviews than we expected. Our last posted review was way back on August 9th. It’s not because we were falling down on the job. Oh no! It was because we were sent a bunch of products that were simply not up to our standards and no one on the Dr Dick Review Crew wanted to use them let alone review them. I tell you this because it’s so important that we all remain vigilant when we’re buying any sort of adult product. There’s still a lot of bad stuff in the marketplace.

Today, however, we have something very interesting to share with you. This product comes to us from the folks at Promescent. It is their signature product and I have Dr Dick Review Crew member, Greg, here to tell us all about this product.

Promescent (trial size) —— $19.95

Greg
I’m back! And it’s way good to be back, too. I was one of the original Review Crew back in the day. Then, in 2010, I moved away from Seattle for love. Once my torrid love affair ended I high-tailed it back to the Emerald City and quickly hooked back up with Dr Dick so I could rejoin the Crew.

Apparently, it was just in the nick of time, too. Dr Dick asked me; “So would you like to review this?” As he handed me three-trial-size packages of Promescent. “What is it?” I asked. And he says, “It’s the only FDA-approved product for Premature Ejaculation.” “That’s cool, I guess, but way are you giving it to me? I don’t have that.” And he says, “Well, did you ever want to last longer than you actually did?” “Sure!” I said. “OK then, have a run at this, and let me know what you think.”

So here I am ready to testify that Promescent really works. Hurray!promescent-01

Here’s the deal. Like I said, I don’t have PE (premature ejaculation). But I know a lot of guys who do; even some of my past partners have had a hair-trigger. And when they talked about it I knew it was devastating to them. I can only feel bad for them because it must be awful to lack control over your ejaculation. And then I remembered what Dr Dick asked me…do I ever want to last longer than I actually do. And yeah, there have been times, especially when I’m with a hot new partner when I felt that if I wasn’t careful, I’d go off half-cocked, if ya know what I mean.

That’s what I had in mind when I used Promescent. And I got to tell you, not having to worry about losing control makes having sex way more enjoyable. I don’t have to count backwards from 100, ya know to distract my attention from the hot sex I’m having. I mean, who wants to do that?

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Before I used Promescent for the first time I went to their website to check it out. While the trial size packaging does have some information about use and other drug information, the print is so tiny that I thought it best that I go to the source for all the information I was looking for. By the way, I suggest that you do that too.

PromescentThe Promescent website has tons of info about the product and how to use it. I learned that you spray a measured dose to the underside of your cock 10-15 minutes before sex. The active ingredient is lidocaine a pretty common local anesthetic. The cool thing about this product is that it penetrates the skin of your dick and it doesn’t transfer to your partner. I mean, I always use a condom when I’m fucking, but still. I can see where this would be very important feature for a couple who doesn’t have to use a condom.

I also learned that once Promescent has been absorbed (in about 10 minutes) and after any excess product has been wiped away, you can then use lube.

The trial size bottle is designed as a single use bottle and contains approximately 10 sprays. I like the trial size because it’s easy to slip it into the back pocket of my jeans, which makes carrying it and using it very discreet. I mean you probably don’t want to be advertising to a partner that you may have a little problem with control, right?

So you’re probably asking yourself, what does it feel like? Does it numb your whole unit, or what? Well, it feels a little cool when first applied. And since Promescent works on the nerve ending under your skin, there wasn’t any significant loss of sensitivity on my cock. That’s great because I thought; I sure as hell didn’t want my dick to be like totally anesthetized.

Listen, you guys, if PE is as prevalent as Dr Dick says it is, then a lot of you are needlessly missing out on a whole bunch of pleasure. And think about the disappointment your partners are probably experiencing because you can’t control yourself. Of even if you are like me and have to, from time to time, think of something unsexy while you’re getting it on, just to avoid untimely climax, then you too are missing out on a bunch of pleasure.
Full Review HERE!

Enjoy