Search Results: Longer

You are browsing the search results for longer

Extra weight can dent sexual confidence

 

by Maureen Matthews

Q: I’m a larger lad than I was a few years ago. Even though my boyfriend still says he finds me attractive and wants to sleep with me, I no longer have any interest. How can I learn to be confident in the bedroom?

A: Carrying extra weight can dent a person’s sexual self-confidence, regardless of their gender and sexual orientation, but the precise nature of the negative self-talk can vary from person to person.

Melbourne sex therapist Dr Christopher Fox (sexlifetherapy.com.au) says gay men are often confronted with cultural images of svelte, muscular, hairless young men. “This is not the only image in the gay community. ‘Bears’ [hairy, and often larger men] also feature. Yet, like the straight community, youth and beauty is still a focus.”

When we carry a mental template of what a “sexy” person looks like, even if we know, intellectually, that it is an unrealistic and unachievable ideal, we cannot help feeling we fall short by comparison, which causes us to feel ashamed of our bodies.

Carrying weight can impact on your self-esteem, Dr Fox says. “The self is an important aspect of us feeling sexy. The way we view our bodies also impacts on our feeling sexy. When our sense of self [esteem] and our body are both challenged, our levels of desire, and of feeling sexy, are also challenged.”

Once low self-esteem and negative self-talk have become entrenched, they can lead to a general feeling of ennui, and a shutting down of the senses. That sluggish, dulled mindset makes it difficult to truly enjoy all of life’s pleasure, but it particularly affects the libido. One of the first challenges you face is to find the motivation to make any changes, no matter how small. So make yourself move your body.

I am not talking about going to the gym, taking up yoga, or doing anything with a view to losing weight. Simply get your system turning over, like warming up the engine of your car. Research has shown that physical activity, even merely going for a walk, releases the feel-good hormones, endorphins. You will start to feel a little more positive, which will help you to take another step.

Fox warns that learning to accept our bodies and ourselves is not an easy process. “It is an achievable process though,” he says. “On an immediate level I think it is important for you to challenge your thinking about yourself. Your boyfriend says he finds you attractive and he wants to sleep with you. Consider how he looks at you. Maybe he sees something you don’t. This is important to consider.”

When we feel bad about ourselves we often react to compliments with “deflection”. We challenge every compliment, or counter a positive observation by drawing attention to a perceived flaw, “but what about my gut!”. This can feel like rejection to your partner, and, if you do it too often, he might either give up, or start to agree with you.

Practise accepting compliments and endearments graciously, with a simple “thank you”, even if that inner voice is screaming out objections. Let the positive words land, and allow yourself to enjoy them.

It can be difficult to make changes without support, and another good way to begin would be to seek professional assistance. Fox suggests finding someone who has experience in working with gay men, body image and sexuality.

“Through therapy we would explore how your changing body impacts on your sense of self and your body image,” he says. “We would explore how you could develop tools and strategies to challenge your own perceptions.”

Remember that although sex and arousal involve elements of fantasy, the true enjoyment comes from the lived experience in the moment. Car lovers might drool over images of unattainable Ferraris and Bugattis, but the pleasure of enjoying the car that belongs to them, that they can drive, and polish, and experience, is the real pleasure.

Complete Article HERE!

Lack Of Penis Bone In Humans Linked To Monogamous Relationships, Quick Sex

Scientists reveal why humans do not have a penis bone.

By

Many of us call erections “boners,” although there’s no actual bone in the penis. This bone has been the subject of many debates as several animals have them in diverse sizes and lengths, but humans don’t. Evolutionary scientists at the University College London suggest this strange anomaly is a consequence of monogamy and quick sex.

The penis bone, also known as the “baculum,” evolved in mammals more than 95 million years ago, and was spotted in the first primates that emerged about 50 million years ago, according to the researchers. The baculum became larger in some animals and smaller in others. For example, in the walrus, it can be two feet long, while in a monkey it’s about the length of a human fingernail.

Previous research has found the penis bone increases the potential duration of intercourse, and the frequency with which sex can take place. A lioness can copulate 100 times per day, sometimes with only four-minute intervals, but has just a 38 percent conception rate. This means males need to have better sexual stamina to achieve the best chance of paternity.

So, why do humans lack a penis bone?

The recent study, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society, found a link between penis bone length, promiscuity, and sex duration. Some species have longer penis bones because they engage in “prolonged intromission,” which means the act of penetration lasts for more than three minutes. Longer intromission times are more common among polygamous mating species, where multiple males mate with multiple females, like bonobos and chimps. This mating system creates an intense competition for fertilization, and reduces a female’s access to more mates by having males spend more time having sex with them, according to the study.

The penis bone is attached at the tip of the penis rather than the base to provide structural support for animals who do prolonged intromission, and to keep the urethra open.

The researchers believe humans lost their penis bones when monogamy became a dominant reproductive strategy about 1.9 million years ago.

“We think that is when the human baculum would have disappeared because the mating system changed at that point,” Kit Opie, a co-author of the study at University College London, told The Guardian.

Opie and his colleague Miranda Brindle believe the male does not need to spend a long time penetrating the female since she is not likely to be leapt by other amorous males. Therefore, the reduction of competition for mates means humans are less likely to need a penis bone. Opie adds, despite popular belief, humans do not generally need longer than three minutes to get the job done, and successfully impregnate a woman.

“We are actually one of the species that comes in below the three minute cut-off where these things come in handy,” he said.

Scientists have just begun to put together the function of this mysterious bone. They do agree changes in the penis bone are driven as part of a mating strategy. This means a bigger penis bone is better when it comes to sexual competition.

Human males, do not feel bad — if the penis bone is damaged, it could take as long as other broken bones to heal.

Complete Article HERE!

Pea App Offers To Help Men Battle Premature Ejaculation

This App Will Help Keep You From Popping Your Cork Too Soon

By Paul Watson

Long Story Short

A new app called Pea provides a training course for men suffering from the embarrassment of premature ejaculation.

Long Story

Premature ejaculation isn’t a subject many men want to talk about. If it’s happened to you, it’ll be a cringe-worthy memory. If it hasn’t then you don’t really want to jinx things.

But a new app, Pea, is providing a solution to men who are blighted by going from 0 to 60 too quickly.

Brennen Belich has suffered from premature ejaculation, so he decided to give men an app that can train them to last longer — a dick training app if you will.

“Just think of it like training for a race. If you want to be able to run for 30 minutes straight, you wouldn’t train by sprinting for two minutes, getting tired, and giving up,” Belich explained.

The app educates men through the “Learn why you Prejack” section, and provides lessons on Kegel training (pelvic muscle building), arousal control and masturbation training (yes, that’s a thing).

Premature ejaculation is usually classed as reaching climax in between one and three minutes. It isn’t a disease and has both biological and psychological causes, so the app takes a variety of approaches to easing the problem.

The cost of the iOS app is a mere $1.85, which isn’t bad value if it changes you from being gone in 60 seconds to a porn star in bed.

Or you can stick with conjuring up the image of a naked Donald Trump doing squats whenever you get too close, too soon. The choice is yours.

Own The Conversation

Ask The Big Question

Can something like an app really help with this?

Drop This Fact

Premature ejaculation reportedly affects between 20 and 30% of men.

Complete Article HERE!

Post-Orgasmic Goading

Q:

When pleasuring another dude’s cock, when should I stop riding/sucking/stroking after he’s cum? I know how sensitive my cock gets after cumming, but I also feel like some of the sweetest and most intimate moments can be what I do with his cock as it subsides and softens, not to mention that there can still be intense, intense pleasure in those early post-cum moments.
Go for it, while adapting to his needs!

ERECT PENIS

I agree with you that the sweetest and most intense pleasurable sensations can be had soon after ejaculation. I personally call this post-ejaculatory penile massage post-orgasmic goading (but that’s a personal terminology as I’ve never seen an official terminology for this) because this deliberate teasing is done at a time where we all know the penis to be extremely sensitive.

Post-orgasmic goading is not something we men tend to do instinctively for ourselves, as a consequence of the additive impact of three phenomena happening quickly after ejaculation:

  1. The powerful and overwhelming sensation of fatigue that numbs us after ejaculation
  2. The almost instantaneous disappearance of all interest for sex that follows ejaculation
  3. The excruciating sensitiveness of the penis — of the glans in particular — following ejaculation

Acting synergistically, these phenomena trained us very early into avoiding any stimulation to our penis after ejaculation. In fact, this is something most of us were driven to understand only a few weeks after our first ejaculation. As a result, most men will have little to no experience with (and, for some, even the knowledge of) the powerful sensations that can be squeezed out from the penis after ejaculation.

Does that mean that post-orgasmic goading should be avoided? Not at all: on the contrary, it should be encouraged.

What it means however, is that you have to be mindful when initially introducing a partner to post-orgasmic masturbation.

  • Begin by announcing your intent. I don’t mean writing down a contract in triplicates, but after the guy has cum and you continue to masturbate him, tell him that you do. Something like “seeing you cum was wonderful, I want to see you squirm and hear you moan longer”. Eventually, you won’t need to ask his permission to go on with the post-orgasmic goading, but at first you’ll need to, so that your partner doesn’t feel apprehensive. Indeed, when unexpected, post-orgasmic goading will bring forth a feeling of loss of control (and it is, to a point). And most men don’t live well with that feeling, as it is not part of the male psyche.
  • Be clear that you’ll stop if he asks to, and indeed stop when he does asks you to… but with a slight delay. The delay is important as the intensity of the caresses are very likely to make him utter you to stop way too soon. So you should playfully continue a bit longer, yet without going overboard so that he’ll know that you can be trusted. At first, you might not continue for long after ejaculation, but as he learns both that you can be trusted and to let go, you’ll be able to give him long minutes of quasi-orgasmic pleasures…
  • Finally, be considerate. While you can continue to caress the shaft with a relatively strong grip (yet toned down compared to how you held his cock as you sent him through orgasm), you must handle the glans with extreme care. Using his semen(1) as lube, rub the glans slightly and delicately with your fingertips. You’re better off beginning too delicately than the other way around because if you begin the cockhead’s caresses too harshly, it will hurt and that will be the end of it. To evaluate your accomplishment, watch his abs for sudden contractions, watch his shoulders dance around, watch his head moving back and forth, watch also for his hand(s) that may attempt to grip you (surprisingly) strongly in an attempt to immobilize you. Listen to his moans also. Embolden him to move and moan…
  • When introducing a man to post-orgasmic goading, one has to be initially very mindful and open to the needs of the other. When done correctly, it opens a new world of sensations and it is totally fun and addictive(2) ! After some time, you’ll be able to make him dance, squirm and whimper for a surprisingly long time. He will even be looking for it.

While semen is a hassle to deal with after ejaculation, we all like to be reminded that we ejaculated and how much we came. Playing with our semen and smearing it all over helps drive the point that we came and helps us registering that we impregnated the world with our DNA. It makes us feel manly. It’s important to fool around with cum, and doing so won’t change the fact that a clean up is needed after orgasm.

This article is written with a partner in mind as this is the question, but the same applies to you too. Every man should use post-orgasmic goading on their own cock. The same careful and delicate approach applies, especially since it is so difficult to persevere at first, as the glans’ exquisite sensitivity tends to make us spineless. Yet, going against the post orgasmic fatigue and the transient disinterest in sex, on one side, and learning to exploit instead of steering clear from the penis’ post orgasmic sensitiveness, on the other side, allows us to milk even more pleasure from our penis. Something no one can be averse to, right? As it goes so much against our instinctual behavior however, it has to be learned and practiced. Practice makes perfect, though. So practice my lad, practice !

Rape Culture and the Concept of Affirmative Consent

March against rape culture

March against rape culture

Throughout most of our history, rape was a property crime.

Today we do not, in the modern United States at least, think of a woman’s sexuality as a financial asset. But that is a recent phenomenon. For most of our history, rape was not treated the same way as other violent assaults because it wasn’t just a violent assault, it was also a crime against property.

You can see this view–of a woman’s sexuality belonging to her father and later her husband–in laws concerning rape and sexual assault. It was even possible for a father to sue a man who had consensual sex with his daughter because he had lost the value of his daughter. Based on this view, value is lost in terms of her work if she became pregnant and was no longer able to earn wages, or in terms of a future wife for someone else because of this stain on her character. Men could not be held accountable for raping their wives because a wife was a man’s property and consent to sex–at any time of his choosing–was part of the arrangement.

Lest you think that these laws are ancient examples of a culture that no longer bears relation to our current policies on rape, spousal rape was not made illegal in all fifty states until 1993, where it still may carry a less severe sentence than other rape offenses. The tort of seduction was technically on the books in North Carolina in 2003.

This context is important given our current cultural attitudes toward sexual assault. To understand this culture and how it can be amended, we need to look more deeply at the historical understandings of rape and consent.


Force Means No

The framework for defining rape underpins our understanding of who is required to prove consent or non-consent. The Hebrew Scriptures, which established longstanding cultural norms that helped form a basis for what was morally and legally acceptable in early America, make a distinction between a woman who was raped within a city and one who was raped outside of the city limits. The first woman was stoned to death and the second considered blameless (assuming she was a virgin). This distinction is based on the idea that it was the woman’s responsibility to cry out for help and show that she was non-consenting. A woman who was raped in the city obviously had not screamed because if she had someone would have come to her rescue and stopped the rape. The woman outside the city had no one to rescue her so she could not be blamed for being victimized.

This brutal logic, which is completely inconsistent with how we know some victims of rape react to an attack, was continued in the American legal system when our laws on rape were formulated. Rape was defined as a having a male perpetrator and a female victim and involving sexual penetration and a lack of consent. But it was again the woman’s responsibility to prove that she had not consented and the way that this was demonstrated was through her resistance. She was only actually raped if she had attempted to fight off her attacker. Different jurisdictions required different levels of force to show a true lack of consent. For example, fighting off an assailant to your utmost ability or even up to the point where the choice was either to submit to being raped or to being killed. Indeed, the cultural significance of chastity as a virtue that the female was expected to guard was so profound that many female Christian saints are saints at least in part because they chose to die rather than be raped or be a bride to anyone but Christ.

Potential canonization aside, it was consistently the responsibility of the woman alleging that she was the victim of a rape to prove that she had fought off her attacker in order to show that she had not consented. If she could not show that she had sufficiently resisted, she was deemed to not have been raped. Her chastity was someone else’s property, either her father’s or her husband’s/future husband’s, so it was always understood that someone, other than her, had the right to her sexuality. The assailant had assumed that he had the right to use her sexually and was only a rapist if she acted in such a way that a reasonable man would have known that she did not belong to him. Her failure to communicate that fact, that she was the property of some other man, was a sign that she had in fact consented. Therefore the rape was not his moral failing in stealing another man’s property but her moral failing in not protecting that property from being stolen.


Culture Wars

We can see the effects of this ideology in how we treat rape victims today. Although we don’t necessarily require evidence of forceful resistance, it is considered helpful in prosecuting a rape case. Rape shield laws may have eliminated the most egregious examples of slut-shaming victims, but an innocent or even virginal victim is certainly what the prosecution could hope for if they were trying to design their most favorable case. One of the first questions that will be asked of the victim is “did you say no?” In other words “what did YOU do to prevent this from happening to you?” The burden is still often legally and almost always culturally on the victim to show that they did not consent.

There is an alternative approach that has been gaining traction on college campuses and elsewhere known as the concept of “affirmative consent.” Take a look at the video below, which elucidates the differences between the “no versus no” approach compared to affirmative consent, which is often described as “yes means yes.”

In this video, Susan Patton and Rush Limbaugh both represent examples of rape culture. The contrast between the views of Savannah Badlich, the advocate of affirmative consent, and Patton, who is against the idea, could not be starker. To Badlich, consent is an integral part of what makes sex, sex. If there isn’t consent then whatever happened to you, whether most people would have enjoyed it or indeed whether or not you orgasmed, was rape. It is your consent that is the foundation of a healthy sexual experience, not the types of physical actions involved. In contrast, Patton expressed the view that good sex is good sex and consent seems to not play a role in whether it was good sex, or even whether it should be defined as sex at all. The only thing that could indicate if something is an assault versus a sexual encounter is whatever physical evidence exists, because otherwise, the distinction is based only on the assertions of each individual. Again we are back to evidence of force.


What is “Rape Culture”?

Rape culture refers to a culture in which sexuality and violence are linked together and normalized. It perpetuates the idea that male sexuality is based on the use of violence against women to subdue them to take a sexual experience, as well as the idea that female sexuality is the effort to resist or invite male sexuality under certain circumstances. It overgeneralizes gender roles in sexuality, demeans men by promoting their only healthy sexuality as predatory, and also demeans women by considering them objects without any positive sexuality at all.

According to this school of thought, the “no means no” paradigm fits in perfectly with rape culture because it paints men as being predators who are constantly looking for a weak member of the herd to take advantage of sexually, while also teaching women that they need to be better than the rest of the herd at fending off attacks, by clearly saying no, to survive. If they can’t do that, because they were drinking or not wearing proper clothing, then the attack was their fault.


“Yes Means Yes”

Affirmative consent works differently. Instead of assuming that you can touch someone until they prove otherwise, an affirmative consent culture assumes that you may not touch someone until you are invited to do so. This would be a shocking idea to some who assume that gamesmanship and predation are the cornerstones of male sexuality and the perks of power, but it works out better for the majority of men and women, who would prefer and who should demand equality in sex.

This video gives a brief highlight of some of the issues that are brought up when affirmative consent is discussed and the difficulties that can still arise even with affirmative consent as a model.


Evaluating Criticism of Affirmative Consent

The arguments are important so let’s unpack some of the key ones in more detail. The first objection, expressed in both videos, is how exactly do you show consent? Whenever the affirmative consent approach comes up, one of the first arguments is that it is unenforceable because no one is going to stop sexual activity to get written consent, which is the only way to really prove that a person consented. We still end up in a “he said, she said” situation, which is exactly where we are now, or a world where the government is printing out sex contracts.

The idea that affirmative consent will by necessity lead to written contracts for sex is a logical fallacy that opponents to affirmative consent use to make the proposition seem ridiculous. Currently, we require the victim to prove non-consent. Often the victim is asked if they gave a verbal no or if they said they did not want the contact. The victim is never asked: did you put the fact that you didn’t want to be touched in writing and have your assailant read it? The idea that a written explanation of non-consent would be the only way we would take it seriously is absurd, so it would be equally absurd to assume that requiring proof of consent would necessitate written documentation. Advocates for affirmative consent don’t want sex contracts.

In addition, even under our current framework we accept a variety of pieces of evidence from the prosecution to show that the victim did not consent. A clear “no” is obviously the strongest kind of evidence, just as under an affirmative consent framework an enthusiastic verbal “yes” would be the best evidence, but that is just what the best evidence is. That is certainly not the only kind of evidence available. Courts already look at the entire context surrounding the incident to try to determine consent. The process would be virtually the same under an affirmative consent model. The only difference would be that the burden would be on the defendant to show that they believed they had obtained consent based on the context of the encounter instead of placing the burden on the victim to show that, although they didn’t say “no,” they had expressed non-verbally that they were unwilling to participate.

The shift in the burden of proof is sometimes cited as a reason not to adopt an affirmative consent model. Critics argue that this affects the presumption that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Which is, rightly, a cornerstone of our judicial system. If this model did, in fact, change that presumption then it wouldn’t be an appropriate answer to this problem. But it does not.

Take another crime as an example. A woman’s car is stolen. The police issue a BOLO on the car, find it, and bring the suspect in and sit him down. They ask him “did you have permission to take that car?” and he replies “Yes, officer, she gave me the keys!”

He is still presumed innocent and, as far as this brief hypothetical tells us, hasn’t had his rights violated. It looks as though he is going to get a fair trial at this point. That trial may still devolve into another he said, she said situation. She may allege that she didn’t give him the keys but merely left them on the kitchen table. At that point, it will be up to the jury to decide who they believe, but that would have been the case in any event. He is presenting her giving the keys to him as one of the facts to show his innocence.

If a woman’s car is stolen we don’t question her about how many miles are on the odometer. We don’t ask if she wore a seatbelt the last time she drove it. We don’t care if she had been drinking because her alcohol consumption doesn’t negate the fact that she was a victim of a crime. We certainly wouldn’t force her to prove that she didn’t give the thief the keys. That burden would rightly be on him and we would be able to both place that burden on him and at the same time presume him to be innocent until he failed to meet that burden.

Adopting an affirmative consent model changes how consent is perceived. It is primarily a cultural change in understanding who is responsible for consent. Rather than making the non-initiating party responsible for communicating a lack of consent, affirmative consent requires that the initiating party obtains obvious consent.

That is how affirmative consent works. It wouldn’t require a written contract or even necessarily a verbal assertion. Context would always matter and the cases would still often become two competing stories about what the context meant. And it doesn’t mean that we are assuming that person is guilty before they have the chance to show that they did, in fact, get that consent. It just means that we are placing the burden of proving that consent was obtained on the party claiming that consent had been obtained.


Conclusion

There is no other category of crime where we ask the victim to show that they didn’t want to be the victim of that crime. A man who is stabbed in a bar fight, regardless of whether he was drunk or belligerent, isn’t asked to prove that he didn’t want a knife wound.

We need to change our cultural framework of rape and consent. When we are working under an affirmative consent framework what we are doing is changing the first question. Currently, our first question is for the victim: did you say no? Under an affirmative consent model our first question is for the suspect: did you get a yes?

Complete Article HERE!