I read a blog post today by Undomestic Diva titled “Quality vs Quantity in the bedroom“. If you haven’t read it yet, then I’m not going to spoil the fun. Go and have a read (men especially) and then come back and continue from here.

You’re back? Ok, let’s get into it then.

Undomestic Diva’s post got me thinking about sex and why men feel they have to be “marathon men” and last for hours and hours. Why is this so important to men and why is it that there is this (seeming) misconception that women are thinking the same way? I think there are a number of reasons this has happened.

Let’s start with peer pressure. Is there some sort of masculine bragging right from being able to go the distance with a girl? Probably. A man wants to look like a stud to his mates. For some, that might be the number of ‘notches on the bed head’. For others, it is bragging about going at it for hours with the hot (or no so hot) chick.

A lot of the stories are probably exaggerated. It’s like the old fishing story about the one that got away, except this time it’s about the hours and hours of hot lovemaking. It probably was all over in five minutes, or thirty minutes. Multiply that by five and you’ve now got a ripping yarn to share with the mates.

So what do we mean by sex? Some women say they want longer and more satisfying sex. Do they mean thrusting in an out intercourse? Possibly. But they probably also want more intimacy. They probably want more attention from their man when they aren’t in bed (or about to be). They probably want a cuddle and a massage occasionally.

That doesn’t mean there should be a massage and cuddle session and kissing and foreplay and then some oral and then some massage and then perhaps some intercourse that goes for hours and hours. Sometimes that will be appropriate. Sometimes a “Wham, bam and thank you ma’am and sir!” is what you both need. Mixing things up is important, but make sure your man knows this.

If you have had intimacy issues in the past and you’ve gotten him to be more attentive, perhaps he thinks it ALWAYS has to be like this. It’s possible in the past he has had a similar situation with another relationship. All women and men are different, so he’s doing what he thinks is right from previous experience, when you really just want it done well and done now.

Then there are the premature ejaculation ads on TV, and this stuff is even mentioned in school. It’s a serious medical problem for some men, but there needs to be a clearer definition so that most men can get on with their life. To me, if you can’t have intercourse because a) it’s done before you even get inside or b) you get inside and that sets you off, then you might have an issue that needs some medical attention. Doctors can do wonders to help you.

The rest of you who are having sex but it just isn’t a long as you want it, you might just have to deal with it. Perhaps when your partner says, “It’s ok you know, I really enjoyed it” they mean it. If they don’t, they aren’t the right partner for you anyway.

Briefly, I’ll touch on porn. Male porn stars seem to last forever (or at least the length of a DVD). Do you think Peter Jackson filmed “The Lord of the Rings” in one take? I doubt it very much. They would not have filmed “The Lord of the Ring” in one take either. (If it’s a real porn title, shoot me. I made it up.) I’m lead to believe they also use numbing agents to allow them to last forever. Sorry, but I want to enjoy sex.

Finally, I think communication is very important. Men need to learn to trust what their partner is saying. If she says she wants it quick, she wants it quick. If she says she wants some more of this or that, then that is what she wants. Don’t second guess her and think “she’s just saying that to make me feel better.” I still make that mistake sometimes, but I’m human and learning.

If she is just saying it to make you feel better, the only person missing out is her. 99.9% of the time (yes, more made up statistics) they are telling you the way it is. “Hey, let’s skip this stuff and get down and dirty” should be music to your ears, not a “oh rod, she’s just trying to make me feel better cause I suck” moment.

So men, listen to your woman. Ask her what she wants you to do. If she wants it quick and fast, give her to her. Enjoy the freedom of not having to worry about lasting for ages longer than we were probably designed for. When she wants more than that, give that to her too. Listen, communicate and understand what she wants from you.

Women, talk to your man. Tell them what you really want. Be up front all the time, so they’ll believe you in the bedroom as well as outside. If they don’t understand, show them. They’ll get it eventually.

Perhaps you need to find some way to let him know what you want this time around. It’s ok to say that you shouldn’t have to tell him — he should just know. It’s easier to just tell him, and then enjoy the fruits of your labour, so to speak.

Girls who are attending private school dances are being required to wear bike pants, tights, leggings, etc with short skirts or dresses as part of a new dress code. The Courier-Mail’s headline cries “School Dance Dress Shock“. Clicking through gives you an even better headline for the article.

Bike pants dress code for school dances to ward off sex

I can only assume they are very unflattering bike pants then.

The article reports that this decision has been made amid concerns that inappropriate touching by boys will lead to criminal charges, and that this rule has been brought in to “ reduce the risk of being sexually assaulted”.  The report goes on to explain that the girl’s schools had asked for the rules to be changed, as previously this type of apparel wasn’t allowed. Perhaps this was a leftover of the late 80s push to consign leggings to the past forever.

It seems sensible to allow leggings, tights. This has become the fashion over recent times and it fits into the appropriate dress code for a school dance. Mini skirts and bare legs really don’t need to be the realm of 14 and 15 year old girls. This way they can wear the current short skirt/dress fashions but with appropriate covering that a private school requires. Win-win I would have thought.

The claims that this would reduce incidents of sexual assault seems strange. Sexual assault is not accidentally touching a girl inappropriately because there was nothing in the way, like bike pants. Sexual assault is the act of touching a person inappropriately (or other such things) and whether bike pants are in the way or not, it’s still assault. Perhaps the  idea is that the boys are not going to be ‘provoked’ by the bare flesh temptation brought about by the short skirts. I don’t think that would stop randy boys from thinking about sex, but randy boys doesn’t mean sexual assault either.

Adolescent boys and girls have always had the hideously difficult task of growing through from innocence to sexual maturity. It’s not always pleasant and can be very awkward. Having been a randy teenage boy at one stage, I know what it was like for me. I was never interested in sexually assaulting someone though.

If a guy is going to sexually assault a girl, it’s because he is a pig and can’t control himself (or chooses to not control himself). No amount of Lycra will stop them.

Good on the schools for having and updating their dress code, but lets not turn it into a panacea for sexual assault at school dances. Education and modelling of correct and appropriate behaviour from older men is one way that we can get the next generation to treat all women with respect and not do the wrong thing. Report anything that you see immediately. If you are attacked, don’t be afraid to speak up. We need to support the victims of sexual assault to help them get the justice they deserve.

A dress code – good idea, but not the end to sexual assault.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has recently been asked to comment on her views regarding Reproductive Rights and Family Planning, including abortion. Rather than summarise, here is the YouTube video of the question and her  answer.

There will be those who disagree with her view and you are entitled to that right. I am with Secretary Clinton on this one. It must be the individual’s right to choose whether abortion is suitable for them. Providing good family planning advice, including information about contraception and safer sex practices is important no matter where you live. Providing the tools for girls and boys, men and women to make sound and informed decisions is much more important than running scare mongering campaigns.

Teaching kids about sex is just as important as teaching them about other physical health issues and perhaps even more so in some cases. They are not resistant to hormones and need to have the information available to think for themselves. Providing them with age appropriate education in a safe environment is important. If parents want to opt their children out then we shouldn’t stop them. But we shouldn’t allow a group to force their views on abortion, sex education or family planning on anyone else.

If your deity, your moral values or your ideological view of society says that it is wrong to have an abortion, then you do what you need to do. Let other women decide for themselves and do whatever they decide they need to do.

So now that I have your attention…

Cardinal George Pell has come out and made it a really Good Friday for Pope Benedict XVI (they need more papal names it seems) and supported his recent comments made to the media. Seems nothing so sinister and isn’t all that surprising, considering his position within the Catholic Church. Until you read into it more. Then you realise that it is disturbing and quite dangerous.

The Cardinal, who sadly I have to admit is an Australian, has come out in support of the Pope’s comments that the use of condoms was actually making the AIDS issue worse in Africa, and not better. Instantly I know that the scientists and politicians of the last 10 to 20 years are wrong and the Catholic Church are unbiased and trusted source of science on this issue. Please.

We should not be quick to judge. We should check whether this is what the Pope really said. Perhaps it is some misquote from a rouge journalist who picked up something he is supposed to have said from an unreliable source. No, it’s a Reuters journalist and it was uttered at a media conference.

Here is the part of the article, from http://www.rediff.com/news/2009/mar/19pope-views-on-condom-use-create-a-stir.htm:

“AIDS cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems,” he told media persons on March 17 while on his way to Cameroon.

They also reported that the Pope has a better solution for this AIDS epidemic:

According to the Pope, combating the spread of AIDS requires a ’spiritual and human awakening’, friendship for those who suffer, and a ‘responsible, moral attitude toward sex’.

Awesome. A very viable suggestion. We will stop people who are having sex knowing that they might get AIDS by giving them a spiritual awakening. They don’t need to know about AIDS and be told of all the possible ways to help stop its transmission. Just get them to pray that they won’t want to have sex anytime soon.

What needs to be done is that out of touch organisations, who are more concerned about their own pontificating than the wellbeing of its followers, should get a grip and come around to the 21st Century. It isn’t going to go away any time soon. There will be no apocalyptic horsemen, although global warming might make them think they are in Hell anyway.

Start providing the right sort of education to all people around the world about the dangers of AIDS. Be sensitive to their backgrounds and current education levels so that they can understand what they are being old. Provide good quality condoms only and provide them for free so that everyone has some. We shouldn’t be making money out of fighting an epidemic.

Edit: You can here his media stop in this AFP video on YouTube. It seems AFP won’t let you embed their videos, even if you are a paid affiliate. And I’m not even close to that.)

Seems being gay doesn’t make you a bad parent after all – at least for penguins.

First item in the “Just Plain Weird” file is a story from the UK’s Daily Mail detailing the exploits of two gay penguins from Polar Land in Harbin, China. It seems being a gay penguin couple is considered as evil as being a married gay couple in Australia. I wonder how you determine a gay penguin from a straight penguin?

Angry penguin doesn't like discrimination. (Source)

It seems the natural urge to be a father was too much for this penguin couple, who were expelled from their colony for stealing other penguin’s eggs.

‘One of the responsibilities of being a male adult is looking after the eggs. Despite the fact that they can’t have eggs naturally, it does not take away their biological drive to be a parent,’ said one [wildlife expert].

Zookeepers have hit back at claims of discrimination, saying that the birds were segregated “not because of discrimination, but so as not to disturb the colony during hatching time.” Perhaps gay penguin sex is loud, messy and just too disturbing for other penguins to see.

In response to complaints from visitors to Polar Land, zookeepers have given the couple eggs from a mother who was an inattentive parent. Zookeepers were amazed to find that they were exemplary parents who are “the best parents in the whole zoo”.

Perhaps humans should take note of nature and reconsider their view on gay and lesbian parents. There are plenty of unloved and uncared for children in need of a bit of love. The sexuality of their parents isn’t going to turn them into psychos. Perhaps we should hope that the system will look after them?

Perhaps not.