Sunnydale Recycling

Gay people - and their advocates - started California fire

Oct 31 at 3:03am by wilkins

It’s sort of a relief, actually, now that we know what happened. You can read the explanation here on the James Hartline Report:

They shook their fists at God and said, “We don’t care what God says, we will issue our legal brief to support gay marriage in San Diego!” Then Mayor Jerry Sanders mocked the Christian vote and signed off on this rebellious legal document to support same-sex marriage.
And then the streets of La Jolla under the Mt. Soledad Cross began to cave in.

We learned of this news from Lee of the Stone, a new blog inspired, in turn, by Greta Christina.

No CommentsContinue Reading

AAG proposes criterion for evaluating porn: pleasure

Oct 29 at 1:01am by wilkins

Always Aroused Girl, noting

must confess that a whole lot of porn does a whole lot of nothing for me.Not all porn, but some porn shows actors who seem either bored beyond tears or who are overacting to the point that I cannot hope to suspend my disbelief.

[After the jump, AAG gives as examples of what she likes - Comstock Films and Tristan Taormino's's Chemistry Vol. 3 - a porn film in which - after selecting the first few performers - the film was cast by cast members  with the criteria being to engage those performers who must turned them on].

Read the rest of this entry »

No CommentsContinue Reading

Marcelle Manhattan - not only angry, but fair, too - and fascinating

Oct 29 at 12:12am by wilkins

Ms. M. Manhattan of Sexegesis has written a post about an ex - someone who, while they were together, made a point of tormenting her about her mediocre skills as a lover. In particular, as a fellatrix.

In truth, there’s no way I can plausibly claim not to be a member of the same group as this  lout. Manhattan plausibly suggests that he’s a sociopath. Let’s look at the evidence:

• gratuitous humiliation, in which he apparently took pleasure;
• based upon a falsehood (”you don’t give good head”). It’s a falsehood because he wasn’t in a position to know anything except whether or not it was good for him. (For argument’s sake - and because we can’t refute it - we’ll assume that, when he was complaining, he was, in fact, not delighted). The only cock I’ve ever had sucked is my own; but I’ve sucked a couple of dozen, with and without assistance from others, and it’s a skill I’ve tried to get down (no pun intended).

  [I like Dan Savage a lot - but apparently he's been saying there aren't any bisexuals. The editorial staff here at Sunnydale Recycling have secret evidence that bisexuals actually exist; it's true that we're all really, really bad people, but that's another matter entirely]

My current assessment is this: there’s a lot of variation between men and cocks and how they like to be blown; giving “good” head can involve lots of things - but always some feedback - usually just via observation - from the recipient.

Women vary much, much more - in my view - much more complexity and heterogeneity in female sexual response. Sounds like Marcelle’s ex didn’t figure that out either.

And - check her out - look how incredibly sexy and smart this woman is. If he’d been nice to her - it would have been apparent sooner.

But some of these guys don’t get off on getting off. They get off on being cruel.

No CommentsContinue Reading

Stand By Your Bowl/Stand By Your Man - and why aren’t you standing with your men? (or, Tammy Wynette on the limitations of monogamy)

Oct 29 at 12:12am by wilkins

Stand By Your Bowl

by Greta Christina

Sometimes it’s hard to be a kitty
Gettin’ all your food from just one bowl
You’ll have wet food, you’ll have dry food
With mealtimes that you can’t control.

But if you’re hungry, you’ll keep howling
Trying to make those monkeys understand
And if you’re howling, and if you’re yowling
Maybe they’ll open up the can.

Stand by your bowl, make sure it’s full of kibble
With tasty things to nibble
When there’s no lap to sit on
Stand by your bowl, and show the world you’re hungry
Keep eating all that you can hold
Stand by your bowl.

Copyright 2003 Greta Christina. From Greta Christina’s Song Parodies.

Which brings us to the original hit - and its opening lines: you don’t need numerology, cryptography or steganography to get the point: for a woman - one man isn’t quite enough.

The Original Lyrics

The first couplet of Tammy Wynette’s hit single, “Stand By Your Man”

Sometimes its hard to be a woman
Giving all your love to just one man (emphasis supplied)

Complete lyrics here. Feel free - the rest is - in effect - since we’ve established that you can only have one, remember they’re insecure and need a lot of attention.

No CommentsContinue Reading

“Fun Today” - from Sharing Dee

Oct 28 at 6:06pm by wilkins

Am admirable definition of “fun.” Check out this link, “Fun Today,” plus a yummy image. From Sharing Dee.

No CommentsContinue Reading

Protected: Fascinator Posh Throw (comfortable, portable, washable)

Oct 27 at 10:10pm by wilkins

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Enter your password to view commentsContinue Reading

You can actually watch the temperature drop (the chilling effect in action)

Oct 27 at 5:05am by wilkins

Lawyers use the phrase “chilling effect” to describe an added perception of risk concerning, or actual deterrence, of legitimate behavior. In other words, you “deter” drug use, forbidden sexual acts, or robbery because those things are intrinsically wrong. But we use “chilling effect” as a cliche - generally in the context of “chilling” free expression. ((The phrase’s use has been recorded in this way as early as 1950: Paul J. Freund. The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties, 4 Vanderbilt Law Review 533, at 539 (1950-1951). See also “Chilling Effect,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect (accessed 287 October 2007)).

Here, “Anthony Comstock,” one of the founders of Comstock Films, discusses his entirely reasonable fears of prosecution in this post:

“Adult sexual conduct is not illegal and it is in fact constitutionally protected. See, e.g., Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). The regulation of visual depictions of adult sexual activity is not based on its intrinsic relation to illegal conduct.”

That’s from the Sixth Circuit Court’s ruling 2257 regulations unconstitutional, and gets to the heart of why I am fascinated by, and passionate about making sexual imagery.

Some few years ago I directed a film about Hutu refugees in Eastern Zaire. The imagery from the camps themselves was appalling enough: emaciated men, women, and children dying as the camera rolled; bodies being stacked into the bed of trucks like cordwood. But also included was footage from the Hutu genocidal slaughter of their Tutsi countrymen (carried out largely by machete,) including footage of a man being murdered by decapitation and the desecration of corpses.

I thought long and hard about what shots I would and would not include this film. I wanted my audience to vividly understand the horrors that had played out, but I did not want to them to withdraw, to down emotionally. I wanted them to stay with the film, through to the end, and hoped that they would find meaning in what I chose to show them. I thought a lot about the line between enough and too much. But never, not even for a moment, did I think about whether or not the footage I chose to include was prosecutable.

By contrast, nothing I show in the films I make about sex is awful. In fact, it’s all quite wonderful! People who desire each other giving and receiving pleasure in the most intimate and delicious ways! Yet in choosing to document and then distributed these consensual, loving, pleasurable, and entirely legal acts, some how through the magical powers of the camera, I may be committing a crime. Depending on where my films are watched, and by whom, what I do may not be protected by the First Amendment, what I do may be considered obscene, what I do may be against the law.

“The regulation of visual depictions of adult sexual activity is not based on its intrinsic relation to illegal conduct.” That’s what the Sixth Circuit Court says. I don’t see how that squares with Miller v. California. I’d like to find out, but I don’t want to lose my house or go to jail.

I thought long and hard about what shots I would and would not include this film. I wanted my audience to vividly understand the horrors that had played out, but I did not want to them to withdraw, to down emotionally. I wanted them to stay with the film, through to the end, and hoped that they would find meaning in what I chose to show them. I thought a lot about the line between enough and too much. But never, not even for a moment, did I think about whether or not the footage I chose to include was prosecutable.

By contrast, nothing I show in the films I make about sex is awful. In fact, it’s all quite wonderful! People who desire each other giving and receiving pleasure in the most intimate and delicious ways! Yet in choosing to document and then distributed these consensual, loving, pleasurable, and entirely legal acts, some how through the magical powers of the camera, I may be committing a crime. Depending on where my films are watched, and by whom, what I do may not be protected by the First Amendment, what I do may be considered obscene, what I do may be against the law.

“The regulation of visual depictions of adult sexual activity is not based on its intrinsic relation to illegal conduct.” That’s what the Sixth Circuit Court says. I don’t see how that squares with Miller v. California. I’d like to find out, but I don’t want to lose my house or go to jail.

Filmmakers should be worried about storyboards, budgets, and the cost of film stock. Not criminal charges for doing what they’re supposed to do - make films.

1 CommentContinue Reading

“Let’s begin with an overview”

Oct 27 at 4:04am by wilkins

This is, I believe, the beginning of the narrative of the blog of Thomas Paine and C at Polyamorously Perverse. This is the first time I’ve thought about a blog as a story you’d want to start at the beginning - rather than a stream you dip into - mostly focusing on what’s in the present.

I’m finding them increasingly fascinating.

After 30 years of thinking I was just another male who couldn’t settle peacefully into monogamy, I finally figured out I’m what’s called polyamorous: I prefer to have more than one lover in my life.

It’s not surprising, actually. My wife and I were both “poly” 20+ years ago without even knowing it. What’s that Country Western tune about “I Was Country Before Country Was Cool”? Well, we were poly before there was even a name for it. The term was coined by some Wiccan babe in the 80s or 90s (not important when). We were just young and frisky and taking advantage of an explosion in alternative lifestyles. Gays and Lesbians and Bisexuals were coming out of the closet, and the Women’s Movement was challenging the way I and almost every other man had been brought up.

My wife confessed one night in bed that she wanted to have sex with other women. I was shocked, but thought it kinda kinky, and said, “sure, you go explore.” For one thing, she was desperately unhappy with her job and her lack of challenge in her life, so maybe I figured “who am I to block her in yet another thing?” And like most guys, it seemed sorta appealing, for reasons I still can explain. It didn’t stop at other women, but included at least one man I know of. I confess I didn’t handle that part well, but partly because I caught her sneaking around with him. So much for an open marriage. Read the rest of this entry »

No CommentsContinue Reading

“Besides the fact that every part of my body is sore, I’ve had a good time with him.”

Oct 27 at 4:04am by wilkins

We’ve just discovered Anal Amy:

Friends with extra special benefits

Well, I thought it would be a while longer before my next sex fueled adventure. Before Thursday night, we still hadn’t gone past first base.I’m not sure how long it was, but it was a pretty long time for a blowjob, he finally came. I had been begging him the whole time to cum on my face. I didn’t think he was going to do it until at the last second, he pulled his cock out and aimed it right between my eyes. I closed my eyes and felt the hot cum hit my skin. It flowed into my eyes, it dripped off my face. I couldn’t open my eyes until he cleaned me up with a napkin.

But as soon as I could see again, I went back to work on his cock. I couldn’t even think about anything else right now. I had to get his cock hard again. His cock tasted like sperm now, and that definitely turned me on.

From “Friends With Extra Special Benefits”

- snip -

Mr Next

Well, I may have met the next one. LOL. I swear I wasn’t even looking, just out with my friends at a party and there he was. I’m not even joking it was one of those moments where I was standing in one part of the room, I looked over to where he was and he looked at me and grinned.

His name is Luke. I kind of knew him already. He’s always in the gym (great body!) because works out all the time and he works there. He’s helped me out with a few of my techniques and “spots.” But this was the first time we’ve really said more than a couple of sentences to each other. It wasn’t the greatest conversation, we were both pretty drunk but he’s so cute, so hot and actually has a brain.

I remember most of our conversation except a part where I said I would start working out with him. He called me up Sunday afternoon and I was a little surprised because I didn’t remember anything about it.

I’ve been thinking about working out for a while - but not as hardcore as he does. He runs (I jogged and walked a little) first. Then he goes into the weight room. I swear there were a couple of times he forgot I was a girl and hadn’t worked out in a while when he was selecting the weights. Then today, he had me work out with the cardio stuff. I’m not sure if he’s a perspective trainer or boyfriend.

It’s kind of weird hanging out with him though. I had a huge crush on him last year when I used to go to the gym all the time. But it’s also weird because we’ve spent a lot of time together the past couple of days. That’s a good thing…I think. Besides the fact that every part of my body is sore, I’ve had a good time with him.

So far we haven’t even kissed. We wrestled but that’s about as much contact as we’ve had. He’s really flirty and really playful. Plus, he’s laid back and doesn’t take things serious. A lot like me.

This is going to sound really - bad but I’m wondering why he’s into me. I’ve seen some of the girls he talks to that come into the gym. Super skinny, blonde, great bodies - etc. They all wear the skin tight shorts and just a sports bra. They have bodies I’d pay for. I honestly think he’s heard that I’m easy, a good fuck or something. I know he knows at least one of my ex’s.

Anyways, I should get back to working on this paper.

From “Mr. Next”

No CommentsContinue Reading

Sunnydale Recycling meets Mr. Jefferson

Oct 27 at 3:03am by wilkins

“Mr. Jefferson is run on a basis of trust.”

John LeCarre, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Sply

New Yorks’s Mr. Jefferson - based on Thomas J., man of many accomplishments, not the LeCarre character - but he is a man you can trust. More about Mr. Jefferson’s personal attributes in near future. Or reasonably near future. However, for the moment, a half-time single parent just starting a new household, Mr. J. is in need of some stuff for himself and kids:

Here’s his list:

Television
Small dining table
Day bed
Twin bed
Chests of drawers
Desk
Bookcases
Nightstands/end tables
Rugs
Printer

Hee’s the post it came from: Moving.

And, of course, we here at Sunnydale Recycling wouldn’t even know about OneLife,Take Two (Mr. Jefferson - who’s having only one life, but clearly taking and giving far more than just two - no matter what wonderful thing it is you might be thinking about: kids he loves, lovers he loves, friends, new friend - almost all of these in amount greater than two. Perhaps the name should be One Life - Take a number greater than or equal to Two). It’s reasoning like this that make Jefferson, and Mr. Paine, and Ms. AAG, such good writers - and me - at least on no sleep - not so much.

No CommentsContinue Reading

Two for one: opportunity to recycle/reuse AND do a mitzvah

Oct 24 at 1:01am by wilkins

Jefferson, of OneLifeTakeTwo  finds himself (1) moving, (2) a single parent, and (3) in need of, among other things:

Television
Small dining table
Day bed
Twin bed
Chests of drawers
Desk
Bookcases
Nightstands/end tables
Rugs
Printer

I don’t know him personally, but he comes with good references. If you live in New York, and you can help him out, do it.

No CommentsContinue Reading

AlwaysArousedGirl

Oct 24 at 12:12am by wilkins

AlwaysArousedGirl Could also be AlwaysWritesGood girl. This may be in part explained by the fact that she’s a TripleGoddess - a concept new to me; also very funny.

Here are a few you shouldn’t miss:

I Must Share These or My Brain Will Explode

Kneeling

She’s brilliant writing about sex. Her writing about her children is transcendent. Except when it’s hilarious.

Napping Baby Grasses

Thankful

You Say You’re Thinking of Having Children, Are You?

Always Aroused Girl.

1 CommentContinue Reading

Mr. and Mrs. Tom and C. Paine

Oct 23 at 11:11pm by wilkins

Polyamorously Perverse is a blog we’ve recently discovered. Here are links to some excellent pieces; what’s more, the comments are quite thoughtful, and in some cases, make the posts complete.

How to set up an MFM threesome;

Sexual Diplomacy and the Battle of the Sexes

Shallow Tom

Sex and Love

A Waste of Good Pussy

The proprietors/authors of this blog are “Tom” and “C” - and they’ve got some really thoughtful things to say about marriage, monogamy, love, sex, and other compelling issues.

They also got a great review from JanesGuide, always a sign of excellence.

1 CommentContinue Reading

Tips for doing certain things where one ought not

Oct 23 at 11:11pm by wilkins

Sexoteric Blog has reprinted Timeout’s tips for having sex in public:

1. Dress strategically. Long skirts for park sex. Commando for cars, dressing rooms and bathrooms. For the ladies, side ties on your bikini bottom for water sex. Sweatpants or loose jeans for guys—this is about the only time the K-Fed look will work for you.

2. Choose your location wisely. Meaning no one should be around—and definitely no kids. Leave parks for after-dark hours when the only “straight” family members are dads cruising on the DL.

3. Play it safe. Tote along condoms and lube pillow packs (silicone-based for lake or pool sex)—they’re about $1 each at adult bookstores.

4. Be tidy. Bring a Ziploc bag to dispose of the condom wrapper, used condom (ewww…) and used pillow pack. It prevents littering, plus your trash won’t tip off the police to your favorite sex spot.

5. Make excuses. If caught—by the police, dressing-room attendant, bouncer, your parents—say that the zipper on your pants got stuck and you needed help.

6. Make yourself comfortable. Though outdoor sex seems romantic in the Wilco/Billy Bragg collaboration “Remember the Mountain Bed,” pine needles and poison ivy on your privates are gross—bring a hoodie so that you can lay your bare butt on it.

7. Learn from gay men. Many straight folks think sex means intercourse, which, in public, is rarely realistic or (for women) orgasmic. Gay men are more creative; much of their public sex involves hands and mouths.

8. Keep it down. If you need a pillow to muffle your cries of joy, you’re not ready for public sex.

9/ Act casual. Avoid thrusting and grinding while “casually sitting” on your partner’s lap. Talk, laugh, smile (but not too goofy). It’s like running with a superfit friend and trying not to hyperventilate. Except instead of hiding that you’re out of shape, you’re hiding the fact that your privates are connected.

10. Cover your tracks. Bring a comb or hairbrush to tame your sex hair. Tuck your shirt back in. Wear patterned clothes to camouflage any stains. And seriously, have some class: Pack a travel-size toothbrush and toothpaste set and brush your teeth before kissing your grandmother if your mouth has been below hip level.

We’ll add two:

1. Know the rules and laws in the city/country in question. Not only the rules on  paper - it’s usually illegal - but is there a current policy in force - (e.g. certain airports in  Minnesota.

2.  If you’re not sure, it helps to have the name of a local attorney handy.

Of course, it always helps to have the name of a local attorney handy, but especially when you’re being naughty.

No CommentsContinue Reading

red rose and curtain.

Oct 23 at 10:10pm by wilkins

Une fleur qui ressemble à mon rouge idéal 

Via Christine Lebrasseur, and in turn via altporn.

No CommentsContinue Reading

Greta Christina: observations on the occasion of the outing of Dumbledore

Oct 23 at 10:10pm by wilkins

Greta Christina has a new piece on her blog about the new discovery about Professor Dumbledore ((get your minds out of the gutter; this has nothing to do with Senator Craig; Dumbledore must do better than that))

pretty much have just three things to say about this:

One: Neat.

I think it’s cool that Dumbledore is the moral center of the book, the apotheosis of goodness, the one character that all the good guys look to for both political and ethical leadership.

And he’s gay.

That’s just nifty.

Two: I think it’s too bad she couldn’t have said so in the books themselves.

Don’t get me wrong. I totally understand why she didn’t. If she’d made Dumbledore overtly gay in the books, then in the general public eye, that’s what the books would have been about. Everything else that the books are about — moral complexity, the realities of a resistance movement, what it’s like to be a child growing up and figuring out that the adult world is seriously messed-up, all the lovely and ridiculous magic stuff — would have become suddenly and dramatically secondary. It would have become the children’s book series about the wizarding school with the gay headmaster. It would have become the seven-volume fantasy version of “Heather Has Two Mommies.” I think it was the right decision, and if I’d been Rowling, I would have done exactly the same thing.

I just think that’s too bad.

I think it’s too bad that we live in a world where the mere presence of a major gay character in a children’s book automatically makes it a Kids’ Book About Gay.

I think it’s too bad that I now have to wonder: How many other characters did Rowling envision as gay, but wasn’t able to say so? (My money’s on Draco…)

I think it’s too bad that the single most popular author in the known universe, the one author who could write her own ticket more than any author living today, still had to keep the gayness of one of her central characters a secret until the series was completed.

It is better now than it used to be, forty years ago or even twenty. Imagine if L. Frank Baum had announced that Glinda the Good Witch was gay. Or Tolkein with Gandalf. Or Madeleine L’Engle with Mrs. Whatsit. There would have been a shitstorm. But it’s a different time now, and the people who are mostly going to be upset about Dumbledore are the fundies who aren’t buying the books anyway because they promote witchcraft.

But I still think we have a long way to go. I still think it’s still too bad that a major children’s book can’t have a major gay character in it without that becoming the central defining feature of the book.

Maybe in twenty years.

Three: Now I have to read the whole series again. Or the last book, anyway.

Damn. What a shame.

Greta Christina’s “Dumbledore Is Gay: Good Guys and Literary Closets“But does this mean authors can now go around, willy-nilly, and retroactively declare, well, I really meant them to be gay/bi/straight the whole time?

Try a few of these:

• TinTin and the  two guys with the bowlers
• The Hardy Boys (figure that out for yourself)
• Bugs and Elmer
• Hawkeye and Trapper;

We’re going to be very upset if someone pulls this on Battlestar Galactica, especially if it’s Admiral Adama - because Laura Roslin has suffered greatly and has, for all of that action, seen no action. If you take our meaning.

No CommentsContinue Reading

Greta Christina: of course same-sex marriage will have effects on opposite-sex marriage

Oct 21 at 10:10pm by wilkins

Greta Christina’s Blog - has a brilliant essay about same-sex marriage and its implications. Greta Christina - is exceptonally smart, and the woman can write. The latest piece, “Hometown Girl Makes Good,” ((The title, I think, is a reference to the piece being published in the Chicago Sun Times, which published it on paper with ink but not on its website, and that Ms. C. is originallly from Chicago)) is an essay which calls certain supporters of same-sex marriage to task for taking the rhetorical position that it “won’t change same-sex marriage.”

It may not even be true that same-sex marriage won’t threaten some heterosexual marriages. If we were to make same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states tomorrow (if you can imagine a different Supreme Court, you can manage this; it’s worth the effort) - the marginal added social approval is likely to lead some of the weakest opposite-sex marriages with a closeted partner to end. Not all, not many, most, and probably not a significant number. Legalizing same-sex marriage will change things - and we shouldn’t pretend othewise - in rhetorical terms, we’re placing mines that we will trip over later. But let Greta Christina make the argument (the illustrations are from her blog:

There’s a trope that I hear a lot among people who support same-sex marriage. It goes like this:

“What are these people so afraid of? How does same-sex marriage destroy marriage? How on earth could my marriage in any way affect anybody else’s?”

Or, when spoken by heterosexual supporters of same-sex marriage: “How on earth could somebody else’s marriage in any way affect mine?”

Of course I see what they’re getting at. And I certainly appreciate the sentiment and support behind the statement. But I actually think it’s somewhat simplistic, maybe even a bit naive. I think same-sex marriage does, and will, have an effect on opposite-sex marriage.

Not in an immediate cause-and-effect way, of course. When Adam and Stephen get married in Massachusetts, it doesn’t send out magical death-rays across the country to destroy the marriage of Alan and Evelyn in Kansas.

But I think it has an effect. Not a trivial one, either. And I think the movement to legalize same-sex marriage does itself a disservice by acting like it doesn’t.

Here’s why.

In order for our society to accept or even tolerate same-sex marriage, a lot of fairly basic, deep-rooted ideas have to change. The way we define family. The way we think of what it means to be a man, and what it means to be a woman. The importance of sex and sexual fulfillment. What we consider natural and normal. Etc., etc., etc.

All of these things shape our practice of marriage, our understanding of what it is and what it’s for. And in order for us to accept or even tolerate same-sex marriage, all of them will need to change.

Thus changing the shape of marriage.

All marriage.

Including the opposite-sex ones.

If for no other reason, the standard default answers to these questions will quit being standard and default. If these changes happen, people will still be free to define family, maleness, femaleness, etc., in the old traditional ways. But they’ll be forced to think about it, to see the traditional way as just one choice among many, to live that way because it works for them… instead of unthinkingly falling into it as the one right choice that works for everybody. What’s more, they’ll be forced to see all these different questions and choices as, well, different questions and choices, instead of a package deal.

And that’s a big-ass change.

Of course, while the fight for same-sex marriage is a catalyst for some of these changes, it’s hardly the only one. Lots of these changes were already happening, even before same-sex marriage got put on the table. In fact, same-sex marriage couldn’t have gotten on the table in the first place if these changes hadn’t already been happening. But it is a catalyst for change, and I don’t want to ignore that or pretend it isn’t true.

What I don’t understand is why that’s a bad thing.

Opponents of same-sex marriage talk about marriage as if it’s been an unchanging institution for thousands of years, one that can’t be altered even a little without risking its destruction. But this is clearly absurd. Marriage has been many different things in human history — radically different things. A property transfer from father to husband. A political and military alliance between nations. A means of producing and caring for children. A means of preserving a religion or race (think of the intense resistance throughout history to both interracial and interfaith marriage). A practical arrangement for keeping a family farm or business. A romantic love match that’s meant to last until death. A spiritual bond that’s meant to last for eternity. And more. And any combination of any of these.

And marriage has taken many forms in its checkered history. From the hundreds of wives of Solomon and others, to the passing down of a wife from brother to brother (also described in the Bible), to a permanent inescapable contract with mistresses and lovers on the side, to the serial monogamy-in-theory that seems to be the contemporary model… the literal, practical shape of marriage has taken wildly different forms over the centuries, and will no doubt continue to take more.

So the fact that the institution of marriage is changing… that’s hardly devastating news. People resisted the legalization of interracial marriage with every bit as much fervor as they resist same-sex marriage now, and for many of the same reasons… and yet the institution of marriage has absorbed that change quite handily, and has soldiered on. The institution is changing, it has always been changing, and it will almost certainly continue to change.

And again I ask: Why is this a bad thing?

And why are these particular changes, the ones that same-sex marriage is both the cause and result of… why are they so much to be feared?

Our definition of family should be broadened. The way we think of maleness and femaleness should be more flexible. Sex should be acknowledged as a central part of human life, and as a basic human right. What we consider to be natural should be more in keeping with the actual reality of nature. And we should be questioning, not only what is and isn’t normal, but whether normality is even a quality we should be prizing.

Not just so we can get to a place where we can accept same-sex marriage… but so we can help make opposite-sex marriage, and all relationships, and life in general for everybody, happier and more fulfilling.

Here’s the piece in Greta Christina’s blog.

This is the first we’ve come across Greta Christina, which happened because we followed a link on Ms. Breslin’s blog.

This seems a good opportunity to plug the Alternatives to Marriage Project (ATMP), whose website can be found at unmarried.org - ATMP fights the good fight not only for same-sex marriage, but against discrimination against people who, by dint of circumstance or choice, are not married. Same sex, opposite sex, rich, and poor. Things like zoning bans on people living in sin living in entire neighorhoods, or ever adopting a child. Or making end-of-life decisions. And there’s a host of reasons: sometimes a divorce in a prior relationship will deprive - as part of a settlement - terminate health insurance; in some cases - particularly with ultra-Orthodox Jews - men, to be spiteful or as a bargaining tactic - decline to provide a get - the religious document which makes a divorce “kosher” and allows remarriage.

As with so many things American, bad things roll down the social ladder - there’s a positive correlation between lack of money and suffering - and that’s certainly true with marriage/non-marriage issues. The United States’ brief flirtation in the 1970’s with free legal services (other than criminal defense) for the poor ended badly. So access to the courts is one the permutations of this problem.

If you’d like a bit of data that fleshes out some of the problems families have in an authoritative way, check out the work of Elizabeth Warren, the Leo Gottlieb Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. In particular, check out The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Mothers and Fathers Are Going Broke. If you’d like to read more of Professor Warren’s work, we’ve put a selected bibliography here.

Dickens, Nicholas Nickleby: ((Page citation missing; we ask our readers to indulge us for the moment.))

They came to see that family need not be defined merely as those with whom they share blood but for those for whom they would give their blood.

When Robert Frost wrote, “Home is the place where, when you have to go there,
They have to take you in,” ((“The Death of the Hired Man,” lines 118–19, The Poetry of Robert Frost, ed. Edward C. Lathem, p. 38 (1967).)), he was working from too small a dataset. The families that are made up of those of us who’ve had to make them ourselves - we deserve at least as much respect as people who win the family lottery at birth.

2 CommentsContinue Reading

From Rominita on FlickR

Oct 21 at 7:07pm by wilkins

From Rominita on Flickr.com:

No CommentsContinue Reading

Porn business model threatened? - OR - Sex, drugs, cops, outlaws, and spies - what they have in common

Oct 21 at 8:08am by wilkins

Reverse Cowgirl - the ever-perceptive Ms. Breslin - has posted about a Claire Hoffman piece in Conde Nast’s Portfolio.com which notes precipitous declines in revenue at commercial porn sites, occasioned by the emergency of three free-download sites, in the nature of YouTube: Megarotic, YouPorn, and Pornotube.

Link to Claire Hoffman’s piece on Portfolio.com.

WNYC’s On The Media - ran an excellent piece in 2002 interview with Jonathan Coopersmith, Douglas Rushkoff, and others making the case that pornography is often the driver of new communications technologies.

For my part, I’d put porn on a plane with two other markets which have different, but no less intense, needs for innovative advantage: illicit markets, and military/law enforcement uses. More my area of knowledge - I can easily name examples:

• As soon as there were phones, organized crime (bootleggers, gamblers) used hijacked phone lines - called “cheeseboxes” in New York - so that when authorities followed a phone line to an address - they’d find an empty apartment - with a wired connection to another phone line - sometimes appearing in another apartment or nearby building - which redirected the calls. They could shut the line down, of course - but by the time the connnections got sorted out - targets and evidence had been moved away.An NYPD source has provided me with an explanation of “Cheesebox” as the name - one of the early such setups was hidden in a closet - the wiring then hidden in what had been a shipping crate for cheese.
• The first mobile telephone I ever saw or used was in law enforcement. (The person I had personal knowledge of using a car-based “radio telephone”was a United States Attorney General; this may be public record now, but not when I came by the information, so we’ll hold the name for the moment, it not being necessary to make the point);
• Let’s not forget what immediate use urban illicit drug-selling organizations made of pagers and then mobile phones;
• The first reported use (that I’m aware of) of a “silent,” vibrating pager was by Richard Helms, then DCI, who was reported in the early 1970’s as been “paged” at dinner parties by the then state-of-the-art “beeper.”
• The FBI was using portable audio recorder hard drives before anyone thought to add “i” to “pod.” Well before.

Sex, drugs, and espionage in the same piece. We’ll try to keep connecting these things as often as possible.

I’m not sure, though - about the extinction of porn as a business - perhaps this is a just a lull before some newer, better porn medium - with some sort of DRM - makes people willing to pay more for better.

No CommentsContinue Reading

Beta-test - WP-Offline 0.02

Oct 21 at 7:07am by wilkins

Mike Malone has released a beta version of WP-Offline, a WordPress plugin which will let users of Google Gears reads blogs offline.

It requires Google Gears . Malone plans to update this so readers can read blogs offline, post comments, and then upload and synch comments later.

Here’s Malone’s main site, which is likely to be of interested to sophisticated WordPress and other developers. He’s also, with his brother Ted Malone, developing the oenophile site Vino2Vino.

3 CommentsContinue Reading