Let's talk about sex - The body part paradox

I realized something, and I wanted to share some thoughts about it.
In the past, I was often criticized by people I had sex with that apparently, I didn't do enough with my hands/arms. To this day, this is mainly down to the awkwardness of not knowing what to do with them.

Bear in mind that so far, my sexual history is exclusively people with a penis. I do know what do to with my hands when I have access to a dick but when I don't (e.g. during penetration), my arms become just two very useless limbs, at best holding my partner, at worst lying next to me. Caressing my partner during sex is a thing I have to focus on, and we all know how hard that can be when you are having good sex. But after receiving that criticism several times, I started thinking: Why don't I know what to do with my hands? Why is that so hard?

I have a theory.
Let's have a good hard look at how we view different bodies in sexual contexts in the media. Bodies that are read as female, according to the portrayal, have a lot of parts to offer that are very sexy - boobs, a nice ass, legs, all of those are viewed as hot and portrayed as hot. The actual genitals are usually less talked about - at most, we see a vulva in media when it is currently penetrated. The visibility of vulvas is a very new concept, and people still have to discuss a lot as soon as they include vulvas in art. Now shift that look towards people read as male. The focus for body parts that are supposed to arouse us is usually on the penis. Then maybe occasionally, you get an ass or some abs.

And here is where the problem starts - the male read bodies that are portrayed as sexy in media are usually very well-trained, there are butts made of steel, overly defined eight packs etc. I don't want to tell anyone they can't be attracted to that, you are all valid, but lets be real: Those bodies are hard to find in real life because they are hard to get, hard to maintain and if you also want to click with someone on a personal basis as well, that reduces the pool of people even more. Thus, when we are sleeping with bodies read as male when they don't have the unlikely set of muscles, we might not really know where to put our hands.

Another thing where this is very visible is the topic of nudes by the way - when a female-presenting person wants to take nudes or have them taken, the focus is mostly on the chest (especially when you are actually modeling for nude art), having photos of a vulva is rare and also viewed as the lewdest option - its more likely that your crotch is hidden in pictures. For male-presenting people who are not as jacked as the image media provides, there are hardly any ways to have photos without a penis considered to be nude art.

Its the complete opposite of how different bodies are viewed in non-sexual contexts by the way, because when it comes to fashion, for example, you can't seem to do it right as a female-presenting person, and it seems to be easier for male presenting folks to find something nice that actually fits their body shape no matter what it is.

So what do we take from this? Glorify other body parts than genitals for male-presenting people. Gush the shit out of them. Gush the shit out of bodies that are not super-muscular, not super slim, that in any way don't fit into the very narrow image of an ideal male-presenting body. Especially for your partners - make the beauty you see in them and the things you think are very sexy about them visible (with their consent only, obviously). Do the same for all the unusual/underrepresented body parts of your female-presenting partners, crushes, friends. We can only win here.

"Nicotine" by Nell Zink - Review

First of all, I want to say that "Nicotine" was not an easy read. It took me about 10 weeks to finish it. To be completely honest with you, I still don't know what exactly to think of it, because it was very strange. It was not exactly good in a classic sense, not the kind of book you just want to celebrate, but that doesn't mean it was bad either. Not at all! But I'm getting ahead of myself, let's try to give you a summary of what it is about first.

Penny Bakers life has never been normal or ordinary: Her father, a cult leader of sorts, married her mother, who's younger than his oldest son, after originally adopting her (yes, that does have a very Woody Allen vibe to it, you are not the only one thinking that). Penny used to rebell against her family by being the more conventional one until her father dies and with him the rental contract for the flat she lives in. Since she is unemployed this makes her face the problem of eventually becoming homeless as well. When she visits her grandparents house that is supposed to be a ruin and finds it alive and well and occupied by a jolly group of passionate smokers (who gave it the name "Nicotine") and falls in love with Rob, a self-proclaimed asexual bike repairman, she decides to not tell him and the others that this house belongs to her family and instead dives into the squatters culture and anarchist life style. All would be well if it wasn't for Pennys oldest brother Matt, who inherited the house from his father and wants to claim it - and also falls in love with Jazz, another occupant of the Nicotine, leading to a very unhealthy obsession with her.

I think its safe to say that "Nicotine" is a very unconventional book. To be honest it wasn't easy to narrow down the plot to the summary above because it has a lot going on given that it only has 336 pages. As someone who has experienced squatters and anarchist circles, I did recognize a few things as very familiar, other things seemed very odd or even wrong to me, but who am I to judge if that isn't exactly how people are like in the United States? If there aren't mostly occupied houses where all people occupying it are activists for the same cause (for example "smokers rights", or climate activists etc.)?

A thing I kinda liked was the uninhibited portrayal of sexuality and especially female sexuality, desire and pleasure (since that is still very thinly spread). However, it often gave me a somewhat voyeuristic feeling, the feeling of the reader being intrusive. It made me uncomfortable, and I guess that is the point. Not porn or overly romaticising, but absolute intimacy including things that only work in said intimacy between everyone involved, which makes the portrayal of sex in this book feel very natural, real and true.

On the other hand, we have the portrayal of sexual orientations which rubbed me the wrong way (no pun intended). As I said, Rob is asexual, but this gets questioned a lot by those wanting to sleep with him and is a huge topic throughout the book, including the narrative of people not able to have a relationship with him without sex. This is not discussed with him or realized after thinking stuff through, it is just a given and unlike Robs asexuality, it is never questioned by anyone.

SPOILER AHEAD

...of course it turns out that Rob isn't actually asexual but just insecure because he has a small dick and after realizing that no one gives a shit about dick sizes when they're in love everyone fucks happily ever after. My guys, I am mad. So much for acceptance in the portrayal of ace folks. Great. Just great.

SPOILER END

I already mentioned that another thing that rubbed me the wrong way was Pennys family in their entirety. Not because they show toxic, unhealthy family constellations (it does get a lot weirder than what I already told you) but because it is never questioned or put into perspective. It is portrayed as normal and ok and not to be viewed with concern. No one, not a single character stops to think "wait, should I really just accept this and not wonder if theres some serious manipulation playing into that old dude marrying his adopted daughter..?" That just never happens and to me does seem unrealistic and an unhealthy portrayal, especially since we're mostly dealing with leftist SJW characters here.
Overall, I think it's pretty obvious that I still don't quite know what to really think of "Nicotine". It did have it's moments and wasn't a bad read but it has a lot of problematic aspects, so I guess I wouldn't recommend to buy it, but if you can borrow it and feel up for something very weird and kinda uncomfortable, do your thing.

Yes means yes

So there's a new law being discussed in Sweden.
This new law says that not only "no" does mean "no" but that an actual "yes", actual conscious consent has to be given for sex to not be rape.
That means: Silence isn't consent, unconsciousness isn't consent, a "yes" under the influence of drugs isn't consent (and yes, that includes being drunk), a "yes" given because you were threatened if you said no is not consent and so on.
Now this law still has it's flaws: It still doesn't cover power inbalances being the reason for a spoken "yes", it is still is word against word when it comes to proving wether or not someone gave consent, but it is propably the best law victims of sexual violence can get to defend themselves and their bodily autonomy.
The reason I am writing a blog post about it is definitely not that I would have a problem with it - if anything, I am shocked again how something that should be common sense is still something Scandinavia has so much ahead of the rest of the world. Blimey, that should be the law everywhere.
No, the thing I am actually shocked of is how the press is delivering those news and how people react to them.
In German newspapers, the title often was something along the line of "in Sweden only yes means yes - ideally in a written contract". We all know that a lot of people rarely read anything more than the headline, so this is all they get from it: I now need a written contract that I may fuck this person. Thus, these news are already dangerously close to being fake news.
Now the reaction of the people doesn't exactly shock me, I have lived in this world long enough to know that people can be absolute assholes. It's just the same boring, exhausting reactions we always get as soon as we discuss sexual rights, and personally, I am really tired of discussing them over and over again with people who do not want to discuss seriously.
"Best to have a notary in the bedroom at all times"
"It takes away the spontaneity that makes sex so good"
"Sure, maybe you should ask when it's a one night stand but in a relationship or even marriage you wouldn't say no ever so why ask?"
and so on. Those are not even the most disgusting ones I read so far.
Now how am we supposed to believe that rape culture is not a thing when new consent laws like the Swedish one are treated like this? When people believe that simply asking "Are you down for sexy times?" is, well, too much to ask for? When people still think others owe them their bodies for whatever reason?
But overall, I am glad that the rape statistics in Sweden will go up. Not because there will be more rape cases, but more cases where the rapists actually will get prosecuted. Thanks, Sweden. Really hope the rest of the world will live up to you at some point.