It’s ironic and perhaps heartbreaking that the woman who helped create an industry based on love and romance never seemed to experience those things in her own life.

It was said that Miss Esther Howland, dubbed the “Mother of the American Valentine,” lived vicariously through her card empire. To this day, she is often credited as the brain child behind the production of the first elaborate, European-style, hand-assembled valentines in America.

Today’s multi-billion-dollar greeting card industry is indebted to her foresight and talent.
I had never heard about Esther Howland until recently, but her story – which I stumbled upon while surfing the internet – intrigued me and captured my imagination.

Esther was born in 1828 and grew up in Worcester, Massachusetts. In 1847, she graduated from Mount Holyoke Female Seminary (now Mount Holyoke College). She was 19. Under the tutelage of Mary Lyon, the school’s progressive founder, Esther excelled in her studies, perhaps determined to follow the advice of her teacher who told her students to “go where no one else will go, do what no one else will do.”

After graduation, Esther received an elaborate English valentine from one of her father’s business associates. Was it a declaration of his love for her? No one knows for sure. And although Esther was said to be impressed by the card, she was certain she could do better.

As the story goes, Esther convinced her father, Southworth Allen Howland, owner of a successful bookstore and stationery shop, based in Worcester, to order lace paper and other supplies from England and New York City. From these materials, she made a dozen valentine samples, which her brother, a traveling salesman for the family store, added to his book and stationery catalog for his next sales trip.

Esther was stunned when her brother returned home with more than $5,000 (the equivalent of about $150,000 in 2012) in advance sales. Bolstered by this demand, she laid out plans for production, organizing an all-female assembly line. And like that, Esther’s valentine venture, which produced beautiful cards at a wide range of prices, was born. Advertising and word-of-mouth led to a $100,000 per year business (the equivalent of millions today).

Esther’s entrepreneurial vision was considered revolutionary, not only from a feminist standpoint (at that time few women started businesses) but also from the perspective of the American valentine industry – one that had been sorely lacking in grace, elegance, and beauty.

Although much was written about Esther’s impressive business successes, other aspects of her existence were a bit hazier.

Unfortunately, my internet sleuthing left me empty-handed when it came to some of the more intimate details of Esther’s life. My imagination getting the better of me, I began to creatively fill in the blanks. What was Esther like in her personal life? How did she really feel about love and romance? Did she have many suitors? Why did she never marry? Were the lines on the inside of her cards, such as the following, inspired by a real-life romance?

Love/or Love Deal’ youth

I read it in your eyes.

Or was Esther simply more interested in the romance of business than in the business of romance? Did she ultimately sacrifice one for the other? Without knowing the real specifics of her life, other than the fact that she was confined to a wheelchair at 38 and died single and unmarried at 76, I was left to imagine the answers to these particular questions.

I envisioned a rich but lonely woman staring out a window as she formulated the poetic words to be written inside her elaborate lace creations, words that she would never fully be able to comprehend. Maybe the closest thing to Eros in her life was the fantastical world of other people’s romances. Maybe she was content surrounding herself with the idea of love and was too busy running a valentine card empire to make room for a little romance of her own. Maybe Esther made the choice of career over love. Would she have been able to succeed in her business if she had chosen to also get married, raise children, and take care of a home?

As I continued to reflect on what I knew of Esther’s life and what I imagined it to be, it dawned on me that her legacy was truly what mattered. Because of Esther and, certainly, women like her, who proved to many that a female could successfully forge paths outside of hearth and home, it became possible for future generations of women to do the same. Esther’s ambition enabled today’s woman to have more choices in life, to realize her potential, to choose her own destiny.

If Esther consciously and purposefully made this sacrifice, it turns out it was more than just a personal one; it was a sacrifice for female posterity, a sacrifice that ultimately helped other women gain the ability to, in the words of her old Mount Holyoke teacher, “go where no one else will go, do what no one else will do.”

For your sacrifice, Esther, this is my valentine to you.

Dear Neely,

Sincerely,
Lover Boy, Boston, MA

Takeaway points:

• 40 seconds: The amount of time you’ve been with someone is a factor, but try thinking less about WHEN you should say I love you and more about WHY you want to say it and you will have your answer.
• 54 seconds: There are 3 times when you shouldn’t say I love you. Tune in to hear what I have to say.
• 2:07: When you can feel really good about saying I love you.
• 2:47: A lot of times women are advised to let the man say I love you first. I explain why.
• 3:25: It should be less about gender and more about your motive for saying it.
• 3:45: The worst that can happen is that the other person doesn’t say it back but if you were saying it for the right reasons, at least you stayed true to the honest feelings you had. See this Seinfeld clip for George’s dilemma:

Submit your dating/relationship questions to neely@blastmagazine.com.

It’s ok if your Valentines this year are Ben and Jerry, but friends don’t let friends spend the night at a pity party. Instead, grab your single friends and scope out these local events for a good time–you may even find your next date!

A Very Fine Valentine: The Timberfakes at Hard Rock Café

Since Justin Timberlake still won’t make any new music despite desperate internet pleas he do so, The Timberfakes, a Boston-based Justin Timberlake tribute band, have stepped in to bring sexy back to downtown Boston. With a set list that includes material from JT’s N*SYNC days, solo career and SNL spoofs, the Timberfakes playing at the Hard Rock Café (24 Clinton St., Boston) will make you feel 15 again. Friday, Feb. 10; 8 p.m., 21+ only. Tickets are $12 in advance and $15 at the door.

Revolutionary Chocolate at the Old State House

Head down to the Old State House (206 Washington Street in downtown Boston) with your history buff friends for an after-hours demonstration of 18th century chocolate making. Enjoy sampling the aforementioned historically accurate candies, because calories consumed for educational purposes don’t count towards that New Year’s Resolution you made. Ingest some interesting tidbits about Boston’s chocolate history while being guided on a candlelit tour of the tower, and see items from the collection rarely displayed in the museum. Friday, Feb. 17; 6 p.m. Tickets $7.50.

Mortified’s Doomed Valentine’s Day Show

Remember the painfully embarrassing puppy-love-and-war things you used to angstily scribble about in that Lisa Frank journal you were convinced was as secure as Fort Knox, but really your entire family knew about the push-button release? Don’t miss this special love themed event at the Coolidge (290 Harvard St., Brookline), featuring regular men and women “sharing their most hilariously embarrassing diary entries, lyrics, poems, and artwork from their teenage years…from unrequited high-school crushes and tumultuous off-and-on romances to bad prom dates and awkward sexual firsts.” You might be single, but you’ll be thankful you don’t have to live through that again! Monday, Feb. 13, 7:30 p.m. Tickets $15 in advance, $18 at the door, students with valid ID $12. 

Valentine’s Crawl with Crawl in Boston

Crawl in Boston is a social networking group that organizes bar crawls as a way for people to meet and explore the city, and, by asking for donations from each crawler, also raises money for local charities such as Horizons for Homeless Children, or this crawl’s beneficiary, the Hattie B. Cooper Center, which provides educational services to underprivileged children and families in Roxbury.  The Valentine’s Crawl is advertised as the biggest of the year and offers $3 drink specials–not to mention Crawl in Boston also claims to be responsible for at least five weddings! Check their Facebook event page for a list of bars, more info and to RSVP. Come on, it’s for the children, right? Saturday, Feb., 11; 12:30 p.m. to 8 p.m., $5. 

Project Cupid

Project Cupid is a charity fundraiser, so you can feel good about paying for a date. Boston’s most eligible bachelors and bachelorettes, including former NESN sportscaster Heidi Watney, will strut their stuff on the auction block at The Estate (1 Boylston Place, Boston) to raise funds for the Jimmy Fund and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Winning bidders get a dinner date with their “prize” at a local restaurant. There will also be auctions and raffles for sporting events and memorabilia, hotel stays, spa services and more. Saturday, Feb., 11; 6:30 p.m. $15 suggested donation at the door, with all proceeds going to charity.

Q: I’m a 26-year-old nice guy who really wants a girlfriend. Trouble is I feel as though women today don’t want nice guys. I see some of my guy friends treat women like crap and the women keep coming back to them. Unbelievable. Do I have to become a jerk to meet someone? Seems rather depressing.

Sincerely,
Nice guy reconsidering, Boston

Takeaway points:

• 34 seconds – Stay true to who you are! You don’t want someone falling for someone you’re not.
• 44 seconds – Definition of nice. Someone who is kind and thoughtful, not a pushover.
• 57 seconds – Most women don’t respect a man who they can take advantage of
• 1:10 – SECRET most guys don’t know about nice guys: Tune in to find out what it is.
• 2:22 – Nice guys can find a balance. You can still be nice, but take charge a little bit when out there dating, so the woman isn’t always calling the shots.
• 2:40 – Observe other men who strike that balance between being nice and remaining desirable to women. Those are the men you want to emulate.

Submit your dating/relationship questions to neely@blastmagazine.com.

Hi Neely,

Sincerely,
Upset by 180, Brighton

Takeaway points:

• 40 seconds: You are not alone!
• 55 seconds: Don’t beat yourself up over this. And try your hardest not to overanalyze the situation. You may never know what happened and you will drive yourself crazy trying to figure it out.
• 1:50: Once you get back out there and start dating again, I promise you will find someone new with whom you have amazing chemistry and you will forget all about this guy.
• 2:00: When it comes to dating – ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS!

Submit your dating/relationship questions to neely@blastmagazine.com.

What is it about sweat that turns us on? (Media credit/Yay Micro)

I’ve long been fascinated by the subject of pheromones, specifically in the context of sexual attraction. For those of you not familiar with the term: A pheromone, according to Wikipedia, is “a secreted or excreted chemical factor that triggers a social response in members of the same species.” Much has been written about the role pheromones play in mating and attraction, including the infamous sweaty T-shirt study. In layman’s terms, though: Ever notice how you’re either attracted to or repulsed by a romantic interest’s natural scent? Well, there’s more to that than you may think.

I was excited to contact Eric Holzle for this article about his groundbreaking company Scientific Match (tagline: “The Science of Love”), which I discovered a few months ago but was founded in 2007. Holzle predicted his company would revolutionize the dating services industry by matching people based on non-matching DNA samples taken from their cheeks. He claimed that well-matched couples would enjoy each others’ natural scents, have more fun in bed, and bear healthier children than those who are genetically similar. Maybe so, but the company’s mating strategy never seemed to gain mainstream traction, its premise titillating but perhaps too far-fetched and impersonal for the romantically inclined (not to mention the service was probably pricey). I agree about the unromantic idea of it all – who wants to be matched with cells from a cheek swab? – but still remain fascinated by the role pheromones play in helping us, consciously and unconsciously, to select a suitable genetic match and curious about other, less clinical ways to harness the power of pheromones. (As an aside: If you really want your mind blown, consider the research that has found the birth control pill may be responsible for reversing a women’s natural sense of smell: That is, women on the Pill like more the smells (i.e. pheromones) that remind them of home and kin and thus are attracted to men with whom they’re genetically incompatible.)

Sadly, though, as I began to write this piece, I discovered Holzle had recently passed away. Shortly after my discovery, serendipitously perhaps, along came a representative from Love Scent who wrote to me via Twitter about the company. Here’s the even funnier part: More than two years ago, I had written about Love Scent on my old blog, in an entry entitled “The Nose Knows.” Essentially, the company’s concept is to sell sex pheromones in a bottle to help men and women attract that special someone. I don’t understand the science of it all but human pheromones can, apparently, be recreated in a laboratory. Love Scent then bottles those synthetically-created pheromones and sells them to the masses at various prices, depending on which product is desired.

There are several other companies that sell pheromones for the purpose of attracting mates, but Love Scent seems to be leading the pack. I don’t doubt their authenticity, so I asked them to send me some samples. A couple weeks later, I received several products, including The Edge towelettes (for women and men), Perception, Scent of Eros Unscented (unisex), Scent of Eros (for her), Chikara, Alter Ego (for him), and The Edge (for him). As the instructional sheet explained, their products range from pheromone colognes and scented concentrates to additive formulas and essential oils. They also sell unrated pheromone colognes – pheromone-containing colognes on which they have no clear data. Their “Fab Four” kit is only for seasoned “phero-gurus” – in other words, “if you have to ask, it’s not for you.”

It would have been nice to experiment with the samples during my single days (the product seems to be best suited for singles, anyway), but I figured I could wear one of them around my boyfriend to see if it was particularly … ahem, arousing. According to the Psychology Today article linked above, “since it’s known that women can detect genetic compatibility by smell – it’s not that men can’t but that so far no one knows – the onus is on females to sniff out a suitable squire,” but because Love Scent markets their products to both men and women, I enlisted the help of one my boyfriend’s male friends who was coming to town with his girlfriend. We asked Joe to smear on some of The Edge (for him) without his gal’s knowledge before going out to the bars.

After he applied the moist towelette, my apartment, quite frankly, smelled like a gigolo, or at least how I imagine a gigolo would smell. Unfortunately, Joe never had a chance to read the instructions: “Watch out for over-application,” which is especially true for The Edge because it is highly concentrated. Don’t get me wrong: It smelled good, but it was so overpowering that it practically consumed the place. Eventually, Joe confessed to his girlfriend, but I’m not sure it would have made any difference if she hadn’t known. I also used one of the samples – Scent of Eros – dabbing it on my various pulse points as instructed. Love Scent says that women have reported additional success when applying to ankles and thighs, but I stuck to wrists and behind the ears. It smelled lovely, like any number of musky perfumes I might buy at a department store, but again there’s no way to know if our significant others were friskier than usual because of the pheromones. Plus, both Joe and I are in fairly new relationships in which we can’t keep our hands off our significant others, anyway. I didn’t expect my boyfriend to attack me like a ravenous lion looking for prey, but I did wonder if I’d be able to detect more subtle behavior changes that would indicate the product was working its magic. I can’t say that I witnessed anything different in him.

Perhaps these products would be good for people in, say, stale relationships, so as to rev up a decaying sex life; in a fairly new relationship if you’re sex life has already decayed, well, then you may have more problems than a topical product (that Richard Gere in American Gigolo might wear) could ever solve. Although, a testimonial from “Julia” on Love Scent’s site makes it seem that their products have the power to unite couples in trouble: “My boyfriend had decided that he wanted to break up. We agreed to go to lunch on his birthday. I wore some of your magic oil and he went crazy…..We are back together. I also put some on a handkerchief and then under the seat of his car…..He keeps commenting on how his car smells like me.” I’m not sure how much stock to put on testimonials but Love Scent’s site does have a ton of them.

It should also be mentioned that Love Scent pheromones may be worth a try if only for the placebo effect. It’s long been documented that the placebo effect has enormous impact on people’s ability to heal. The Wall Street Journal recently wrote a piece about this effect entitled Why Placebos Work Wonders. If someone applies one of Love Scent’s products with the idea in mind that they have a secret, extra edge, they may exude more confidence because they believe themselves to now be more attractive to potential mates. Dating and attraction is often about confidence – it’s all in the head (no, not that head), as they say. So any suggestions or ideas that can inspire confidence when it comes to your dating life is a usually a good bet, unless of course, the idea is to wear a hat like this.

Another thought I had about using these kinds of pheromones is that once you run out of the product your natural scent will be exposed, and whomever you’ve managed to woo with your pre-made pheromonal concoction will now quite possibly be repulsed by you and have no idea why. Don’t worry, though, Love Scent accepts orders in bulk.

Susan Baxter, 32, founded Hire a Boston Wingwoman in 2010.

Susan Baxter, 32, has the solution for single Boston guys looking for love: Wingwomen. Sure, you’ve got your Bud Light-guzzling, cleavage-ogling, popped collar-wearing wingman already, but isn’t the same old “you distract the less attractive friend while I talk to the hot one” routine getting a little stale? Baxter’s wingwomen get straight to the point with confidence, class, and a well-worth-it fee: the girl you’re going after.

For clients of Baxter’s company, Hire a Boston Wingwoman, it works like this: You and a wingwoman go to a bar or a lounge, or wherever you want to go to meet chicks. You scan the room, zoom in on your potential love interest, and your wingwoman goes in for the kill. It might begin with a compliment (“I love those shoes!”) or a question (“What’s your favorite drink here?”). Then, she might say something like, “This is my friend Joe; we’re looking for a bar to go after this. Do you know of anywhere good?”

“She kind of hangs around in the background once the introduction is made,” says Baxter. “If it doesn’t work out, then the client tries another woman. And if it doesn’t seem like the woman is interested, the wingwoman can pretend to be the client’s girlfriend.”

Wingwomen are better sidekicks than wingmen, Baxter says, because “Women tend to have their guards up when they go out; maybe it’s a girl’s night and they are just out for some cocktails with their friends and aren’t looking to talk to guys. Women feel less intruded upon if a woman comes up to them. They have their guards up when a man goes up and says, ‘Hey, I’m Joe, how are you ladies this evening?’ It’s old, and it’s lame, and she’s like, ‘Oh, here we go again.’”

Even better, adds Baxter, “It’s a boost of confidence to walk in to a place with a beautiful woman by your side. Girls like competition, so if they see you with an attractive woman, they’ll think you’ve got something to offer.”

So what makes a successful wingwoman? Generally, says Baxter, they are outgoing, and unafraid to approach and strike up conversation with that intimidating, hot girl you’ve got your eye on.

“You’ve gotta play the part,” she says. “You can’t go to that trendy, upscale bar if you look like you just got out of a Red Sox game; it’s gotta be realistic. But each wingwoman has a different personality. Some are bubbly and are good for clubs, and some are more intelligent and would be good for a social networking-type party. They’re attractive, outgoing, social, and willing to go up to a woman and say, ‘Hey, where’d you get your hair done? I’m looking for a new salon in the area.’”

Baxter, who has a master’s degree in applied sociology from the University of Massachusetts, started her business in September of 2010 with the knowledge that “a lot of people are shy and are intimidated to go up to people at a bar,” she says. “People tend to just stand there at the end of the bar and wait to be approached.” Plus, she was already being a wingwoman for her guy (and girl) friends, so why not make it a business?

“My ‘aha’ moment was when I was watching an episode of the ‘Tyra Banks Show,’ and a woman was on there who was a wingwoman for her friends,” says Baxter. “And I was like, ‘Wait, that’s what I do!’ The idea had spread to New York City and to Las Vegas, and I thought, why not Boston?”

Now, Hire a Boston Wingwoman employs nearly 40 wingwomen (and counting–she’s hiring!) in their 20s, 30s and 40s. The business works with about 10 clients a weekend, with many repeat clients. Fall is the busiest time of year for the company, which Baxter attributes to several factors: “In the fall, people are coming back from their vacation or their summer fling, and are looking for something more serious. The holidays are coming and they don’t want to be alone; it’s time to settle down. Plus, fall weather is cozy.”

Hiring a wingwoman costs $65 an hour, with a two hour minimum, and is $30 for every half-hour thereafter. Several testimonials on the company’s website attest that it’s worth the price: “My wingwoman focused on making connections and harnessing intuition,” says client Scott Alden. ”The method was to hang out with her, be myself and seize the moment when it was right. Women who saw that I was with her felt more comfortable around me, and I didn’t have to work as hard. I felt comfortable, too.” Michael, a client from Cambridge, writes, “I felt really comfortable after meeting the wingwoman, who introduced me to a couple of very attractive ladies.  I have already re-hired her because she was great company and made me very confident.”

There’s no guarantee that a wingwoman will help you find your future wife, of course, but who can argue with at least giving it a try? Besides, you get to be seen with a hot, confident woman by your side instead of your cologne-drenched, awkward-pick-up-line-using best friend.

Hi Neely,

Thanks for your advice!
Confused, Philadelphia, PA

Takeaway points

• 1:20 – Listen to what a man is saying. Is he telling you he doesn’t want to be in a relationship but you’re choosing not hear him? You won’t change his mind no matter what you do.
• 3:17 – A man may like you and like spending time with you but not want to be in a relationship with you. If he doesn’t give you what you want and need, walk away, because you DESERVE TO BE LOVED!
• 3:48 – Don’t be afraid of being lonely. It’s okay to feel lonely.
• 4:20 – Men are in go-mode when they want to be in a relationship. They don’t give a woman scraps. They only give scraps to a woman who will let them get away with that.
• 4:45 – You can’t control how another person is going to feel.
• 5:56 – Just because you have chemistry with someone doesn’t mean you’re supposed to be together.
• 6:10 – The sooner you stop pouring energy into someone who isn’t meeting your needs, the sooner you can devote your energy to finding someone great and who wants to be with you.
• 6:54 – When you have a real physical and emotional involvement with someone, it can be difficult to give other people a chance.

Submit your dating/relationship questions to neely@blastmagazine.com

Hi Neely,

Thanks for your advice!
Tired of Text Messaging, Boston, MA

Send your dating/relationship questions to: neely@blastmagazine.com.

For some reason, Dale Ballard never clicked romantically with American women. He wasn’t well versed in Game or the timeless art of seduction – unlike these Casanovas, who have built careers out of charming the fairer sex — a skill which would have helped him make better connections, but he shunned these sorts of tactics anyway. He disliked playing games or using any kind of manipulation strategies with women. He just wanted to be himself, and for American women that didn’t seem to be good enough. Luckily for the 32-year-old from Phoenix, Arizona, he seemed to have better luck with ladies from other countries (in particular, Bosnia, Estonia, and Sweden).

When asked via our phone conversation the other week why he connected better with foreign women, he parried the question a bit, trying to appear diplomatic, perhaps betraying his real feelings about American women. But he was sure of one thing and was willing to state it on the record: Foreign women don’t play games the way American women do.

In 2008, in his search for love, Ballard joined the typical dating Web sites — Match, eHarmony, OKCupid — but was disappointed when he couldn’t find foreign women in his area. Moreover, “when you type ‘foreign women’ into Google, all you come up with is ‘mail-order brides,’” he said with a laugh. Frustrated by his experience and recognizing a need, the young entrepreneur started mulling over the idea of launching his own dating Web site to accomplish what he wasn’t able to do via the traditional sites: find foreign women locally. There’s gotta be other people that feel like me, he told himself. 

Two years went by, his idea still simmering inside his head, like a slow-cooking stew. He hadn’t taken any action but was inspired by 2010’s The Social Network to turn up the heat. Shortly thereafter, DatingMashup.com was born. With his parents’ help – their expertise in marketing, research, and information technology was crucial — Ballard was off and running.

“If you could date anyone other than an American, who would it be?” he asked me during our chat. I didn’t have an answer, but Ballard reflexively answered his own question:  ”Seventy to eighty percent of the people I’ve surveyed knew immediately. They just don’t have the resources to act on their preferences.” Ballard also added that DatingMashup.com is a great site for foreign people who move to the U.S. and are looking to find others with similar backgrounds, even if it’s for platonic purposes. Currently, the site is free, making money through advertising, but it will eventually sell e-books full of dating tips and strategies for both men and women. Since the site officially launched, in March of 2011, it has been growing steadily and continues to expand its roster of countries — currently, there are members from the U.S., Korea, China, Canada, Spain, Mexico, Indonesia, the U.K. and Japan.

So if you’re in the market for some global lovin’ or you’re an expat looking to find someone of a similar background, check out DatingMashup.com.

Special deal for Blast readers only: Don’t forget to take advantage of their 25/25 program – the first 25 people who register get a $25 gift card to over 18,000 restaurants nationwide.  Just be sure to select “Blast Magazine” when prompted by the drop-down menu to explain how you heard about the site.

Happy hunting!

An email from a New York City-based investment banker admonishing a woman who never responded to his inquiry for a second date went viral last week. Facebook posts and Tweets abounded. People couldn’t fathom how one person could take so much time and expend so much energy to email a woman who simply never returned his call or text messages. A normal human being would have taken approximately 30 minutes of feeling rejected, chalked it up to experience, and moved on. But Mr. Banker guy (who might have already moved to Mexico to avoid public ridicule) couldn’t seem to let it go.

The kerfuffle over the letter was reminiscent of a similar situation another woman found herself in about a year ago.

Last March, she had a rather bizarre experience on Match.com and emailed a group of her female friends the following:

“This is one of the craziest guys I have ever met (don’t worry – didn’t meet him in person); I looked him up yesterday b/c he sent my friend a nasty ranting email when she suggested they meet for drinks instead of a phone call. He was like, you’re not good looking, i don’t like to waste gas money, etc.

So then he starting IMing me last night. I kept it going at first just to see what he would do. He was crass, full of himself and NOT funny (your joke that there are 30,000 battered women out there and all you get is a plain one is not funny – even if you put LOL after it).

So i eventually called him a douche and logged off.”

The next day, this woman woke up to the below 1,700-word rant. We’d say the letter is nuttier than the I-bankers rebuke. What say you? Also, if anyone can understand what the hell this guy is talking about, we’d love to hear from you in the comments section.

The thing your young female brain forgot… is that maybe I wasn’t interested in you to begin with. Maybe it was all in jest and for another purpose. That is actually the case. You also need to keep your youthful ego and mouth in check when talking to people much older. We’ve already been your age, when you thought you knew it all, only to realize you don’t know much at all. I don’t even think I find many people under the age of 40 very interesting, worldly , sexy or interesting at all. Celebrity or not.

So of course I know my IQ, and that i”m the CEO of my own business and that I hire people like you to be a tool for me. If you’re polite and respectful that will win you points. When you start talking all gibberish like you’re the center of the galaxy thats when it starts getting downright funny. I would say you should check your knickers there kid. Young girls your ag e are so duped and foolish that you have almost zero clue that the world has existed long before you got into your diapers. The world isn’t clearing some huge path for your egocentric goddess worship.. what your’e really doing is helping my industry (pharmaceutical) to get fat and wealthy off your neurotic gender gone off its rocker.. the largest consumer of antidepressants, and Schedule II drugs, schizoid, etc… females. But a major lanslide…

You may think you’re pretty smart. I say give it a few more years. Thats when you will realize you dug your own ditch so high you can’t get out. There will be no hands left to pull you out either. I can tell just by the way you literally think you’re childish opinion carries weight with a worldly guy who commands respect, is alpha male and laughs at the very idea you think you’re making a dent at all here when you go off with silly remarks (little more than conjencture form a fickle youthful female) that you’re way off kilter already.. . charting a course into the depths of utter futility and confusion in the future, because you’re lost already.

there is a reason I IM”d you. It wasn’t to flirt or to find you interesting. You’re a statistic in truth. You make yourself that way by virtue of what you’ve chosen to do with your time. Confirmed.

You don’t know anything about Maine. You just think you know something because you were there briefly. I know exactly where you were.. and just laughed to myself. Why are you so clueless ? Do you think maybe sometimes you’re being a bit toyed with by men and you’re totally unaware of it ? I think so.

I IM’d you because I was 100% sure that your headline was indicative of your lack of couth and manners. Within a few keystrokes it was obvious. Just a confirmation check. Just out of curiousity my dear. I’m not attracted to you physically. I don’t think you’re someone who would raise my interest level . I’m guessing you’ re pretty dull, boring and well just a kid. So it was interesting. Especially your smart alecky ways forgetting how young you are in the eyes of a more mature adult. Yes of course one has to “play along” with you. You forget its impossible for you to zip forward and gain the years of wisdom, so you can’t have a clue how you appear. Kinda silly. Especially with your boastings. At least have some years of experience as a good wife and mother before you start talking about having acheived a thing. You haven’t. Right now you’re a walking talking statistic. A Rockefeller wildchild..creation right out of the mind of Rupert Murdoch. LOL

Good luck on match. Next time I think it would be wise for you to know when to digress, when you’re outclassed, and outwitted, instead of fighting and sounding stupid like a teenage girl ranting silly insults. Come on. Go to your room !

Silly. All the college degrees in the world are not going to save the massive feminist implosion th at is now pending on the horizon. The bottom dropped out of it long ago. Empty wombs, early tombs. Thats the result. Men got wise. They aren’t going to deal with you are marry you. You’re on your own when you choose that path. Word to the wise, get used to being old gray and lonely now. That is where you’re headed. Men are not interested in a competitor favored by law, as set up by Masons, SkullnBones and their int’l banking brothers, in order to usurp humanity, and dominate every sphere of the human race. Women will not have control over their own ovaries very soon. They’re already pupetted and poisoned physically and mentally and don’t even know it. They can’t procreate and if they want to, they’re discouraged from it. A massive backlash against feminism is creating a deluge of over 40 single never married no children TE’s….

A TE is what they call the ‘goyim’. You’ll have to spend about 15 years to figure it out, reading and researching. So I’ll save u the time. “Temporary Entity”. Thats right. Thats why you are fooled and duped into what you’ve fast tracked yourself to become. Extinguished. Gone. No offspring. Population reduced. Already the birth rate is below the replacement rate and dropping fast. Some really mean spirited nasty white men from another part of the planet planned this out a long time ago. They owned all the banks. They owned all the industry. They financed all the wars and revolutions. They owned the educational system and the lawmaking bodies of most countries. The one thing they wanted to own was your womb. They got control over that thru little pills when they financed the research, and then carried it even further by financing the education of women thru books, movies, tv, secondary education. The funniest and saddest part is that women everywhere actually BELIEVE that something magical and happy is happening. In fact its quite sinister, and plays on the naivety of the female brain. As a biochemist with a 15 yr. career in industry I can say that its scientific fact the female has a smaller brain, a lower IQ in general and is very gullible, and more easily ‘trained’ , has a lower pain threshold (although lied to and told not true), and will go along in groups easily persuaded than male counterparts. Just look at Oprah. Her rise to fame isn’t accidental. Was financed. There is a reason for it. Bernie Madoff only went to jail because he stole his brotherhood’s money too. Otherwise he would have been in the clear.

If ever you want to make some sense and come into full awareness, of the world, and really gain some maturity…learn to understand the history of money, the financial history of Europe, the Masons, Templars and the Rotshchild banking system. Read Creature from Jekyll Island and the History of Money. Research the battle between the central bankers and Lincoln, Jefferson, Andrew Jackson (who abolished it in Philadelphia ), and Teddy Roosevelts battle against John D Rockefeller that l ed to anti trust laws. The Rockefeller and Ford Foundation fund feminism directly. thru ‘womens studies’ programs. They funded ‘eugenics’ and the foundation of Cold Spring Harbor Labs where Dr. Watson discovered DNA. Dr. Watson was sitting in MY office 9 years ago at (Name removed) when I was the head of (name removed) there, invited as a keynote speaker. They were not after DNA research for no particular reason..they were searching for the ‘fountain of youth’ and to control the destiny of mankind. Eugenics. Its now called “genetics”. Almost everything around you is not what you think it is. We live in a false environoment, glued together by a belief system that the bottom floor of this massive construction is secure… when its not, it never was, its always been a house of cards, stacked so high few ever dared to delve into the ground floor. The monetary system is a scam. All of humanity is literally a mind-slave indentured servant working for an elite that keeps itself in the shadows and has only its puppet figureheads in the limelight. They own your mind. They train it from the time you’re young. From TV and school systems. You’re too young to remember a time when there was little to know feminism on TV anywhere. IT was peaceful. There was alot less chaos, except for the end of the Vietnam conflict.

Next time you think you’re so smart..check yourself again. You’re living in a delusion, but you don’t know that at all. You’re actually living in the rubber room, comfy and cozy not allowed to question why you’re there and why you’re so happy to be there. You don’t realize at all that this house of cards is being stacked against you, and especially your gender. But if you opened your eyes up and saw who the man behind the curtain really is.. you would be aghast. And for the millions of single women on this site you would feel horror. Mind control is just as powerful as any standing army. When you can teach and train an entire class of population, by manipulating one gender to render itself impotent by teaching her how to behave unnaturally.. you have accomplished something tanks, planes and bombs can never do without collateral damage. Believe that in this century… the warzone is actually inside your head and they work overtime to own the gray matter you think you own by systematically programming it from dawn to dusk.

Good luck smarty pants. One day you’ll be wise. Today is not that day.

*Spelling errors not corrected

Sometimes people use New Year’s Eve as a barometer to measure how well their life is going: Big plans equals a big life. Over-bloated expectations can make this a tough holiday, especially when you’re single. It is impossible to escape the questions that highlight great expectations others have for your “big night.” And on top of it all, if you’re single there’s the dreaded tradition of someone to kiss at midnight.

There are two typical ways single gals may deal with the New Year’s Eve pressure-cooker: avoiding it or faking it. But there’s no reason to crawl under the covers or to slap on a make-believe happy face and stay out until all hours. Here are my top tips for single women looking to genuinely enjoy New Year’s Eve, either with your single friends or on your own.

If you have some other single gal-pals this is a great opportunity to spend some time with them. Use New Year’s as an excuse to capitalize on the importance of strong female friendships and to celebrate the women in your life.

Have a girlfriend get-together at your place.

If you’re with your friends I recommend avoiding the bar or club scene. It’s a high-pressure night and you’re likely to feel like it’s all about forced-fun, flirting with anyone around, and potentially hooking-up with someone you would avoid on a “normal” day. Instead, grab your girlfriends and stay in.

  Host a finger food party.

Have each guest bring an appetizer and a bite-size dessert. These fun foods can be passed around all night or set up on a buffet. You can munch throughout the evening as you talk, drink and laugh. This will be less work than serving a traditional dinner and a lot more fun.

  Have a classic movie marathon.

Pick up a set of classic mysteries (like Hitchcock) or have a horror film festival. Avoid anything sappy, like dramas and romantic comedies. Pop a few batches of popcorn (you can add fun flavors to them to make it more festive) and ask each of your friends to bring a bag of their favorite fun-size candies/chocolates. Create a little movie buffet, sit down and have some fun. Incidentally, this movie night can just as easily be adapted for one. Don’t skimp on yourself—do up the popcorn and candy and see some of the movies that have always been on your “list.”

  Make your own spa night.

Stop at your local beauty supply store and splurge on some relaxing spa treatments: bubble bath, a body exfoliator, a face mask and some luxurious lotion. Follow-up with a do-it-yourself manicure and pedicure in a cheerful color that embraces the day.

Don’t forget, in life you need to take care of yourself first so kick off the New Year celebrating the most important person in your life – YOU – and get ready for your best year yet!

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/love-and-romance/the-single-girls-guide-to-new-years-eve/feed/ 1 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/for-richer-or-poorer%e2%80%a6till%e2%80%99-our-marriage-expires/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/for-richer-or-poorer%e2%80%a6till%e2%80%99-our-marriage-expires/#comments Mon, 12 Dec 2011 03:01:31 +0000 Blast Magazine Newsroom http://blastmagazine.com/?p=69677

By Elizabeth Race-Moore at Emmanuel College

For many young people the idea of marriage may seem outdated and old fashioned. Perhaps it’s the “till’ death do us part” line that sends 20-something’s running. But lawmakers are now looking to make the enslavement of marriage a little less scary, and a little easier to get out of.

The idea is to create a contract between married couples that would require a marriage renewal after 10 years of marriage. After that time, couples would either agree to extend their marriage or have it dissolved. Couples wishing to get married already have to fill out their marriage license; this contract would be very similar.

The contract would also specify how to split up property, pay alimony and determine custody of children in the case that the marriage was not extended.

Photo Credit: almightydad.com

Boston’s unhitched women are warming to the idea.

“The downside of this law is that it might encourage people to jump into marriages too soon,” said Nicole Oliveira, Emmanuel College Junior.

“But at the going rate of divorce, maybe it isn’t such a bad idea.”

Political party members are not looking to speed up divorce but to give a solid chance to the marriage. On the other hand, this can help to avoid the long and complicated process that comes with a divorce.

For the younger generations starting to think about marriage, this mandatory “expiration date” could dramatically cut the rate of commitment phobia.

“I know all too many guys who will say ‘I’m never getting married’ or ‘Who wants to be with one person for the rest of your life,’” said Boston College Junior, Hannah Kavanaugh.

Maybe if more people felt they weren’t being sentenced to life at the altar, it might open their eyes to the idea of marriage. “The first ten years is like a test run, see where it goes from there.”

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/for-richer-or-poorer%e2%80%a6till%e2%80%99-our-marriage-expires/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/mp4-love/mp4-love-1-alpha-female-33-and-divorced/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/mp4-love/mp4-love-1-alpha-female-33-and-divorced/#comments Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:31:34 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=69666

Hi Neely,

Love your articles and realistic approach to dating. Thought you might have some good feedback for me. I’m 33 and am looking for a relationship. I finally think I’m ready after being single for the last two years. Before that I was married for four years. The divorce was amicable and I still talk with my ex – there just wasn’t any passion and his meekness became a problem for me. People tell me I’m an Alpha female (I have a high-powered job, am very organized, and I’m a bit anal retentive in certain ways), but I’m not really sure – sometimes I see how they can say that but sometimes I disagree. I really want to be with a strong man, an Alpha male. I’ve dated a couple of guys after my divorce who were just plain boring. I’m tired of being in charge. I want a man who is going to take charge and be in control. Is that too much to ask for? All I seem to be meeting and attracting are guys with more Beta qualities. What do you think? Help!

- Desirous of Alpha male, Boston

Submit your questions to neely@blastmagazine.com!

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/mp4-love/mp4-love-1-alpha-female-33-and-divorced/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-is-this-feminist-angry/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-is-this-feminist-angry/#comments Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:52:00 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=69533

(Originally published on The Good Men Project)

On my day off from work the other week, I engaged in my first Twitter debate. I was perusing the Timeline when I came across a Tweet from Amanda Marcotte, a writer for Pandagon and one of the leaders of today’s feminist movement. I had been in touch with Marcotte recently, asking her to contribute to my piece on Skirtgate, the Park Slope, Brooklyn sexual assaults contretemps (which, incidentally, inspired my next piece titled Feminism: The Winter of Men’s Discontent, a commentary on the rise of misandry and men’s growing resentment toward feminism). Marcotte tweeted that she was disgusted with the New York Times for giving air-time to Katie Roiphe, who argued in a recent op-ed that sexual harassment in the workplace is an irrelevant, antiquated institution. Or in her words: “When I was at Princeton in the ’90s, the guidelines distributed to students about sexual harassment stated, “sexual harassment may result from a conscious or unconscious action, and can be subtle or blatant.”… If this language was curiously retrograde in the early ’90s, if it harkened back to the protection of delicate feminine sensibilities in an era when that protection was patently absurd, it is even more outdated now when women are yet more powerful and ascendant in the workplace.”

Roiphe is one of the most talked about cultural critics of her generation (her book Uncommon Arrangements: Seven Portraits of Married Life in London Literary Circles 1910-1939 was a delight to read, by the way). But Marcotte isn’t a fan. Fueled by her rage at Roiphe’s commentary, Marcotte launched insults at her throughout her response piece, writing things like, “She cashes that NY Times paycheck while doing no real research that could actually upend her baseless assertions” and “I’m looking forward to Roiphe’s denunciation of Dan Savage’s It Gets Better project, where she scoffs at the idea that pantsing a kid and calling him ‘fag’ on a daily basis should be a matter of concern, and not just a delightful expression of youthful boisterousness that shouldn’t be troubled by the high suicide rate amongst gay teens.” Marcotte considers Roiphe a giggling “hair-curler” who “panders to sexist men for condescending head pats.”

When I engaged Marcotte on Twitter I knew I was in for a wild ride. She is adept at Tweet debating (Twebating?) and dominated our discussion, firing out replies and replies to my replies three or four at a time, leaving me heady and confused as to which reply I should reply to. I’m new to Twitter and am still working on Tweet etiquette and strategies. Perhaps I tried too hard to fit all of my thoughts into one tweet – often substituting numbers for letters and symbols for words, which I now see is not the most couth approach – as opposed to doing it piecemeal like Marcotte.

The question that started it all was based off Marcotte’s response piece, in which she used the word slut several times (she wasn’t calling Roiphe a slut but used the word in other ways). I was curious to know, simply: “Do you have a definition for the word slut?” In recent times, feminists have appropriated the word, wearing it like a badge of honor at various protests, such as the Slut Walks, but I wanted to know how Marcotte actually defined it. Here’s how the debate began (I’ve done my best to reconstruct it):

AmandaMarcotte

http://bit.ly/tGiyq3 Fucking disgusting that the NY Times continues to run people questioning whether or not to allow harassers full rein.

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte - Hi, Amanda. Curious: Do you have a definition for the word slut?

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg Yep. A “slut” is someone who has had sex with two more people than the person calling the target a slut.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg “Slut”, however, has no relationship to reality. It can’t be measured and basically is meaningless without misogyny.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg In other words, to believe in the concept of a “slut”, you must believe women are inferior to men on some level.

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte - Can we agree it’s not just a term used toward females? What about misandry – women calling men “sluts”? That happens too.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg If you believe that, I have a bridge I can sell you.

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte - may not happen as often, but my friends and i have called men “sluts” and “man whores” plenty of times. it goes both ways.

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte – Don’t understand how u go from critiquing Roiphe to saying she would scoff at calling little boys “fags.” A stretch, no?

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg It’s a really nice bridge. Maybe you’ve heard of it? Can you get to the San Francisco area soon with your checkbook?

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg It’s also made of PURE GOLD. And you can have it for a mere $5,000. It’s an incredible bargain.

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte -i had a feeling u would start to belittle my thoughts…a shame…I’m a fellow female who is just trying 2 have a dialogue.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg If you believe ironically calling someone a manslut is the same as calling a woman a slut, you have growing up to do.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg I don’t really see the point in arguing with people who are being disingenuous, sorry.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg And I can’t force you to grow up on Twitter, so what’s the point of engaging you?

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte - that’s ur biggest mistake, amanda. thinking that people who disagree w/you r being disingenuous. for the record, i’m not.

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte – why is calling someone a man slut ironic? you don’t think women feel grossed out by men who fuck everything that moves??

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg If calling a man a “slut” with humor is the same thing as calling a woman one sincerely, then I AM selling you a bridge.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg If you sincerely don’t believe in irony or nuance or context, then you believe I’m actually trying to sell you a bridge.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg You can’t have it both ways. So what’s your offer on that bridge? I’m not mocking you; there is no such thing as irony.

AmandaMarcotte

@NeelySteinberg For the record, I do think you’re being disingenuous. The only other option is “really daft”, and I don’t want to think that

NeelySteinberg

@AmandaMarcotte – that’s right. begin the ad hominem attacks.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-is-this-feminist-angry/feed/ 1 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/mp4-love/intoducing-mp4-love/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/mp4-love/intoducing-mp4-love/#comments Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:48:11 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=69472

I’ve dedicated a good portion of my life to writing, thinking, and speaking about dating, sex, love, and relationships.

I’ve written countless articles and hosted two radio shows and an internet TV show about these important subjects. At 34, I’ve had a ton of experiences out there in the dating and relationship world, and I want to share what I’ve learned with you by answering your questions. I am here to help you in your quest to find a healthy, happy dating life and/or relationship. I promise to always be honest and to try my darnedest to practice in my own life what I preach to you.

So send me your dating, sex, love, and relationship questions to neely@blastmagazine.com, and I’ll reply to you when my video answer has been posted on Blast.

Your real name will not be used. Please keep your questions under 500 words.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/mp4-love/intoducing-mp4-love/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/trend-alert-sexy-photo-albums-for-fiances/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/trend-alert-sexy-photo-albums-for-fiances/#comments Fri, 02 Dec 2011 15:42:45 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=69178

This photo by Daphne Weld Nichols shows a bride who apparently came in to give her husband-to-be a photo album of sexy pictures as a wedding present. Channel 7 filmed this woman for a segment they did a short while back

The other day while sitting in the locker room at my gym, I saw a segment on Inside Edition discussing a new trend called “boudoir photography.” For those of you who didn’t study French, “boudoir” means a lady‘s private bedroom, sitting room or dressing room, or, according to Urban Dictionary, “a room where you can get S&M with Rihanna.” Let’s use the first definition for the purposes here. In this type of photography the photographer takes pictures of a woman in an actual boudoir (possibly hers) or in a studio designed to look like one. As you might have guessed, the woman posing is scantily clad. Boudoir photography isn’t necessarily a new art form, but as the segment mentioned, recently there’s been a surge of women giving boudoir photo albums as wedding presents to their fiances — the gal featured on Inside Edition did just that. Although you couldn’t see it through his pants, something was definitely happening down below, as the husband-to-be flipped through the final product, grinning ear-to-ear. And why shouldn’t he be … ahem, aroused? She looked hot and the photography was spectacular. The lady sitting next to me, who was in her fifties and looked a little something like this, shook her head in disapproval. “Is that really necessary?” she groaned, gnashing her teeth.

To which I now reply (because I didn’t then, managing only a brief smirk): YES! I think boudoir photography is the greatest thing since sliced bread and this and quite possibly these. If you’re going to be sleeping with one person for the rest of your life, which assumes you won’t be signing up for this God-awful site, anything you can do to spice up your sex life is a brilliant game plan. To the ladies: Men love when their partners confidently express their sexuality – a private, for his-eyes-only keepsake in the form of erotic pictures is the perfect way to show him that you want him and that you want him to want you. Plus, in fifty years, when your chest looks like this, he’ll have a reminder of what you used to look like, and just maybe he’ll be able to forgo the Viagra for a few more rolls in the hay or Craftmatic adjustable. It’s a win-win, really.

When I mentioned the segment to my boyfriend, he thought immediately of an advertisement in the back of Improper Bostonian. He remembered it, because, well … what able-bodied male wouldn’t remember an advertisement in which a woman is posing provocatively wearing nothing more than a bra, panties, and garter, with an expression on her face that’s saying, “Take me, lover, and have your way with me!”? So, the next day, when I passed by an Improper Bostonian sidewalk dispenser, I pulled out an issue and took a gander at the last couple pages. Lo and behold, there she was! A lady looking seductively at the camera, mouth agape, with the words Fantasy Photography by Daphne nuzzled between her supple breasts.

My interest was piqued – who was this Daphne lady? After perusing her Web site and watching a behind-the-scenes You Tube video of a client during a photo session, I decided to get in touch with her to find out more. Turns out, Daphne Weld Nichols has been doing boudoir (or fantasy) photography for more than 25 years. Her interest in the genre, as stated in her biography, began when she came across an article in Cosmopolitan Magazine, which told how a particular Playboy Playmate of the Month captured the eye of a Hollywood producer, who in turn sent for the centerfold model to audition for a part in his latest film. When the centerfold model arrived for the appointment, the producer did not even recognize her, stating that the woman in his office did not bare the slightest resemblance to the perfect fantasy girl he had seen in the magazine.

“In that moment, when I read that article, I said to myself, ‘men are truly duped,’” said Weld Nichols. It was at that moment that she felt she received her calling. ”I wanted to be the equalizer for the average woman who doesn’t have all the beauty enhancement techniques, products, services, and artists that help manufacture the unattainable, unrealistic images that men see in the magazines.”

Fantasy Photography by Daphne was thus born. Her clientele, mostly women, ranging from 18 to 90 (!), couldn’t be happier with their experience and the end product. Weld Nichols, a native Bostonian whose studio is located in Arlington, MA, echoed the trend of younger women booking shoots so they can give albums as wedding gifts to their husbands: “We just had an 18-year-old newlywed come in, and about 50 percent of our clients fall between 21-35.” Mostly married, working women who have money to spend take advantage of Weld Nichols’ services, which, in addition to the shoot, include a complimentary consultation, full makeup application and hair styling by her all-female crew of stylists, as well as plenty of pampering on the big day.

While the impetus for most clients is indeed to present their mates with sexy photographs, Weld Nichols explained that many women usually want or need the excuse of it being a gift, highlighting perhaps the more prurient desires of the fairer sex. Many also come in for facebook or Match.com photos. To take the edge off and make the client feel safe – most are anxious at the start of the session – Weld Nichols makes use of Feng Shui and healing energy to make the studio space as relaxing as possible. “We make an effort to tune into each client, since everyone is different, so every session is a unique experience.”

Tricia Traxler, one of Weld Nichols’ older clients, speaks to that connection.  ”I can’t emphasize enough the connection we made and their ability to get me to relax. It was like stepping into an alternate reality and peeling the onion in order to reach through the day-to-day pressures to get to the real and true beautiful self,” said Traxler, who lives in Massachusetts and owns her own business in executive placement. “It was a transformative experience.” Traxler came to Weld Nichols when she turned 50 to “cast in stone” her look at the time. “There is nothing like getting a beautiful, professional set of photographs made that captures your essence,” she opined. “No matter your age, you are at your peak of beauty once you have this experience with them and will want to go back again and again (and I have) to mark other milestones and track your progress in life. Everyone should do this for themselves and would be happier for it.  I did this for me but it is a beautiful, personal, heartfelt gift for couples to share.”

Over the years, Daphne and her crew have seen some incredible transformations – timid ladies letting go of their inhibitions and insecurities; average-looking women blossoming into swans – but her most memorable shoot was when a handicapped woman came to her studio. “Her husband carried her up to the third floor where our studio was at the time. She had been in an airplane crash as a young woman. She felt so happy, sexy, and beautiful after her session that she painted a watercolor of herself, named it ‘Fantasy Dream,’ and gave it to us.”

There have also been some bizarre moments in Weld Nichols’ nearly three-decade career, like when a woman came in, shook her hand and said, “Hi, my name is Rene and I used to be a man.” Or the time when a handsome man wearing a three-piece suit, carrying a briefcase, came in for a consultation for his bride-to be’s session and it turned out that he was to be the bride. “The day of the shoot, we kept looking around for his fiancé, until finally he came clean and told us he always wanted to be a bride in a white gown,” said Weld Nichols. “Most of these types of unusual occurrences have been with men – Harvard professors, judges, high-powered attorneys, some wearing full beards, who have secret lives as women.” She continued: “There have also been many married women who made it clear to us that they wanted to do the hot sexy photographs for their lovers on the side.” Yowza! Maybe they were members of this God-awful site.

Not all men, though, coming in to Weld Nichols’ studio are gender benders. “Dudeoir Photography,” as Daphne playfully calls it, focuses more on internet dating photographs, and business and traditional portraits.

I’ll admit that some of the studio shots I viewed on Weld Nichols’ website (unfortunately, I wasn’t able to visit the studio) reminded me a little bit of the gal in the glamor shot photo Napoleon Dynamite – in the eponymously named movie – pretends is his girlfriend, but many of the portraits are beautiful, capturing the romance and beauty of the female form in all its glory. And testimonials of Weld Nichols’ superior artistry, professionalism, and warmth abound: This woman even wrote a blog about her experience. Clients also have the option to be photographed at their own home, if a studio shoot isn’t their aesthetic ideal.

So if you’re about to walk down the aisle, if you’ve been married for several years and are looking to freshen up a marriage gone stale or want to make an already blazing union even hotter, or if you’re just in the market for a sexy album of yourself that you’ll be able to flip through for years to come, get thee to a boudoir photographer. Weld Nichols is waiting for your phone call.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/trend-alert-sexy-photo-albums-for-fiances/feed/ 5 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/condom-purses-promote-safe-sex-break-down-stereotypes/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/condom-purses-promote-safe-sex-break-down-stereotypes/#comments Wed, 30 Nov 2011 01:05:50 +0000 Shannon O'Neill http://blastmagazine.com/?p=69065

Dirty Little SKYN Cosmetics Bags ($25)

You’re about to get lucky: Are you covered? The approach of World AIDS Day on Dec. 1 serves as a reminder that carrying–and, of course, using–condoms can be a life saving decision. Fashion designer Maggie Kervick and LifeStyles condoms want to show you that being protected can be fashionable, too.

Kervick and LifeStyles have teamed up for a line of  vinyl bags made to look like SKYN condom wrappers, part of the “I’m Covered Campaign.” One dollar from each purchase will benefit Answer, a national sex education organization associated with Rutgers University.

“I’m hoping to break down the stereotype that if a guy has a condom he is considered ‘prepared,’ but if a girl has a condom she is considered a ‘tramp,’” says Kervick. “The bag is a great conversational piece that will relay a message to onlookers about the woman carrying the bag–how she is confident, responsible, and protected.  The ‘I’m Covered Campaign’ reinforces the need for self-respect and a proactive approach in regards to protecting oneself from STIs and unwanted pregnancies.”

The bags come in three styles, the Living in SKYN Tote ($55), the Dirty Little SKYN Cosmetics Bags ($25) and the I’m a Slave for SKYN Wristlet ($20). Bonus: Get a free pack of LifeStyles condoms and information on how to use them with each purchase!

To learn more or to buy a bag, go to bagsbymags.com.

Living in SKYN Tote ($55)

 

I'm a Slave for SKYN Wristlet ($20)

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/condom-purses-promote-safe-sex-break-down-stereotypes/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-teenage-breast-implants-are-a-bad-idea/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-teenage-breast-implants-are-a-bad-idea/#comments Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:36:35 +0000 Patricia Leavy http://blastmagazine.com/?p=68702

Can’t think of what to get your teen this holiday season? Some are forgetting traditional gifts for daughter such as jewelry and new clothes, and jumping on the breast implant bandwagon. Under the guise of giving their daughters a self-esteem lift, these parents may be setting them up for a lifetime of chronic low self-esteem.

Just a few nights ago I watched a tabloid television show that featured a mother who proudly bought her teenage daughter breast implants. I guess it was a sort of grown up mommy-and-me experience as the mother also had implants. I suspect the story I watched was fairly typical. The daughter had been teased in school because of her small breasts, became highly insecure and wanted implants. Her mother obliged. I have no doubt that this mother, like many other parents, was trying to help her daughter build her self-esteem. Sadly, she has likely done the very opposite.

There are 3 main dangers for teens getting breast implants, all of which they are ill-equipped to understand and properly consider at their age: 1. physical 2. financial, and 3. emotional/psychological (see http://www.breastimplantinfo.org/news/teen_implants.html).

1. Physical dangers: breast development can continue into early twenties; breast augmentation has a very high complication rate often requiring additional surgeries; an increased risk of various types of cancer as well as severe depression; risk of infection and even death; breast implants interfere with mammography (obscuring more than half of all breast tumors); less likely to be able to breast feed successfully (which carries health benefits for the child); if they change their mind at any time removal of implants can cause severe sagginess which is likely to cause more body dissatisfaction; and, breast pain and loss of sensation in the nipples is common (as teenage females have not reached their sexual peak yet they may be giving up personal sexual pleasure for life before they have had a chance to understand how their body works and they are objectifying their own body).

2. Financial dangers: corrective treatments and surgical procedures can be very expensive and may occur at a time when they are financially independent (they may not realize the potential medical costs they will incur over time).

3. Emotional/psychological dangers: teenage body image dissatisfaction is likely to lessen or go away with age; parents are validating that there is something “wrong” with their daughter’s body; and, possible loss of sexual pleasure has a psychological component as young women learn to prioritize males’ viewing pleasure over their own bodily pleasure.

Looking at the preceding list of risks it is clear that these are serious consequences a teenager is unlikely to comprehend on any meaningful level. Putting this list of dangers aside though we can return most simply to the reason the mother I saw gave-in to her daughter’s breast implant request-the reason I suspect other parents do too. Young women are often teased by their peers for not measuring up to the media ideal of the body-beautiful and so they develop a poor body concept and parents want to help them. Breast implants are not the answer.

There is no quick-fix for self-esteem; it must be built up internally. Giving in to external pressures will only feed insecurity in the long-run and set our daughters up for a life time of substituting others’ judgments for their own. Breasts comes in all shapes and sizes, there are even artificial ones. However, there are no substitutes for real self-confidence and trying to fake it will backfire.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-teenage-breast-implants-are-a-bad-idea/feed/ 3 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/nine-unassuming-places-to-meet-women-and-how-to-meet-them/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/nine-unassuming-places-to-meet-women-and-how-to-meet-them/#comments Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:08:33 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=68574

If you’re tired of going to places like this to meet women, then you’ve stumbled across the perfect resource.

Single women are almost always on the lookout for eligible men. Sometimes they may not appear to be interested, but inside they’re really saying, “I hope that cute guy over there breaks the ice.” While I thought the movie was pretty stupid, Will Smith nails it in the opening scene of the movie Hitch, in which he explains that women hardly ever wake up thinking, “I don’t want to be swept off my feet today.”

A male friend of mine recently commented that although he’s now in a great relationship with someone he met online he’s started to notice more the many beautiful, single women all around him. He has no interest in these women and is in love with his girlfriend, but he found it curious that once he settled down and started expanding his horizons socially by participating in different kinds of activities he enjoyed, the women started to come out of the woodwork.

So if you’re a single guy, if you’re ready for love, if you’ve decided the bar scene isn’t cutting it anymore, and if you’re looking for something a little more organic than online dating, I’ve compiled a list of unassuming spots to meet women, some of which you may scoff at but definitely places where you’ll be able to meet lots of eligible ladies who are just waiting for you to sweep them off their feet.

Of course, listing the spots is only half the battle: Putting yourself in the company of women is the first step, but the key is to know what to do when that cute, little blonde is standing next to you, twirling her hair.

For pick-up strategies, I turned to the inimitable Gareth Jones. Voted the Best New Pick Up Artist of 2010, Jones, an ABCs Of Attraction instructor for more than two years, is known worldwide as a life-changing in-field coach and as the master of phone and text game from his Text To Sex program. This guy is so smooth, he convinced a porn star to take a 45-minute, $160 cab ride over to his house in the wee hours of the morning, for, well … acts of a sexual nature. Fast forward to 6:03 for the story.

He has taught in London, Sydney, Melbourne, and has been referred to by several students as “One of the best decisions of my life.” If you’re looking to attain a James Bond level of suave, Jones is your man.

Before we get to my top picks, though, Jones had a few general pointers, in his words:

First, we want to understand the two types of ‘openers’: These are “canned” and “situational.”

Canned openers are openers that you’ve prepared beforehand. In days of yore, guys would have ‘lines’ they’d use (i.e. “Do your legs hurt because you’ve been running through my mind all day.”). Nowadays, we tend to lean towards more interactive conversation openers that aren’t so cheesy. This is best formed with any kind of question to get her engaged, such as, “Hey, quick question, is it O.K. to wear jeans to a wedding?” (Neely’s note: No, it isn’t, unless it’s this kind of a wedding.) For some, these seem forced and can get a guy stuck in his head, but we’ve all been in that situation where we’ve either frozen up or simply couldn’t think of anything to say, so we know how important it is to be prepared. I always tell people to have at least one engaging opener prepared so we don’t lose the girl of our dreams on account of a brain fart.

Situational openers are just that: A question or statement composed off the cuff about an element in the current situation. Maybe this is a question about what kind of coffee she’s purchased or a comment about the long line you two are suffering in. A situational opener is unpracticed and spontaneous. A lot of guys find these quite difficult (especially when they start thinking they need to be witty to win a girl over right away), but undoubtedly, they give off a much more natural vibe, which is always preferable. It’s in this category that direct openers fall. They are one of the most genuine and, therefore, powerful openers. You are simply showing direct interest in a way that is true to you, so the actual words always vary. It may be something as specific as, “I absolutely love the way you’ve matched your shoes to your nail polish. Was that on purpose?” Or something as simple as, “I had to come over here and tell you I think you’re stunning. My name’s Gareth.”

Now that we’ve understood the forms with which we can engage, let’s look at some of the most important elements of actually talking to a girl.

The first, and, to me, the most important aspect of beginning a conversation with a stranger is, undoubtedly, the smile. Guys are always trying to be the “cool” guy that gets the chicks. More often than not, this comes off as really cold or, sometimes, downright frightening. When we smile at a woman it makes her feel good and shows her that we’re confident, friendly, and not up to no-good (don’t ever use no double negatives).

Another really important element of the approach is engaging her. One of the huge problems guys have when approaching women using a direct opener is that they simply compliment her and expect her to carry the conversation. Imagine a homeless man coming up to you and saying, “I like your shoes.” You’d say, “Thanks,” and try to get away as quickly as possible. That’s essentially what she’s going to do (unless she happens to be physically attracted to you, but that’s another story), so we’re going to need a way to engage her. This is as simple as asking a question. Whether it be a canned opener (which usually is a question in itself) or a situational opener, I make sure I follow up my initial line with something that will engage her. The strength of the nail polish compliment above comes from my interest in whether she chose to match or if it was an accident. I’m not putting an undue weight on her with a compliment that she’s expected to return, I simply happen to be complimenting her while I ask about her style.

Once we’ve shown her that we’re friendly and we’ve engaged her in the conversation, we can take it practically anywhere we want (which is up to your game). For the spots Neely’s chosen, I’ve added a list of “If I were here … I might say this … .”

1. Cultural centers

Neely: In Boston, for instance, the French Cultural Center is sure to turn up some intellectual, attractive ladies. In fact, I know it does: My boyfriend volunteers there, and when I went to visit him once at an event, I was bombarded by several young beauties. Find a cultural center in your city that meshes with your geographical sensibilities, and you may just find a great date.

Jones: Any cultural center almost certainly presupposes common interest, so a conversation is easy to start with something like, “I’ve always wanted to learn to speak French and I’m really glad to finally have the time. What brings you here?”

2. Open art studios

Neely: Women flock to open art shows. There’s just something about dim lighting, free wine, and aesthetic beauty that really gets our juices flowing.

Jones: If art is your interest, a studio is a great place to meet someone of similar passion; if it’s not, it’s a great place to meet someone you can learn from. “I know I shouldn’t, but I always tend to pick a favorite when I’m in a gallery. You tell me yours and I’ll tell you mine.”

3.Clothing events

Neely: If you don’t know yet that women could shop all day long, every day, then you apparently haven’t been living on planet Earth or have been too busy playing Modern Warfare on your Xbox to notice. There’s a gazillion clothing events (trunks shows, store promotions, openings, fashion shows, etc.) going on in your city, so get your ass there – the ladies will be plentiful.

Jones:Fashion events are great places for fashion forward people to meet, but make sure you’re dressed to the nines! “This collection is phenomenal. Do you know who the designer is?”

4. Salsa classes

Neely: My friend and three of her girlfriends signed up for salsa classes with Boston Center for Adult Education hoping to meet men there. When they showed up, there were five other attractive women and one 78-year-old man named Gene. Here: I’ll make it easy for you Boston gentlemen.

Jones: Dance classes are such a great way to meet and interact with women and they practically beg you to talk to other people. Say something as simple as, “Do you have a partner tonight?” Also, try not to say this in a seductive way while winking a bunch. I mean, you can, but let’s take it slow for now.

5. Dog park

Neely: An old boyfriend of mine had what I would consider the most awesome dog ever. When he had to go out of town his good friend was more than happy to take the dog for a few days, because that meant he could take him to the dog park to meet women. Just think about how women love to gather around a cute pooch (I’d stay away from the grey-hound, furless types and opt for the you’re-so-cute-I-just-want-to->stand-here-all-day-and-pet-you-which-is-perfect-so-my-owner-can-hit-on-you types). Of course, it’s possible the dog thing could backfire on you, like in this pee-your-pants hilarious movie clip from The Lonely Guy, but I doubt it. Note: If only Steve Martin knew what to say when all those ladies were crowded around his pup. Jones to the rescue!

Jones: Whenever there are animals playing, people are usually in a great mood. I’ve met so many women out playing with my friends’ dogs and it’s always incredibly easy to strike up conversations with a simple compliment and follow-up. “I think a happy dog says something about its owner. Is she/he always this playful?”

6. Jogging club

Neely: Do you know how many great women I know who join these groups? A lot. Plus, when you’re sweating your pheromones are at their finest, which will allow her to sniff you out in all your perspiratory glory.

Jones: It completely escapes me why anyone would join a jogging club, but it’s another common interest that is sure to be a perfect opener. I might say, “That was a great route. Do you have a favorite area you love to run through?”

7. Yoga/Pilates

Neely: Again, a breeding ground for the ladies, and no doubt in-shape ones. Plus you get to stare at their … yoga pants. C’mon, boys, get your mind out of the gutter! Jeez!

Jones: Of this list, definitely my favorite. At yoga, it’s going to be 90% women and they’re all going to be fit and motivated. Maybe I’ll say, “I’ve never been here before, but I like the vibe. Have you been coming here long?”

8. Volunteer at an animal shelter

Neely: I know several young gals who help out at pet shelters. What better way to meet someone who has a shared love of animals and a great heart?

Jones: I’m pretty sure all you have to do to meet women while you’re volunteering at a pet shelter is to be well dressed and walk up to her, stick out your hand and say, “Hi. I’m Gareth. I’m the type of guy that volunteers at pet shelters” and it’ll be a go, but just in case it’s not, I might simply tell a woman, “I admire people that you have time to give back to the community. What brings you here?”

9. Volunteer at a political campaign

Neely: Couples who have drastically different political viewpoints have it tough. You’re almost certain to meet someone of the same mindset, with the same values, if you meet them while volunteering for a political campaign. No more counting down the dates until you can bring up the fact that you are the proud owner of an NRA membership, or that you’re favorite hero is that fat slob of a filmmaker Michael Moore, because you already know you won’t offend the other with your political leanings. And trust me: The campaign parties and social gatherings are teeming with single women.

Jones: Politics are always tricky when first meeting people, but if you’re meeting someone that’s volunteering for the same campaign you are, it might be a little less hazardous. How about, “Isn’t it nice to be in a place where you can meet someone and know your political views will line up?”

Jones concluded by saying: “As always, remember that a big smile and solid eye contact are super important. Relax, be present in the interaction, and LISTEN!”

Which has always been my biggest advice to men: If you can listen (and listen well – good eye contact, active gestures, etc.), we are putty in your hands.

Good luck, boys!

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/nine-unassuming-places-to-meet-women-and-how-to-meet-them/feed/ 1 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/parents-question-the-appropriateness-of-ex-porn-stars-appearance-in-elementary-school/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/parents-question-the-appropriateness-of-ex-porn-stars-appearance-in-elementary-school/#comments Sun, 13 Nov 2011 13:07:26 +0000 Erin Farnsworth http://blastmagazine.com/?p=68278

Sasha Grey, a 23-year old former porn actress, recently read to the first and third grades at Emerson Elementary School in Los Angeles County for Read Across America Day.

The actress’s appearance, who has not been involved in pornographic films for the past two years, has ignited indignation from parents. Some parents have filed complaints with the Parent-Teacher Association, or PTA.

Grey has frequently appeared on HBO’s “Entourage“.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/parents-question-the-appropriateness-of-ex-porn-stars-appearance-in-elementary-school/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-are-you-still-single-an-interview-with-vh1s-siggy-flicker/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-are-you-still-single-an-interview-with-vh1s-siggy-flicker/#comments Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:08:45 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=68093

Siggy Flicker (Media cedit/VH1)

Move over Patti Stanger: There’s a new matchmaker on the scene. No, this isn’t some feeble attempt to pay homage to the greatest maker of matches of all time: the inimitable Charles Nelson Reilly, may he rest in peace. (Dear God that man was a genius.) I’m referring, of course, to Siggy Flicker, VH1’s newest star of Why Am I Still Single?!, airing on Sundays at 9 p.m. Flicker, who the Village Voice referred to as “a hyper mix of Teri Hatcher and Sandra Bullock,” has spent years — 20, to be exact – creating a successful matchmaking business, recently gaining the attention of VH1 executives perhaps inclined to knock Stanger off her throne. With help from her team of “recruiters” (Victor, Chynna and Hayley) and stylists (the Moxie Twins, Jenn and Jamie Dunn), Flicker’s goal on the show is to help men and women find real love by helping them discover what they’re doing wrong so they can break the habits and behaviors that are keeping them single.

Flicker’s an interesting character, the type of woman you’d want as a best friend but who also might be slightly overwhelming at times. A fellow member of the tribe, she talks a mile a minute, hints of her Jersey accent peeking through occasionally, with a passion that’s clearly a prerequisite for those working in the matchmaking industry. Flicker and I caught up on the phone recently to discuss the show, her background, and the answer to that million dollar question: Why are you still single?

Like her passion for life and love, Flicker’s personal back story lends itself well to the business: After her first marriage with the supposed “perfect man” ended due to lack of chemistry, Flicker, two children to her credit, grabbed her proverbial bootstraps and put herself back into the challenging world of dating, determined to find a man with whom she had a real connection. Find that man she did: He’s a “bald, used car salesman,” Flicker says proudly and matter-of-factly. Together for six years and tying the knot next spring, Flicker feels fortunate that she abandoned the checklist because it led her to Michael ultimately. “For years, finding a mate was about making everyone else happy, dating the lawyer, the doctor, etc., but you can’t guarantee chemistry. I met Michael and fell madly in love.”

Flicker can thus relate to people’s dating struggles and that’s what makes her so appealing, both in her business as a matchmaker and a character on reality TV. “I know what it’s like to be out there starting over, but I also practiced what I currently preach,” says Flicker. She adds: “I could have stayed with my ex-husband, but I changed my attitude and got out with class and dignity and went searching for true chemistry.”

Attitude, contends Flicker, is what it’s all about. And finally, we get to the crux of the matter: The main reason people who don’t want to be single are still single is their attitudes. “Singles need to change their attitudes in life, they need to not have unrealistic expectations about people, and they can’t look at dating as a chore or burden,” opines Flicker. “This is not Iraq, for God’s sake, you aren’t losing your legs!”

Flicker also has some strong opinions about her more famous matchmaking counterpart Patti Stanger. “This is not Millionaire Matchmaker,” she says. “My show is not about money. I observe clients on dates to uncover their faulty patterns and help them understand what they are doing, and help them to find true chemistry.”

Flicker also practices in her business what she preaches to her clients: Finding the right fit. That’s why she turned down a slew of reality TV show offers before her current show on VH1, because they weren’t the right fit. “VH1 got it right,” says Flicker, maintaining for the umpteenth time that “it’s all about the chemistry.”

Flicker makes some great points, and I’d be remiss if I didn’t chime in on the discussion; after all, I’m one of the dating and relationship columnists for this magazine. I, Neely Steinberg, can offer you a simple explanation as to why you are still single … in eight parts (which reminds me of a great scene from Back to School, starring Rodney Dangerfield):

1. You really do want to be single. Case closed.
2. Because your actions don’t match your words. Refer to the ‘Know Thyself’ bullet point in my piece on the Kim Kardashian divorce for further explanation. Essentially, though, you are saying you don’t want to be single, but your actions in your love life prove otherwise (i.e. only dating unavailable men, etc.).
3. You really do want to be in a relationship, but:
1. Your standards are too high or low.
2. Your expectations are too high or low.
3. You are pursuing people with qualities that you want, without considering the qualities that you may actually need. In other words, you have this idea of what your perfect mate looks like; in reality, though, this type of person would be completely incompatible with you. For example, a Type A woman wanting to be with a Type A man. She may think she wants to be with someone powerful and in control, but she’d probably be better off with a man who displays more Beta qualities.
4. You haven’t taken an honest self-evaluation, physically speaking. I have said before (in this piece) that while you absolutely need to be physically attracted to your mate, relationships should never be based primarily on looks. But, if you’re a 5, the chances that you’re going to land a 10 are less than if you pursued, say, a 7. Moreover, studies have shown that men and women typically end up with someone of a similar degree of attractiveness. Just look at couples around you to prove this theory. Note: the two exceptions to this are if you’re a rich and/or famous male, or you are a Game aficionado, like Neil Strauss.
5. You don’t love yourself enough or you love yourself too much. If you have no respect or love for yourself, how can you expect another human being to love you? If you have an overly inflated ego, it’s likely you’re always after the next best thing. Note: IT DOESN’T EXIST.
6. You are stuck in your ways and unwilling to compromise. A study from 2009 found that the optimal time for marriage is between 24 and 26 – a marital sweet spot, if you will. I actually disagree: Statistically speaking, the divorce rate goes down for those marrying after 30. But the study does make a salient point: The older we get, the more stuck in our ways we become, the less willing we are to compromise. Which is why the study says that 24-26 is ideal: It’s the time in your life when you are not too fixed in your habits and behaviors (and maybe not yet jaded by life) but also mature enough to handle commitment and all that comes along with marriage. Something to consider.
7. You’re lazy. Love isn’t going to magically fall into your lap; you’re not going to be rescued by Prince Charming. I understand the wisdom behind the axiom that if you don’t go looking for love it will find you, but to an extent I disagree. You have to be active in your pursuit of love. Not desperate but active. For instance, you may be averse to online dating, but why not give it a shot? What do you have to lose? My mother always said: “Neel, you’re not going to meet anyone lying on your couch.” She was right. Sometimes you have to push yourself a little bit, even when you’re disheartened about the dating process.
8. You don’t make enough time for your love life. I get it: We’re all busy nowadays with work, hobbies, friends, etc. But if you really do want a relationship, you have to make time for dating.

I could go on, but eight is enough. I am interested to hear your thoughts in the comments section below. Why are you still single? Why do you think others (your friends, family members, etc.) are still single? I look forward to hearing from you!

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-are-you-still-single-an-interview-with-vh1s-siggy-flicker/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/are-americans-too-prudish-for-our-own-good/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/are-americans-too-prudish-for-our-own-good/#comments Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:00:35 +0000 Tiberio Simone http://blastmagazine.com/?p=68090

Being an American citizen, I enjoy the freedom of expression enjoyed by artists in this country. However, I wonder sometimes if we grasp some of the ironies of how we express that freedom.

I am from Italy, which is known as one of the most romantic countries in Europe, a destination for lovers who come to visit from all over the world. So, perhaps I have a slightly different perspective on how Americans express themselves, particularly with regard to romance and sensuality. In Italy, we embrace these concepts in everything we do – the way we dress, the way we cook, the way we dine, and the way we live.

In America however, I sometimes sense a split personality with regard to these concepts. More specifically, I think we sometimes confuse our sensuality with sexuality, and as a result, try to keep both of them hidden for fear of corrupting our children. My point is, there is a difference.

For instance, if any part of the human body that would traditionally be covered by a bathing suit on a typical American beach is shown in a film, that film is rated for adult content, usually getting an “R.” If it is shown in a TV show, the scene is either deleted, or the “naughty bits,” as the British call them, are digitally pixilated out. And of course those areas are not necessarily even covered by bathing suits in Europe, as many of the beaches there are clothing optional.

In this type of censorship, there is no accounting for context. It’s not about the type of scene, but rather the anatomy. If it is a romantic scene, with a context of love and respect, soft lighting, and appropriate mood, it is considered just as “dirty” as a scene in which naked women are running around and shown as sexual objects and nothing more.

The same goes for modern art. Gallery shows in which the human form is depicted tastefully and sensually are regarded as pornography by many “morals” groups, leading some Congressmen to suggest that public funding from the National Endowment for the Arts should not be awarded to any artist who deals with the nude form. The chilling effect, when we approach the sensual and the sexual in the same way, is that we teach our children that nudity itself is a dirty thing, and that they should all be ashamed of their bodies.

That is why young adults in America go directly from puberty straight to pornography – because they do not have anything in between, such as public art or other forms of healthy nudity – things that would help them develop an understanding of sensuality.

Here is the ultimate irony. While we demonize certain parts of the human form, we don’t demonize treating women as sex objects at all, because we use sex to sell just about everything in the consumer marketplace. In TV commercials, young, attractive, and barely dressed women sell everything from cars to beer, weight loss plans to gym gear, breakfast cereals to vacation destinations – even snack foods practically guaranteed to make the men who eat them incredibly unattractive to the women used to sell them.

The difference here is context. We enter the world naked. It is our most natural state as humans, yet the naked body is considered dirty and inappropriate for all time zones. Meanwhile, treating women not as people, but simply as objects of sexual desire, which demeans all women in the process, is perfectly acceptable.

We need to create an environment in America in which sensuality is not confused with sexuality, so that we can all enjoy a freedom of expression that is based in context and meaning instead of an unhealthy and negative obsession with sex.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/are-americans-too-prudish-for-our-own-good/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/six-lessons-from-kim-kardashians-divorce/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/six-lessons-from-kim-kardashians-divorce/#comments Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:02:22 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67753

Kim and Kris on October 22 in Las Vegas (WireImage).

It was the shock heard ’round the world: Kim Kardashian files for divorce. Boom! Immediately after the news hit, the internet was aflutter with talk about what went wrong and the lessons we mere mortals could take away from their connubial downfall. I’m going to hop on that bandwagon and offer my perspective.

1. Don’t always believe what you see and therefore don’t envy what you see

“The truth is rarely pure and never simple” – Oscar Wilde

Hollywood is full of deception. One such falsehood it perpetuates is the perfect, fairytale relationships of its celebrity inhabitants, the endless coverage of which is at once addictive and nauseating: Hollywood lovers on perfect dates, wearing perfect clothes, on perfect vacations, looking perfectly. They gush about each other in magazine interviews and mug happily for the paparazzi. What glamorous lives, what gorgeous couples – they must all be so perfectly happy! It isn’t long, though, before we’re shaken from our delusional daydreams by the words “irreconcilable differences.”

Hollywood’s not the only architect of artifice. The advent of social media gives us all the ability to create these illusions, in just a few clicks of a mouse no less. Facebook is one of the worst offenders, a veritable avatar for perfect lives and perfect weddings and perfect homes and perfect children who never cry and always look like little darlings. (I liken these saccharine displays of social chest-puffing to the Class Notes section of my alma mater’s alumni magazine, in which my classmates – who are either on the brink of curing cancer or on the path to becoming the next Supreme Court Justice or are popping out kids with wild abandon – have an uncanny ability to make me feel completely inadequate.)

And so it’s not just celebrity couples who we come to falsely envy for their supposed perfect, picturesque relationships. We do this with everyday couples all around us. We build them into things they’re not, and wonder if our own relationships measure up. The truth, though, is that we should never believe what we see – we’re not privy to what goes on behind closed doors in other people’s relationships. We don’t know if a couple has constructed a facade of sparkles and rainbows in order to hide the fact that they may in fact be struggling. I learned that valuable lesson a few years ago when, out at a bar, I saw a man I knew all over some woman, who just so happened wasn’t his wife. But what about the ad nauseum pronouncements of their perfect love; what about that fabulous vacation they just took, in which they looked so mind-numbingly happy? I had been so envious of what I thought they had when in reality it was an illusion.

It’s easy to be envious of others, to covet what they have – or what we think they may have. Quite often, though, those seemingly perfect couples have issues. Case in point: Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries, or the couple on Facebook you’ve been admiring. Making comparisons to other couples is pointless and unproductive. And doing so doesn’t get us anywhere closer to being happy within our own relationships.

Focus on and treasure what you have with your partner; celebrate what’s great about your relationship.

2. Fools Rush In

“Marry in haste; repent at leisure.” – William Congreve

I know what you’re going to say: You heard a story about your friend’s brother’s painter’s lawyer’s doctor’s proctologist’s veterinarian, who married her husband six months after meeting him. But here’s the deal: That’s not going to happen to you. OK, maybe it will. But the odds are against it and there are plenty of reasons, anyway, as to why you should wait. I have no doubt Kris Humphries and Kim Kardashian fell in love (and major lust!) with each other, but there was hardly any way for the two of them to know, after six months of dating, especially given their lifestyles, if it was the type of love that could last for the long haul. They barely knew each other. They had no history together to be able to say: “We know we can get through something difficult as a couple because we already went through x, y, and z together.” While I’d like to think just being in love can get you through the worst of times, realistically speaking, I think you need to experience a few downs with someone to know if that love has long-term potential.

Just recently, Kim Kardashian released a statement regarding the demise of her relationship: “I want a family and babies and a real life so badly that maybe I rushed into something too soon. I believed in love and the dream of what I wanted so badly. I felt like I was on a fast roller coaster and couldn’t get off when now I know I probably should have.” This appears to be a classic example of someone wanting something so desperately that they’re not even sure what they’re signing up for. They have the end goal in sight but aren’t thinking rationally about the present moment. Had she put the reins on the relationship a bit and experienced a longer courtship, perhaps she would have realized (before spending the GDP of a small, third world nation on her wedding) that Kris Humphries wasn’t the right person for her. Hindsight is always 20/20.

3. Beauty doesn’t bring relationship happiness

“Any girl can be glamorous. All you have to do is stand still and look stupid.” – Hedy Lamarr

Kim Kardashian may be one of the most preternaturally beautiful creatures in existence (that hair, those eyes, those cheekbones!), and Kris Humphries may be an Adonis in his own right, but as the erudite Yoda would say: “A happy relationship that does not make.” It can be hard not to be just a tad bit envious of someone so stunning; when you realize, though, how little beauty means in terms of personal contentment envy becomes a much easier pill to swallow.

The most beautiful people might even have it the toughest: Do their mates truly love them for who they are at their very core, or do they just want them for that shiny, delicious-looking exterior? I remember Kim Kardashian saying something early on in her infatuation with Kris Humphries, before even meeting him, about wanting to have his babies on account of his good looks. While that kind of a comment makes for a good tweet, it smacks of superficiality. Sure, it’s important to be attracted to your mate, but it’s equally as important to be reminded that a relationship based primarily on a person’s hotness quotient is a precarious tightrope to walk.

4. Money doesn’t buy relationship happiness

“While money can’t buy happiness, it certainly lets you choose your own form of misery.” – Groucho Marx

It’s also hard not to be envious of Kim Kardashian’s lifestyle, until we realize that it’s actually quite easy. With millions of dollars coming in and the glitz and glamor of a relationship between an NBA star and a not-sure-why-exactly-you’re-famous star, we were fooled (once again) into believing the fairytale. Then, divorce ensues, the veil of perfection is lifted, and we are reminded (once again) of the false promises of money. Sure, it may make life easier in certain ways, if we have a lot of it, but it can never fill emotional voids. Take the majority of Bravo’s Housewives: Despite gobs of money coming out their surgically enhanced wazoos, most of them seem pretty miserable.

5. Know thyself

“Observe all men; thy self most” – Benjamin Franklin

Let’s refer back to the aforementioned quote Kim Kardashian gave about her desire for babies and family, a sentiment I’ve heard her make countless times before. These declarations certainly make for good interview soundbites and TV footage, but unfortunately, her actions and choices in her love life don’t seem to ever match her words.

In my early to mid-twenties I was guilty of doing the same thing. I’d continually squawk about wanting to settle down and my desire for intimacy, yet the only type of men I went for either lived far away or were commitmentphobes. I’d complain and cry and stomp my feet, always blaming everyone else for my relationship woes, everyone but myself – it was easier to pass the buck than look inward at my own issues. In retrospect, I don’t think I was at all ready for real intimacy during this period of my life. There’s a great book I read during this tumultuous time, titled “He’s Scared; She’s Scared” by Steven Carter and Julia Sokol. One of the ideas they focused on was “passive avoidance,” the notion that people passively avoid commitment by pursuing unavailable mates. It was pretty incisive.

I have no idea what Kim’s issues really are; however, I do know that saying you want the trifecta – love, commitment, and family – doesn’t necessarily mean you’re ready for it or that it’s even deep down what you actually want or that you know how to get there. Take some time to figure yourself out; when you have a better understanding, you’ll be in a position to make better choices.

6. For the love of God, exercise some monetary discretion

“Spending 10 million dollars on your wedding is stupid.” – Neely Steinberg

Enough said.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/six-lessons-from-kim-kardashians-divorce/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/love-and-romance/top-10-best-date-spots-in-boston-according-to-the-boston-tweet-guy/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/love-and-romance/top-10-best-date-spots-in-boston-according-to-the-boston-tweet-guy/#comments Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:09:38 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67624

After graduating from college in … oh never mind, I moved immediately to Boston. Over the last several years, I’ve come to know the area quite well and have been on my fair share of urban adventures, one of which had me dancing with people who smelled really bad. Given my many experiences gallivanting around the city, I could probably rattle off a bunch of great date spots, but I thought it would be way more fun to ask a man who has made a job out of scouring every inch of Beantown and beyond; a man who, like George Costanza, probably knows the location of every public bathroom in the city (the city of Boston, that is). That man is Tom O’Keefe, also known as the Boston Tweet Guy.

A serial entrepreneur, O’Keefe started Boston Tweet in November 2008 as “a way to create awareness for local business when the economy was descending into a recession.” He tweets daily about news, events, food and drinks that he believes are of interest to 20- and 30-somethings living in the city. (Read more about his life as a perma-tweeter in this interview). O’Keefe now has over 41,000 followers; currently, I have 149, and I’m extremely jealous. But I reached out to him, anyway (because jealousy is a an evil emotion that can make us do really mean things, like when you’re 12 and you tell your friend’s boyfriend that she said he was a bad kisser because, well, she did but mostly because you’re jealous he’s into her and not you and you’re tired of making out with the mirror and your pillow), to ask for his expert opinion on great date spots around the Hub.

In no particular order, here are the Top 10 Best Date Spots, according to Tom O’Keefe:

The Boston Public Garden

The Public Garden is the first public botanical garden in the United States and it continues to be the most beautiful place in Boston. The Public Garden is the perfect date spot – it’s romantic, beautiful, and free. You’ll score bonus points if you can rattle off the names of more than three types of flowers currently in bloom – I never get past tulips. After you impress your date with your floricultural knowledge, take a stroll over to the Frosty Ice Cream Truck (Arlington and Boylston) for a cone or a stop at the Parish Cafe for a bite.

• Neely’s  note: I’ll pay you $100 (in Monopoly money, which, as it happens, is the official currency of Occupy Boston) if you can tell me the name of the sculptor who is both related to me and has a statue in the Garden. Hint: the sculptor is a woman and her name rhymes with Lashka Taeff. Leave your guesses in the comments section below.
• Another note from Yours Truly: You might want to save this date spot for a day when flowers are actually in bloom. But the Parish Café is delicious no matter what time of year. Try the Zuni Roll – delectable!

Tour Fenway Park

Everybody loves Fenway Park and now that the Sox won’t be back until 2012 you can take a tour of the park every day, on the hour, from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m.

Tasty Burger

If you build up an appetite on your Fenway Park tour then lucky for you: Tasty Burger is behind the park serving delicious and extremely affordable burgers in an old converted garage – which means it’s just as casual as Fenway Park.

SoWa Sundays

If you’re never been to a SoWa Sunday then you’re missing out on a great afternoon of food trucks, vintage items, food markets, music and tons of locally made crafts that you never knew you needed. A SoWa Sunday is a great casual date for those who want to enjoy being outside while looking at melted beer bottles and eating the occasional grilled cheese sandwich from Roxy’s.

Picco

Beer, pizza and ice cream. What else could you ask for on a date? Picco is one of my favorite spots in the South End because it’s casual, affordable, the pizza is great, the craft beer is plentiful, and they also specialize in ice cream.

Craft Beer

If you want to impress your date with your knowledge of craft beer then a visit to the Publick House (Washington Square), Meadhall (Kendall Square) and/or Lord Hobo in Inman Square are perfect spots for “beer geeks on a date.” Combined, the three bars have hundreds of taps, even more bottles, and enough ABVs to relax your nerves.

Go For a Walk

One of the things I love most about Boston is that it’s a walkable city. You can walk from the Back Bay to Beacon Hill to the North End, and even Cambridge, within a few hours. Go for a walk, enjoy the conversation, and along the way you’ll discover some new neighborhoods, restaurants, and cafes.

MFA

The MFA is hands down my favorite museum in Boston and the perfect place to spend the day admiring works of art almost as beautiful as your date. If you’re a student, then you’re date is free! The MFA’s University Membership Program offers free admission to college students who attend college in the Boston area.

The Abbey – Washington Square, Brookline

The Abbey is that perfect date restaurant. The food is amazing, the atmosphere is dimly lit by candlelight, the service is impeccable and Emack & Bolio’s is next door for that required “first date ice cream cone.”

The North End

I personally don’t think you can go wrong with any restaurant in the North End but a few of my favorites are Bricco, Cantina Italiana and Lucca. After dinner take a walk over to Caffe Vittoria on Hanover Street to enjoy an after dinner drink and an amazing chocolate mousse cake.

• Neely’s note: I’ll pay you $250 in Monopoly money and give you my title deed for Marvin Gardens if you can find a very skinny house in the North End that was built out of spite. Yes, that’s right: spite.

Are you an expert on a topic related to dating/sex/love/relationships? Want to submit an “According To … ” list and see it published in Blast Magazine? Email me at: neelysteinberg@gmail.com.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/love-and-romance/top-10-best-date-spots-in-boston-according-to-the-boston-tweet-guy/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/the-science-of-studying-sex/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/the-science-of-studying-sex/#comments Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:00:05 +0000 Maria Pawlowska http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67447

Imagine a married couple’s bedroom. They’ve just had a wonderful dinner (perhaps candles and wine were involved) and the kids (if they happen to have them) are tucked into their beds. They start kissing and one of them brakes away saying: “Not tonight honey, I’m sorry but I have a headache.” Stop right there. Let me guess — you imagined the wife making excuses right? Her husband (or any other guy for that matter) is bound to be the one who wants sex, right? Women on the other hand are the ones who like it less and don’t need it as often – so they are thought of as the sex that always ends up making the ‘not this time’ excuses. Or so we’re told from about the time we learn what makes boys and girls different. We’re constantly being convinced that there are strong biological bases for men wanting (and pursuing) sex more than women. They mostly boil down to the same old “it’s about the testosterone” or “men evolved to pursue multiple sex partners”. Because these pseudo-scientific claims include words with more than three syllables as well as references to Charles Darwin’s tried and true theory, these explanations tend to sound like facts. For starters, though, do these “facts” explain real human behaviors or just perceptions about what human behavior is (supposed to be) like?

Ever since Dr. Alfred Kinsey gave up gall wasps and decided studying human sex is more interesting we have been learning more and more about the realities of our species’ sex life. However, we still have quite a way to go and there’s a number of reasons for which it’s pretty hard to learn what’s actually going one. Firstly and most importantly, the subjects themselves – i.e.’ regular’ men and women – are a bit of an issue. As anyone who has ever seen a single episode of House MD will know: “People lie”. Dr. Greg House is a bit on the cynical side (to say the least), but he is right about one thing: people tend to stray from being truthful when asked personal questions by people in white coats or with any authority. And that’s basically what sex research is. A bunch of professors with strings of letters behind their names signifying how important and smart they are, asking delicate questions about how often and how much… You might be thinking that anonymous questionnaires are a way out, right? They are – but only to a certain degree because it’s been shown that people will still give the answers they think they’re supposed to. This happens even when they’re guaranteed complete anonymity. Consequently, at the end of the day the result really might not be all that enlightening.

Secondly, it’s very hard to discern nature from nurture. As in any study on fellow Homo sapiens – whether it’s studying the causes of diabetes, breast cancer or musical talent – it’s really hard to tell what is innate and what’s not. In the case of sex studies, the real question is discerning socialization and conditioning from innate tendencies (some people aren’t even sure it’s doable). People still don’t really know how much of our sexual behavior is the result of what our families and cultures teach us and what is determined by our libido and innate characteristics. So, for example, when I was 12-years old, my Mom made me watch “Bridges of Madison County” with her. If you haven’t seen it, I assure you you’re not missing much. Basically it’s a movie about a wife who cheats on a husband and hates herself for it (or something to that effect). So when the movie was finally over and I was a little surprised by my dear Mother’s question “Maria, what do you think is the moral of this story”. I had absolutely no idea. As far as I was concerned, the moral was that making movie with the words “bridges” and “Madison” in the title is not a very good idea. Because my Mom could see the blank expression in my face, she proceeded to lecture my on how this movie really is about the merits of per-marital sex. I didn’t quite understand so she elaborated that it shows how one should make sure to experience sex before committing to a lifelong relationship, because otherwise we might wind up with someone with an incompatible sexual temperament. I was 12. I still thought boys gave you cooties and at the time I was slightly traumatized. Now, I think this incident (and the general attitude in my house) went a long way to making sure I have a pretty healthy relationship with both myself and my husband (the story also makes for pretty amusing dinner party conversations). I’m pretty sure that if I had spent my childhood and adolescence being lectured on the long list of things ‘good girls’ don’t do, I probably wouldn’t be writing this piece right now. Would I still learn to enjoy sex and have a healthy relationship with my sexuality? Perhaps, who’s to say, but I’m pretty darn sure it would be very difficult. My story is just one example of how hard it is to disentangle the complicated factors which impact this very complex thing that is sex drive and sexual behavior in general.

Having said all that, scientists do keep having a go at studying the underlying causes of human sexual behavior and the determinants of our sex drive – and good on them! A recent study in Current Directions in Psychological Science by a Michigan psychologist Terri Conley and co-authors actually looked at some of most common myths about sexual differences between genders:

1. Men have more sex partners than women

Yes, men talk about their sex partners more than women do, but there’s no real data to show that it’s because they actually have more to talk about. It might be that they feel they can talk about it, because they won’t be called ‘sluts’ for doing so or…potentially they sometimes just make stuff up. Previously, sexologists largely based their studies of human sexuality solely on what subjects were telling the scientists (and remember there are some issues with that). Now, this really isn’t the way science should be conducted. If fictional doctors from fictional hospitals know that people don’t always tell the truth, surely super smart scientists should come around to that conclusion as well, right? Well good news – they did. Conley and colleagues came up with an interesting (if somewhat sneaky) way of getting their subjects to tell the truth about their sex partners – they hooked them up to a fake polygraph. Obviously, their interviews had no idea the thing didn’t actually work. The results were illuminating: Conley et al write, “When participants believed that their true sexual history could be revealed by the polygraph, gender differences in reported sexual partners disappeared.” Basically, it’s back to what I mentioned earlier – people tend to say what they think they should say, so women claim to have fewer partners and men tend to exaggerate the number of women they slept with. If you get them to speak truthfully it turns out that the differences in the number of sexual partners aren’t real.

2. Women aren’t into casual sex, men like nothing more

This assertion (scientifically) goes back to a now-famous study in which men and women approached subjects and offered to have casual sex with them. No women agreed to the proposition, but 70% of men did. According to a lot of folks, this was the ultimate proof that men were biologically hardwired for random sex and women avoided it. But, surprise surprise, things aren’t that simple. As it turns out, men and women were both more likely to accept a proposition if they thought the proposer would be good in bed — and women were much less likely to think that a random guy would have the skills to make it all worth the hassle. Plus there is the issue of safety – a random hookup is much less likely to turn violent for the guy involved. And not to be forgotten- the ghost of moralities past ‘slut-shaming’ – which is still doing pretty well for itself.

Finally:

3. Women are “picky,” but men will have sex with just about anyone

Conley et al point out that “assumptions about women’s choosiness have been based on our culture’s traditional gender dynamics” — particularly, the expectation that men should approach women while women should wait and silently bat their eyelashes at potential sex/romantic interests. One research team decided to turn the tables by asking women to approach men and a speed dating scenario. Here’s what happened:

“The mere act of physically approaching someone (i.e., simply rotating through potential partners and introducing oneself during speed-dating) caused individuals to evaluate potential partners more favorably (e.g., reporting greater romantic chemistry and increased likelihood of a romantic relationship developing). Moreover, when women approached men, women behaved more like men (becoming less choosy), and men behaved more like women (becoming more choosy). Thus, this research suggests that “choosiness” may be an artifact of gendered social norms concerning who approaches whom.” The review goes on to conclude that “gender differences are in fact rooted in much more mundane causes: stigma against women for expressing sexual desires; women’s socialization to attend to other’s needs rather than their own; and, more broadly, a double standard that dictates (different sets of) appropriate sexual behaviors for men and women.”

So, studies conducted so far suggest that there probably are some biological differences between men and women which may (or may not…) go beyond the anatomy of the sexual reproductive organs. The thing is, it’s currently an incredibly difficult exercise to actually dig through societal influences and get to the ‘biological core’ and the ‘true explanation’ of our behaviors. I wonder though how useful that would really be?

As just about anything, humans have complicated the relatively simple biology of sex with a lot of cultural influence. Simple things like eating and sleeping are no longer obvious to considerable numbers of human beings (notably insomniacs and people suffering from eating disorders). Why would we think that sexual intercourse is a simple act and we’ll all just follow our ‘biologic blueprint’ when we get around to it? And that’s assuming there really is one. Obviously, sex takes up a whole lot of people’s lives (doing it, thinking about it, watching card ads with nude ladies…) so we want to know as much as possible about it. In essence, this is a good thing – as applicable a science as any which may tell us something useful/enlightening about our nature. However, as I hope I have shown, the study of human sexual behavior is fraught with difficulty. Also, we need to keep in mind that it’s just that – the study of general human behavior and not research into what an individual human being should like/do. Really, the important take home message of most of this research is simply this: differences in sexual temperament are individual and not gender differences and it’s about time we got over this whole biological determinism thing and let people enjoy their sex lives without making thing difficult with gendered expectations.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/the-science-of-studying-sex/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/wanted-condom-coordinator/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/wanted-condom-coordinator/#comments Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:43:47 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67408

On my old radio show, I had a segment called “The Apocalypse is Coming,” during which I talked about ludicrous stories in the news (while playing this song in the background, because nothing says human suffering like a Richard Strauss tone poem named Also sprach Zarathustra) that, in my mind, indicated the impending arrival of The Four Horsemen. Examples included: Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi’s book “A Shore Thing”becoming a New York Times bestseller (let me tantalize you with an amuse bouche from her ghostwriter’s Ms. Polizzi’s masterful novel, a book so blindingly brilliant it will undoubtedly be compared by posterity to “A Tale of Two Cities”and other such classics: “Gia danced around a little, shaking her peaches for show. She shook it hard. Too hard. In the middle of a shimmy, her stomach cramped. A fart slipped out. A loud one. And stinky.”); Ashley Dupre, disgraced former Governor Eliot Spitzer’s favorite call girl, getting her own dating/sex advice column in the New York Post, showing young women all across our fine nation that the road to success and a paid column in a national outlet can be achieved through good fellatio skills, spreading your legs for money, an ability to tolerate your customers wearing socks during sex, and having a “magic vagina;” And the invention of this.

I’d like to bring that segment back and introduce it to you, glorious readers of Blast Magazine, because with every passing day, I encounter more and more stories that can only mean one thing: The end is near. And because I love you (well, more like lust for you, but good enough) I want to share our final days together. 

Currently, there are two reasons the end is near (besides, oh, the obvious reasons, such as Iran trying to get its hands on nuclear weapons and other trifling headlines of that sort): 

1. New York City’s Board of Education is looking to hire a Condom Coordinator to distribute condoms at public schools throughout the city and for that arduous task will pay them $88,000 to start (including medical benefits and a pension, and a free lifetime supply of rubbers – OK, that last part’s not true). This is when people like you and me need to pack it up and call it a day. For the love of God (and I’m not even religious), whatever happened to the old basket-outside-the-nurse’s-office strategy? Just UPS a vat of Trojans to the schools’ Health Services centers with a note saying: “Please distribute.” Because that makes much more sense than wasting a ridiculously large amount of taxpayer dollars on such a moronic job. Would that be so “hard” to do? Ba-dump-bump. On a side note: What would the Coordinator’s title be when he or she gets promoted? Magnum Condom Coordinator? Double ba-dump-bump. I’ll be here all week, folks!
2. Let’s leave New York City and go straight back to New York City for our next news item. Any minute a fiery ball of…fire is going to crash down upon us, just you wait and see. It’s been reported that sexual education classes at NYC public high schools and middle schools might delve into some X-rated lessons next year.And I’m not talking about lessons on all sorts of cool words that start with the letter X, like xanthareel, xanthospermous , or xylotomous. No. These lessons are of a more salacious nature. According to the New York Post story, here’s what the kids will be learning in addition to geometry and Greek mythology legends, like that one about the “Trojan” Horse. Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.

• High-school students go to stores and jot down condom brands, prices and features such as lubrication.
• Teens research a route from school to a clinic that provides birth control and STD tests, and write down its confidentiality policy.
• Kids ages 11 and 12 sort “risk cards” to rate the safety of various activities, including “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant,’’ mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral sex and anal sex.
• Teens are referred to resources such as Columbia University’s Web site Go Ask Alice, which explores topics like “doggie-style” and other positions, “sadomasochistic sex play,” phone sex, oral sex with braces, fetishes, porn stars, vibrators and bestiality.

I’m all for sexual education classes in schools today, because let’s face the facts: A lot of parents aren’t educating their children about sex, and it’s everywhere. In New York City alone, a large percentage of children live in single-parent homes, which means the burden of  parenting falls to the mother (in most cases) and when she’s out working multiple jobs that leaves little time for those birds and the bees discussions. That leaves the school systems, in loco parentis (I’ve come around to this argument). Kids are going to have sex so we need to educate them about sex (including abstinence). But have we really gotten to the point where we need to talk to our 12-year-olds about vibrators, porn stars, and bestiality? In the words of the Peanuts Gang’s inimitable Lucy: “Good grief!” 

Until next time, Blast readers, that is, if we haven’t plunged into the darkness of universal destruction by then. 

** 

Do you have any stories you want me to cover in the next installment of “The Apocalypse is Coming”? Leave your ideas below in the comments section.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/wanted-condom-coordinator/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/attention-passengers-not-pan-am-xxx-porn-parody-released/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/attention-passengers-not-pan-am-xxx-porn-parody-released/#comments Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:50:03 +0000 Shannon O'Neill http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67383

Whether or not you’re already a member of the mile high club, the just-released “Not Pan Am XXX” video will get you hot, bothered, and ready for liftoff!

Shot on a realistic Hollywood soundstage, the spoof video, directed by Will Ryder, will make you want to hop on the next flight and never get off…the plane.

Want some nuts? A pillow? A warm, wet towel? The “Not Pan Am” stewardesses, played by Kayden Kross, Misty Stone, Kacey Jordan, Teagan Presley, Sunny Lane, Shyla Stylez, Hillary Scott, Lexi Love and Kenzie Marie, offer their passengers all that and much, much more.

One of the pampered passengers is played by none other than world-famous Ron Jeremy, who gives a sexy stewardess the ride of her life (we bet she loves all that turbulence!).

This and other Will Ryder/X-Play movies, including “Not the Bradys XXX,” “Not Charlie’s Angels XXX” and “Not the Cosbys XXX,” are available here.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/attention-passengers-not-pan-am-xxx-porn-parody-released/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/feminism-the-winter-of-men%e2%80%99s-discontent/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/feminism-the-winter-of-men%e2%80%99s-discontent/#comments Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:16:29 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67148

“You only touch a nerve by telling a truth.”

Last week, I wrote an op-ed piece on the recent sexual assaults in Park Slope, Brooklyn and the ensuing contretemps surrounding a police officer’s controversial remarks to a woman about her attire. The remarks, seen as sexist, had feminists crying foul. In the article, I asked Susan Walsh of Hooking Up Smart (HUS), and Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon.net for their thoughts. Walsh and Marcotte are ideological opposites — Marcotte is one of the leaders of today’s feminist movement; Walsh believes that Marcotte and her ilk’s contemporary feminist doctrine is dangerous and counter-productive. After linking to my article on HUS, a war raged in the comments section, in which anti-feminist rants from men abounded. Naturally, Marcotte supporters were in the minority.  One battle in particular pitted some poor gal named “Stephanie” against everyone else, and although I disagree with her position, I give her credit for taking the time to understand contrasting viewpoints. As of press time, there were 370 comments and that number will likely grow until Walsh’s next blog entry.

Like many of Walsh’s posts that deal with feminism and modern-day sexual mores, my piece clearly hit a nerve among men. As Rebecca Traister once wrote in a Salon.com review of Maureen Dowd’s contentious book Are Men Necessary?: “You only touch a nerve by telling a truth.”

The truth in this case, I believe, is a very real burgeoning discontent among men today with the feminist movement.  While it’s difficult to know if the comments within Walsh’s post are representational of the larger male population, it would be disingenuous not to acknowledge a growing resentment, restlessness, and frustration that, contrary to what some may argue, does not seem to be operating at the fringes. In fact, it’s a sentiment that seems to be growing daily and in large numbers. Men are angry. And I suppose they should be.

In a recent article entitled Why Men Are in Trouble, which I also mentioned in a recent piece I wrote about the supposed sexist remark of Senator Scott Brown, author William Bennett offers insight into why this may be the case.

“The data does not bode well for men. In 1970, men earned 60 percent of all college degrees. In 1980, the figure fell to 50 percent, by 2006 it was 43 percent. Women now surpass men in college degrees by almost three to two. Women’s earnings grew 44 percent in real dollars from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6 percent growth for men. In 1950, 5 percent of men at the prime working age were unemployed. As of last year, 20 percent were not working, the highest ever recorded. Men still maintain a majority of the highest paid and most powerful occupations, but women are catching them and will soon be passing them if this trend continues.”

Additionally, in 2008, men represented 93 percent of all workplace deaths, even though women were responsible for 43 percent of all hours worked, and about 95 percent of workplace suicides in that same year were committed by men. Single men constitute about 60 percent of the homeless population.

Men are the ones now crying foul about countless topics: the divorce court system; Title IX; gender quotas; loosened employment physical standards (e.g. firefighters, police officers, military personnel, etc.) for women but not men; confusing dating mores (is it no wonder they’re running in droves to the Seduction Community?); male gender bias in school systems; disingenuous domestic violence numbers; misleading wage gap statistics; derailment of stimulus money for “testosterone-laden, shovel-ready” jobs. (On the topic of domestic violence: I’m beginning to see more and more examples of female on male violence. Just look at reality television, for instance. Shows like Teen Mom and Jersey Shore show frequent examples of this sort of abuse. In the case of Teen Mom, one of the female leads was arrested for her actions, but when Jenni “JWOWW” Farley attacked Mike “The Situation” Sorrentino – see video here – nobody seemed to bat an eyelash. Compare that collective indifference with the headlines sweeping the nation when Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi was hit by a man – see video here. How many examples of female on male violence are actually reported, anyway? And finally, God help me for knowing those fist-pumping delinquents’ names by heart.)

A blogger named “Byron,” a frequent commenter on Walsh’s site and an eloquent one at that, sums up the growing disillusionment in a different way. In his personal blog, he writes: “We cannot apply identical expectations to both men and women, as men and women are, by definition, different. If you have a law or a morality that is very easy for 50 percent of the people to live under and very hard for the other 50 percent, it isn’t a fair law, and it isn’t a healthy morality.”

If the pendulum of gender equality once swung all the way to one side it’s now perhaps well on its way to the other.  I’m truly thankful to the Suffragettes of yesteryear, who, frustrated with their social and economic lot in life, helped women make tremendous gains. I’m truly thankful to the feminists who helped pave the way for equal pay and equal rights and equal opportunity. Just the other day, I was having a conversation with a woman who has been a college professor for 35 years. She told me that when she first started teaching, a couple of the male faculty members at the college where she worked asked if she wanted to join the faculty wives club. “I sent my husband,” she said with a Cheshire Cat grin. While not the most abhorrent of statements and probably not intended maliciously, I certainly wouldn’t want to go back to those days (although watching this guy live would have been fun).

I can’t help but wonder, though: When it comes to the present day, as men’s bitterness grows and women’s progress continues at the expense of men’s, has the fairer sex gone too far? Are we now committing the sins that we spent years admonishing men for?

Men sure think so. They argue misandry is on the rise.

The anti-misandry movement, however, is also on the rise, bubbling just below the surface of mainstream reporting. Type in the word “misandry” into a Google search, though, and all sorts of articles and book titles appear. On YouTube, there are hundreds of videos dealing with the subject. Websites and blogs dedicated to exposing feminist indoctrination flourish. (This video in particular I found poignant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZAuqkqxk9A.)

Men are starting to feel like they’re the enemy. That sentiment makes sense when you come across blogs like Eve’s Daughter, in which she dedicates an entire post to listing all the ways men are rape-supporters. The first bullet point says a man is a rape-supporter if “he’s ever sexually engaged with a woman while she was drunk or high.” There go the celebrated days of Woodstock…

When I inserted myself into the hullabaloo over at Walsh’s site, I asked the male commenters the following question: “There seems to be a growing animosity and resentment from men towards the feminist movement, and it’s certainly reflected in these threads. I am curious to know: From a male POV, what could the feminist movement do to bring men on board?”

I don’t align myself with the modern-day feminist movement (although I am grateful for gains previous waves achieved), but I am curious to know from the male perspective if there’s a way to bridge what I see as an ever-growing divide – one that more and more seems to be pitting the sexes against each other rather than uniting them. Men want to be heard when it comes to these topics; they want to talk freely and openly as men but, ironically, feel that their honesty only brings tsking, shame and derision (the way women once felt or still feel, perhaps). But how can we get anywhere unless we have honest discussion? Or, in the words of blogger Byron: “How do you talk between the sexes about the differing experiences of sex?”I, for one, wanted to listen to what they had to say. Here is a small sampling of some of their responses:

Wayfinder: For me, the good in the post-first-wave feminist movement was co-opted on the academic side around the time of deconstructionism. The academy has moved past that, but feminism is still mired in the 20th century ideologies that produced it. In attempting to root out underlying ideologies behind prejudices, they became the thought crime enforcers they were trying to fight.

So, I’m not sure that the feminist movement needs men or women at this point. I think its ideology is due for being replaced with something a bit more gender-realist, something that acknowledges that there are differences between the sexes and that the women actually like it that way aren’t brainwashed.

To put it another way, feminists have defined masculinity as the enemy while simultaneously trying to ape the male-success standards. Cultures have existed that celebrated women’s achievements, but feminists discount them because they aren’t defined as male achievements.

To address the point I think you’re looking for, feminism can’t bring men on board until they stop defining male masculinity and female femininity as the enemy.

Jesus Mahoney: Way back in 2002, Shelby Steele wrote a great essay for Harpers entitled :The Age of White Guilt: and the disappearance of the black individual” about the Civil Rights Movement in America, and I think that much of what he says there can be applied to the Feminist Movement equally well.

I’m sure you can find a link to it somewhere, but the gist of the article is that a political movement that demands recompense for grievances (i.e. a movement of people playing the victim card) robs the individuals that comprise that group of their personal power, and therefore cannot achieve anything of lasting value.

In short, insofar as battle against racism has been won at all, it’s been done by black individuals who have shown their worth in society, not by black groups shouting for freedom and equality.

In short, people should stop jockeying for political power and start reclaiming their individual power.

If women want power, they need to start living lives of power instead of complaining about being victims.  In other words, they have to display their value to society instead of just screaming about it.

In short, Feminists must have been snoozing through high school English while their teachers were exhorting them to “show, don’t tell.”

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/feminism-the-winter-of-men%e2%80%99s-discontent/feed/ 49 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/though-shalt-not-judge-others-orgasms-the-lesson-freud-never-learned/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/though-shalt-not-judge-others-orgasms-the-lesson-freud-never-learned/#comments Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:38:30 +0000 Maria Pawlowska http://blastmagazine.com/?p=67054

Sigmund Freud barely needs an introduction. He is none other than the father of psychoanalysis; the man who gave the world the ‘ego’ and ‘Id’; the famous Austrian doctor who discovered the subconsciousness and who persuaded millions to blame (all) their problems on their mothers. But Freud also made other ‘discoveries’ which are not as often spoken about (for good reasons…) today, but the effects of which resonated through bedrooms and medical textbooks worldwide for almost a century. And those are related to Freud’s theories about female sexuality.

Freud never held females in too high a regard and didn’t make much of a secret of it. The idea of ‘penis envy’ clearly could be spawned only in the mind of a man who didn’t think women could aspire to much at all. His personal relationships with women were complex to say the least – having an affair with your own sister-in-law isn’t the best way to secure a happy marriage and blissful family life. It is perhaps no surprise then that his writings about women are full of sweeping statements on their (sexual) inferiority with little or no factual support. The surprise is that people still took his word for it at least half a century later.

Freud’s initial idea was that as women matured — emotionally and sexually — their erotic zones were ‘transferred’ from the clitoris to the vagina. This ‘reallocation’ of the center of sexual pleasure was, according to Freud, crucial for reproduction and the proper development of a heterosexual identity. Freud’s disciples went somewhat further and began interpreting the failure to achieve vaginal orgasm as a sign of frigidity and not solely sexual immaturity. In the quaintly titled “The sexually adequate female,” Frank S. Caprio, a contemporary follower of Freud’s ideas elaborated that “…whenever a woman is incapable of achieving an orgasm via coitus, provided the husband is an adequate partner, and prefers clitoral stimulation to any other form of sexual activity, she can be regarded as suffering from frigidity and requires psychiatric assistance.” (The Sexually Adequate Female, p.64.). This gem of a book was first published in 1953 — the world was a decade away from the equal pay act and Betty Friedan’s seminal ‘Feminine mystique’ — and yet here was Dr. Caprio diagnosing mental disease in women who liked making use of the only known organ whose sole biological function is to give pleasure!

Women who desired having their clitoris stimulated were thought to behave like men, because they preferred their ‘external’ organ pleasured rather than indulging in the ‘feminine passivity’ of accepting a phallus into their vagina. Consequently, it was thought that as a result of their obvious lack of feminine behaviors they were likely to be awful mothers and would probably fall victim to mental disease and general ‘social disintegration’ (talk about jumping to conclusions). A treatise on sexual issues from 1937 strongly recommends (in the spirit of disaster prevention) that if a woman is unable to reach coital orgasm, sitting astride the man ‘is certainly better than titillation of the clitoris’.

Today we know that there is absolutely no evidence for Freud’s idea of a transfer in female erotic zones — it seems he made the whole thing up sitting in his comfy Vienna office. What’s more, in light of current anatomical and sexological knowledge the whole idea seems pretty absurd (although, I’m sorry to report, the myth of a ‘better’ vaginal orgasm is still alive and well in a lot of corners around the Internet and many peoples’ minds).

The notion of a clitoral orgasm being different from a vaginal one was only really possible in a world where there was very little knowledge about female anatomy (Freud never really cared to learn any himself). What we have come to think of as the ‘clitoris’ is quite literally only the tip of the organ, which in fact can be up to 5 inches long. The internal portions of the clitoris surround the vaginal opening and canal and have more sensory endings than the relatively poorly innervated vaginal walls. Plainly speaking, ‘vaginal orgasms’ are commonly the result of either external indirect stimulation of the clitoris (perhaps the source from the partiality of many 19th century women towards ‘riding astride’ their husbands was that this position results in stimulating the clitoris without the use of hands); or internally – friction against the vaginal walls excites the nerve endings in the interior parts of the clitoris and…kazaaam! Vaginal orgasm.

However, there is much more to the (female) orgasm than just the vagina or the clitoris. Medically speaking, the orgasm is an autonomic physiologic response to various kinds of stimulation which is often (but not always) experienced or perceived as sexual. Importantly, stimulation doesn’t even have to be tactile and there is definitely no rule which says that female genitals have to be touched at all for an orgasm to take place. “Women on Top: How Real Life Has Changed Women’s Sexual Fantasies” – Nancy Friday’s follow-up book to her ground-breaking book on female sexual fantasies “The Secret Garden” – gives numerous descriptions of women who achieved orgasm by simply fantasizing in the shower or having their nipples caressed. No penetration of any kind was involved. Now, that would be pretty much guaranteed to blow Freud’s mind if he ever heard about it. He’d probably swiftly proceed to come up with elaborate schemes about how, for example, too much education resulted in the transfer of sexuality to the brain instead of the vagina or how a perverted breast-feeding relationship with a mother could have been the cause of nipple stimulation leading women to orgasm. In fact, in his essay “The Psychology of Women” Freud actually did formulate his cure to nearly all manner of female sexual ‘neuroses’ – the “abandonment of the life of the mind”. In Freud’s opinion, women simply couldn’t handle having their brains and vaginas functioning properly at the same time. It was an “either, or” as far as Sigmund was concerned (now, maybe it’s just me, but I really think this guy seriously underestimated half the human species…).

Freud never cared much about what women themselves had to say about their sexuality. He pretty much had his mind made up before he even got started on ‘studying’ the issue. Mind you, there wasn’t any particularly useful studying to do, unless you were willing to do some actual high quality primary research with real women, which Freud wasn’t. He just listened to a few ‘experts’ and added some of his own wisdom. Importantly, back in those days, experts were all men who, similarly to Freud, did not think women could contribute to the scientific knowledge base, even if they were the object of study. These male experts reasoned that. being the superior sex, they could surely draw their own conclusions which would by definition be more insightful than anything a woman could tell them about her ‘private parts’ (also, it would spare them the embarrassment and possible accusation of indecent behavior which would have surely cropped up once word of investigations with real women would have spread).

It perhaps doesn’t take much feminist deconstructing to come to the conclusion that male doctors’ doctrines about sex had a lot to do with male expectations and experiences of sex. Men generally thought that penetrating a vagina provided for a jolly good time, so surely women must really like it too. And if they don’t, then, by golly, there must have been something wrong with them. I’ll admit – this is a bit of an oversimplification of doctors’ discourse on female sexuality prior to the 70s. But just a bit… All manner of medical professionals (psychiatrists, family doctors and gynecologists to name the most prominently involved) firmly believed that favoring clitoral stimulation makes a women “sexually inferior” because she doesn’t need a penis to have a good time. The logic was that a penis made a women complete – that’s what the cavity of the vagina is for, right? So if a woman doesn’t want to be ‘complete’, she’s surely demented in one way or another.

Thankfully, we moved past these assumptions since then, but there is still a lot of negative over-thinking going into female sexuality. As the amazing sex-educator Heather Corinna points out, “ever hear someone talk about a penis orgasm?” No? That’s because male sexuality is accepted as more natural, almost simpler in a way – men want sex. What more is there to analyze/think/talk about? Women, on the other hand…ah…now that’s more complex…they want sex but they don’t, they’re maternal and not sexual, they have different orgasms in different places and it’s all oh so complicated. I’m not saying we shouldn’t study female sexuality – far from it! But we should definitely step back and let individual people enjoy their sex lives without worrying that they have inferior orgasms or there’s something wrong with them because they guy who invented psychoanalysis said so…

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/though-shalt-not-judge-others-orgasms-the-lesson-freud-never-learned/feed/ 1 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/analyzing-park-slope-and-skirtgate/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/analyzing-park-slope-and-skirtgate/#comments Fri, 14 Oct 2011 19:50:57 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=66878

Park Slope, Brooklyn: One of New York City’s most desirable neighborhoods and home to a whole bunch of famous people, like Steve Buscemi and that actor everyone confuses with Samuel L. Jackson. Recently, though, Park Slope hasn’t been so idyllic. A slew of gropings, rapes, and molestations have occurred since March, making the locale more infamous than anything else. The suspect has been targeting women between the ages of 20 and 35, all of whom at the time of assault were wearing short-hemmed clothing. (Police do have a “person of interest” in custody as of October 11.)

A recent Wall Street Journal article covering the attacks had me thinking about what I believe to be a tragically misguided focus. According to the Journal, police officers patrolling the area have been telling young, female residents to be mindful of what they’re wearing because the assaulter has been going after women dressed in short skirts. Granted, some of the quotes from the officer, as mentioned by “Lauren,” sound a bit obnoxious, especially if, in your head, you add a certain tone or emphasis on particular words. But there’s no way to know exactly how those warnings were delivered by the officer, unless you have access to a flux capacitor and a Delorean. I digress. The point I want to make is that instead of focusing on the assaults and keeping women safe, some members of the fairer sex have seized on the cops’ sartorial advice and deemed it inappropriate, insensitive, and sexist.

NYPD spokesman Paul Browne responded to the uproar by saying: “Officers are not telling women what not to wear — there’s a TV series that does that.” (Do I smell a career in stand-up?) He continues: “They are simply pointing out that as part of the pattern involving one or more men that the assailant(s) have targeted women wearing skirts.”

Alas, Skirtgate was born.

The incident soon became the latest cause celebre for feminist groups, inspiring protests and yet another Slut Walk, a demonstration against explaining or excusing rape by referring to any aspect of a woman’s appearance. Not too long ago I attended the Boston version of Slut Walk, organized by feminist figure Jaclyn Friedman.

While I agree that the way a woman dresses is NEVER an invitation to be raped or sexually assaulted (I’m having visuals of the horrific Jodie Foster rape scene from The Accused), I do have to wonder: What’s so wrong with suggesting that women exercise a little common sense in these scenarios? If I know that a man is assaulting women wearing short skirts in a certain area around a certain time, you can damn well be sure that I’ll take all precautions necessary. Nor would I ever tell my daughter (if I ever have one) the following: “Sure, honey, wear those hooker heels and that dress that barely covers your vagina proudly when you walk through Boston Common at 3 a.m. on a Saturday.”

The notion that humanity is perfectible — that we can reason with or socially engineer sick-minded individuals — is puerile. We do not live in an ideal world. We never will. Unfortunately, we live in a world where police won’t always be able to save everyone or catch the criminal right away. Unfortunately, we also live in a world where this happens and people like this exist. We do not live in an ideal world. So what’s wrong with merely suggesting that women take precautions?

I admire their passion and dedication, but I do think that certain feminists are so ideologically attached to their ideas that they often become blinded to reality. What if a woman came forward on the night of a Park Slope attack and said she felt she had been saved by an officer’s counsel earlier that day, in which he mentioned to be sure to cover up late at night? Of course, there’s no way to know for sure in this hypothetical if that’s the reason the attacker avoided her and went after someone else, but would the feminists turn a blind eye to this kind of testimony? I wonder.

I would be remiss, however, if I didn’t mention the fact that I remember many nights walking home late from the bars in outfits that, to be sure, revealed some skin. Part of me feels a bit uncomfortable, hypocritical even, espousing calls for good judgment when the mistakes of my youth burn brightly in my memory. But the truth is I was lucky. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with dispensing advice based on the filtered wisdom one gains with age.

After writing this piece and tiring of my own opinions on the matter, I was curious to see what others had to say about the Park Slope contretemps, so I reached out to a few people who I knew would view the incident through different lenses. The first of which was Susan Walsh, author of the popular blog Hooking Up Smart (HUS), a strategic take on dating, sex, and relationships. Walsh was a guest on my radio show back in the day. She was recently profiled in this tremendous piece about the lives and realities of today’s single woman. HUS has a large following and is worth a weekly check-in.

Next, I contacted the aforementioned Jaclyn Friedman, Feministing.com’s Jessica Valenti, and author and speaker Amanda Marcotte, all avowed feminists and leaders of the movement. Marcotte responded; I never heard from Friedman or Valenti. Marcotte, by the way, is no stranger to controversy – this woman has balls! (In one of her entries for John Edwards’ campaign blog, of which she was blogmaster, she wrote: “Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.” Yowsa!)

In many of Walsh’s blog entries, she goes toe-to-toe with all three ladies, so I figured their juxtaposed opinions would be interesting. Below are Walsh’s and Marcotte’s thoughts on Skirtgate and a few other topics I wanted them to answer about dating, sex, relationships, and feminism.

Their responses couldn’t be more different. Check them out below – they are worth a read. Who do you agree with?

BLAST: What was your reaction to the Park Slope incident in which cops warned women about wearing short skirts?

MARCOTTE: First, I want to draw your attention to the fact that the NYPD responded to feminist complaints.

It was unacceptable of the NYPD officers to exploit the existence of a rapist as a cover story for an obvious power trip on women. Authoritarians all over the world love how rape gives them an excuse to indulge the misogynistic desire to tell women what to wear and how to act, but the police work for us, and because of this, they should treat women with respect. We women, after all, pay their salaries with our taxes.

WALSH: I understand why the women who were stopped by the policeman were offended. He may have been insensitive in his approach. I think it’s very important to consider his intention, though. As far as I can tell he was attempting to advise women about real risks to their safety. Though the journalist suggests that the police department disapproves of all shorts, skirts and dresses, he appears to have specifically taken issue with “short shorts” and dresses that “show a lot of skin.” Is it in fact prudent for women in that neighborhood to be careful about their appearance and behavior at night? Of course!

The WSJ article describes how many women in the neighborhood are taking concrete steps to stay safe. 80 have attended self-defense workshops. Women have stopped wearing high heels because they make it difficult to run away from an assailant. Women have been observed taking taxis to travel two blocks at night. All of these strategies are sensible and effective. Do they guarantee that a woman will not be attacked? Of course not, but they lessen her risk considerably.

Does it lessen a woman’s risk to refrain from “showing a lot of skin” at night in the very neighborhood where these attacks are occurring? Probably! It sure can’t hurt! Evidence that all of the attacks have been against women in skirts just adds to the good sense of such a strategy.

What’s going on among feminists here is that the political is getting in the way of the personal. When we stifle prudent advice to women about keeping themselves safe from assault because it doesn’t fit the agenda of sex-positive feminism, we risk the health and safety of women in a very real and measurable way.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/analyzing-park-slope-and-skirtgate/feed/ 20 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/the-history-of-nymphomania/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/the-history-of-nymphomania/#comments Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:04:28 +0000 Maria Pawlowska http://blastmagazine.com/?p=66803

What do cows’ uteruses, decreased diary production and attitudes towards women’s openly expressed sexuality have in common? Unless you’re an expert in bovine anatomy the answer may come as a surprise to you: it’s nymphomania.

Nymphomania is a term for short inter-oestrus periods in cattle, but it’s also (mainly?) used to describe women with ‘abnormal’ sexual urges. The way that this abnormality was defined has changed dramatically over time, but is best characterized with a quote from the famous Dr. Kinsey himself — “A nymphomaniac is someone who has more sex than you do.”

The story of nymphomania is a sad tale of a time when women weren’t acknowledged as sexual beings and judged/jailed/held in mental hospitals against their will if they were not willing to conform to the ideal (or rather sick contortion) of women as sexless creatures. It’s a story of women who were all forcefully classified within the virgin/whore dichotomy. The only reputable way to lose one’s virginal status was to become a wife and bear children conceived in a dark bedroom with as little pleasure as possible. Of course, at the same time it was a very different deal for men. They were mostly allowed as much premarital sex as their money could afford – as long as they weren’t defiling reputable women that is.

Well into the 20th century women weren’t supposed to like sex. Sex was thought to be something that men pursued and women unwillingly gave up so that they could fulfil their lives’ goal by bearing the heirs their husbands wanted and the little darlings they needed to lavish with their innate motherly feelings on.

The thing is, although society has largely managed to ignore this fact and a tonne of medical books has been written to the contrary, women do in fact have a sex drive. When girls hit puberty and start producing sex hormones (oestrogens as well as testosterone) they start having (consciously or not) sexual feelings. There is a small percentage (less than 1%) of the population, both female and male, that is asexual and genuinely does not want or need to have sex. The rest of us are destined to a life in which carnal urges will play a role at some point. However, the whole concept of nymphomania is built-up on the completely false assumption of sexual urges being unique and healthy to men and a sign of disease and lack of mental stability in women.

In order to understand the history and societal significance of nymphomania, we have to take a closer look at its supposed opposite: female frigidity. The latter was basically assumed to be the status quo for female sexuality in the US and much of Europe (if you weren’t a ‘working girl’ that is). There was never much evidence to back this up (ahem…I don’t know, maybe because it’s an entirely false claim?). However, this perception was likely to be fueled by anecdotal evidence from men who spent their wedding nights with terrified young wives who had no idea about sex and all of a sudden had their clothes ripped off and a penis inserted into their vagina with no prior warning (other than perhaps fumbling with breasts for a few seconds) and nothing to arouse them beforehand. Usually, the deed was done within a few minutes, the marriage consummated and legal, and the wife left thinking (quite correctly) that she’s survived something awful and dreading it happening again. As much as we may like to, we shouldn’t put all the blame on the husbands. The ‘poor’ chaps were brought up and socialized to think women take absolutely no pleasure in sex and they perceive it a mechanical act which needs to happen in order to make them mothers. Who needs foreplay if all you really want is to change diapers.

However, there were women the world round, who could not be convinced they don’t like sex. Even if everyone around them tried to convince them otherwise they still seemed to enjoy making use of their genitals for things other than procreation. And so nymphomania was born. It was defined as a multitude of behaviors ranging from “lascivious glances” and flirting through masturbation and attempts to convince husbands to have more sex, all the way to actual physical attacks on men to enforce intercourse.

It’s not a recent invention. Nymphomania, or a Dissertation Concerning the Furor Uterinus was written by an obscure French doctor, M. D. T. Bienville, and translated into English in 1775. The good doctor helpfully explained that “Eating rich food, consuming too much chocolate, dwelling on impure thoughts, reading novels, or performing “secret pollutions” (masturbating), overstimulates women’s delicate nerve fibers and leads to nymphomania.” Thank goodness there were people like Dr. Bienville to look after the “delicate nerve fibers” of women who eat too much chocolate or indulged in the obscenity of reading novels…

In the Victorian period the common perception – among the medical profession as well as patients – was that strong female sexual desire was a symptom of disease. Sexual madness was an actual concern among (mostly) “refined and virtuous” women and their physicians. And the women weren’t just worried about possible inconveniences. Openly having a libido could get a woman into serious trouble in Victorian England. And by trouble I mean an awful mental hospital that one could get locked away in for years. Shockingly, women didn’t have to want sex to be diagnosed as a nymphomaniac. The outright opposite was sometimes true and victims of sexual assault were deemed to be diagnosed with this ‘disease’ just as women who bore illegitimate children, “abused themselves” (i.e. masturbated), or were judged as promiscuous. Once at the asylum, women underwent a pelvic exam to determine a number of things including the size of their clitoris and the moistness of their vagina. If any of these were deemed unsatisfactory by the physicians the patients were forced to undergo ‘treatments’. These were nothing like the rather benign ‘vibrator therapy’ of the early 20th century and instead involved induced vomiting, bloodletting (also in the reproductive organs), restricted diet, douches to the head or breasts, and, at times, clitoridectomies (i.e. removal of clitoris).

Attitudes towards women and sexuality relaxed – in parallel with women’s growing role in society and their increased independence – and over the 19th and 20th century women were rarely locked away for wanting sex. A bit of a breakthrough for nymphomania came with Freud. The father of psychoanalysis certainly has quite a few accomplishments to his name, but he was no expert on female sexuality. Freud was a self-proclaimed misogynist and his views on women are perhaps best known thanks to his misguided (to say the least) theories on penis envy. Freud’s views on nymphomania rather missed the spot as well, but they did redirect the discourse around it. Building on his now discredited idea of the superiority of vaginal vs. clitoral orgasms, Freud and his disciples claimed that, far from being a sign of excessive sexuality, nymphomania actually sprang from frigidity. The sexually immature woman, they argued, was unable to orgasm during intercourse and took lovers in order to achieve sexual satisfaction. And so for a time nymphomania became the disease of unsatisfied women. With this we were getting closer to the crux of the matter – nymphomania is in fact a term that describes women who like sex and are willing to actively pursue. Sounds familiar? Ah, right. Isn’t that what we expect of healthy males?

As the sexual revolution rolled around, the medical establishment, as well as regular people, became more accustomed with the fact that women can in fact enjoy sex without being mentally ill and the psychiatric definitions changed in step with societal perception. Distressingly, the term held out in court rooms for an inexcusably long-time – nymphomania was commonly used in rape cases to defend male rapists – “the victim didn’t just ‘ask for it’, your Honour she basically threw herself at my client, this sick nymphomaniac women.”

A brief overview of the history of nymphomania as seen through the American Psychiatric Association’s official guide to madness – the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) – is fairly illuminating about more than just development of psychiatry. In DSM-1 nymphomania was listed as a “sexual deviation”. When DSM-III was published in 1980 nymphomania was ‘degraded’ to a “psychosexual disorder”. By 1987 nymphomania and its male counterpart, Don Juanism, had been replaced them with “distress about a pattern of repeated sexual conquests or other forms of nonparaphilic (nondeviant) sexual addiction.” In 1994 (DSM-IV) even sexual addiction was abandoned and straightdope.com has a great explanation for why this happened: “perhaps because the non-gender-specific nature of the term laid bare the speciousness of the whole project: If men as well as women can be sex addicts, and if many male victims (Bill Clinton, Joe Namath) are successful, admired, and largely unrepentant, it seems stupid to characterize as an illness what a lot of people would consider an accomplishment.”

Curiously, according to the WHO women can still suffer from nymphomania. The WHO’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) includes “Excessive Sexual Drive” which is divided into satyriasis for males and nymphomania for females, and “Excessive Masturbation”. What makes this even more curious is that there is no definition of “excessive sexual drive” (Dr. Kinsey had a pretty good suggestion…) and doctors “considering such a diagnosis are advised to formulate their own criteria of excessive sexual drive”. For some reason when it comes to tuberculosis, AIDS or schizophrenia doctors aren’t left the leeway to come up on the spot with what constitutes a disease symptom but when it’s an issue concerning our sex lives we’re (or at least the WHO is) happy to hand it over to them. This is potentially dangerous as we’ve seen how much of what defines healthy sexuality has nothing to do with health but everything to do with societal conventions.

In the 21st century we’re slowly moving past policing women’s sexuality (and men’s – but let’s be honest, we never really cared so much about their ‘sleeping around’ anyway). However, pop-culture and our daily lives – I’m sure – abound with examples of how we judge women’s sexual conduct differently (read: more harshly) then men’s. For example, in a recent episode of “How I Met Your Mother” (a hugely popular sit-com hailed as the new “Friends,” one of the main characters says that if he were to meet a women and have sex with her the same day she would be a “huge slut.” It doesn’t seem to occur to him (or his best friend with whom he’s having the conversation and who nods approvingly all the way through) to judge himself on the decision to have sex within hours of meeting someone. He’d just be doing what all dudes want to do – aim to have a ton of sex, right? She’d, on the other hand, be a “slut.”

It’s important to see slut-shaming for what it is – a new incarnation of “nymphomaniac-shaming.” Women used to be judged as crazy for liking sex, now they’re just ‘immoral’ if they have ‘too much of it’ (according to a recent survey the number of sex partners a women has to have to merit being called a slut is … five).

Nymphomania isn’t quite dead. It pops up every now and again – usually in the close company of the phrase ‘sex-crazed’. It’s not as damning as it used to be. The term doesn’t sentence women to years in mental institutions anymore; it’s more of a joke. “Slut” is the new, dangerous bad word. Again, no mental institutions are involved, but societal ostracism can be as bad as ever. We, as a society, should remember about nymphomania’s fate every time women are slut-shamed. And most of all, we should remember the moral of that story: female sexuality has a (continuous) history of being unreasonably judged and policed and unless we put a definite stop to it, gender equality will continue to be a goal and not reality.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/the-history-of-nymphomania/feed/ 1 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/xxx-parody-a-wet-dream-on-elm-street-available-now/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/xxx-parody-a-wet-dream-on-elm-street-available-now/#comments Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:04:48 +0000 Shannon O'Neill http://blastmagazine.com/?p=66785

Freddy Krueger is back, and he’s ready to make you scream with fear and pleasure–that is, if burned flesh, a raspy voice and long metal fingers are what you’re into.

Just in time for Halloween, Tom Byron Pictures and director Lee Roy Myers have released their newest X-rated comedy-horror film, “A Wet Dream on Elm Street.” In the parody of Wes Craven’s slasher classic “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” Freddy (Anthony Rosano), a greedy sex toy dealer, is burned alive by his angry customers who are sick and tired of being overcharged for their dildos. In true Freddy fashion, he comes back and haunts the dreams of Elm Street’s hot and horny residents.

“Horror and sex go together perfectly,” says Myers. “Both get hearts racing, though with different outcomes.  Mix in some humor, and we have sexy, scary and hysterical parodies true fans can enjoy.”

The flick, starring Jennifer White, Sophie Dee, Gracie Glam, Charley Chase and Giselle Leon, can be ordered here.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/xxx-parody-a-wet-dream-on-elm-street-available-now/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-news/politics/leave-the-sexist-card-out-of-the-scott-brown-race-please/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-news/politics/leave-the-sexist-card-out-of-the-scott-brown-race-please/#comments Fri, 07 Oct 2011 20:26:57 +0000 Neely Steinberg http://blastmagazine.com/?p=66545

During last week’s Democratic debate, when questioned how she put herself through school, Senate hopeful Elizabeth Warren responded: “I didn’t take my clothes off” (referring, of course, to Scott Brown’s salacious 1982 Cosmopolitan pictorial, the proceeds of which apparently helped him pay for his education at Tufts University). Everyone laughed and all was merry. A couple days later, when asked during an interview by a WZLX disc jockey for a response to Warren’s jab, Brown responded: “Thank God.” Cue the insanity.

Now, Brown’s response could have been taken two ways. He could have meant that it would have been tragic for her to feel the need to pay for her education by offering her body in exchange for money, as many college women seem to be doing nowadays. (On a side note: Watch me grill the CEO of seekingarrangements.com, the “elite sugar daddy site of those seeking mutually beneficial relationships,” in this video (below). I’m the one on the left.)

Or, Brown meant that seeing Elizabeth Warren in the buff would be about as pleasurable as a root canal.

Of course, we all know that he meant the latter, which is why a bunch of women (and men, too, although let’s face it: more women) out there have their panties in a bunch. That sexist pig! Or, in the words of Terry O’Neill, president of National Organization for Women,  as told to Politico: “This is the kind of sexist misogynistic attack that we have very sadly come to expect from politicians whenever there is a strong woman who is capable and really dedicated to the betterment of all the people.”

To which I say: Get your panties out of your ass, unless it’s a thong, which would be physically impossible but you get my drift, and get a sense of humor. Have we as a nation become so unfunny and so beholden to pussyfooting (no pun intended) that we’ve lost our collective sense of humor?

Why do women need to be treated like such delicate flowers, anyway? If the fairer sex can dish it out, shouldn’t we be able to take it? Women have scrutinized and made fun of Governor Chris Christie’s weight, former Senator and all-around deuche John Edwards’ hair, and Senator John Kerry’s (alleged) Botox treatments, to name a few, yet we are incapable of handling a little joke about not wanting to see a 62-year-old woman naked? Frankly, who would?

Actually, me. I would. It would be awesome. If Hef or that guy from Hustler were smart they would capitalize on the hubbub and offer Warren a spread (again, no pun intended), or some enterprising genius should sell a calendar for charity called Babes of the Senate, featuring Warren (should she win the general election) and some of the other ladies currently in office. It would look sort of like this or this, except more awesome.

Besides, women don’t have all that much to complain about nowadays in the area of liberation. We’ve largely achieved equality (although a wage gap still exists, it isn’t as wide as typically reported and may never go away fully — read Kay Hymowitz’s piece); in fact, women have begun to surpass men in a number of areas.

Didn’t we fight tooth and nail all these years for women to be able to celebrate acts like this and this with wild abandon and without stigma attached? And now we’re going to kick up our stilettos over an innocent little barb? One more thing: Not to sound like a 10-year-old, but, like, she started it.

Let’s leave the sexist card out of this one, ladies. Frankly, it’s time for us all to man up a little.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-news/politics/leave-the-sexist-card-out-of-the-scott-brown-race-please/feed/ 1 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/rihanna-sex-tape/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/rihanna-sex-tape/#comments Thu, 25 Aug 2011 12:25:51 +0000 Blast Magazine Newsroom http://blastmagazine.com/?p=64749

Rihanna performs at the Staples Center on June 28, in Los Angeles. (WireImage)

Seriously?

If the rumors are true, Rihanna may be the latest celebrity to have a sex tape leaked.

Hustler claims to be in possession of a video showing Rihanna and J-Cole doing the dirty, RadarOnline reports.

“Hustler are in possession of the Rihanna and J-Cole tape,” a Hustler representative told Radar. “We have seen it and we do not know what we are going to do with it yet.”

RiRi has denied the rumors.

“We don’t believe U, U need more people…AND ofcourse an actual sextape! #slownewsday,” she tweeted.

J-Cole opened for Rihanna’s 2011 Loud tour and she appeared in the music video for his song “Just Can’t Get Enough.”

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/rihanna-sex-tape/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/tasha-reign-reacts-to-her-penthouse-centerfold/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/tasha-reign-reacts-to-her-penthouse-centerfold/#comments Mon, 08 Aug 2011 03:40:51 +0000 Blast Magazine Newsroom http://blastmagazine.com/?p=63807

Registering at 5-foot-5 with green eyes and blond hair, Tasha Reign is the, pardon the pun, reigning centerfold in the August issue of Penthouse.

She was also the May 2011 Pet of the Month, for those of you keeping score at home.

“I have been told that this is truly a rare occurrence to be a Pet one month and the centerfold spread two months later,” said Tasha, reaching to her latest appearance in Penthouse. “It’s actually a bit overwhelming and also way cool.”

The bombshell is not even primarily a magazine layout girl. The 22-year-old Californian is new to the adult industry, debuting in 2010 in a lesbian porn film. She is seen as one of the rising stars in the industry.

“It is our great pleasure at Penthouse to have Penthouse Pet Tasha Reign once again grace the pages of our magazine,” says Penthouse Publicist Lainie Speiser. “She is beautiful, dynamic and very exciting to look at, so much so we just had to have her back again so soon after her initial appearance in Penthouse’s May 2011 issue. We give our readers what they want, and they made it plain they couldn’t get enough of Tasha Reign.”

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/tasha-reign-reacts-to-her-penthouse-centerfold/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/porn-comes-to-facetime/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/porn-comes-to-facetime/#comments Mon, 09 May 2011 18:34:39 +0000 Blast Magazine Newsroom http://blastmagazine.com/?p=60656

We knew this day would come. As Apple’s Facetime technology — and competing tech from other mobile companies — makes video calling popular after two decades of existence, pornography has come to take advantage of the trends.

iP4Play bills itself as the “first and only provider of live adult entertainment utilizing Apple’s FaceTime technology.”

Miss FaceTime 2010 Charlotte Stokely

The company recently put up starlet Charlotte Stokely as “Miss FaceTime 2010″ for her … work … with the emerging technology.

iP4Play is a brand new company. During its first six months in existence, the company has also offered two-way audio and video sex over Skype.

“iP4Play users have quickly realized the benefits of the iP4Play experience over traditional computer-based webcam services,” the company said in a statement. “Unlike most webcam services that offer only one-way interaction, iP4Play offers true interactive two-way audio and video via FaceTime on iPhone 4, iPod Touch, the iPad 2, and Mac computers.”

As for Charlotte Stokely, she was born in a much more conservative geography in Utah and now lives in SoCal. She’s Scandinavian and English and loves music, movies, and reading.

We’re not exactly sure what the “Miss FaceTime” award entails, but it gives us an excuse to post her photo on Blast.

“I am so thrilled and excited at winning this incredible award,” says Charlotte. “I have so much fun with the people from all over the world who come to get away from life’s craziness to enjoy having a crazy time with me!”

You can follow Charlotte on twitter at @Char_Stokely.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/porn-comes-to-facetime/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/teenage-wet-dream-katy-perry-porn-parody-coming-soon/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/teenage-wet-dream-katy-perry-porn-parody-coming-soon/#comments Tue, 19 Apr 2011 21:54:24 +0000 Shannon O'Neill http://blastmagazine.com/?p=60040

We all know that she kissed a girl and she liked it, but did you know she had a thing for puppets?

Goodnight Media is about to release their newest porn parody, “Katy Pervy — The XXX Parody of Katy Perry,” poking fun at the blue wig-wearing “Teenage Dream” sensation and at many of your other favorite chart-toppers, including Ke$ha (kA$$ha), Rihanna (Rihandjob), Lady Gaga (Lady Gagger) and Snoop Dog (Snoop Dong). In the film, Katy Pervy gets down and dirty with a red, fuzzy puppet who looks like a ratty version of Elmo. He’s no Russell Brand (Russell Gland), but he sure gives Katy some fireworks and makes her go “Oh, oh, oh!”

Director Lee Roy Myers said of the parody, “Hey, if I didn’t go there with ‘Katy Pervy — The XXX Parody,’ then how would you know what might go on behind closed dressing room doors? Your favorite stars are having filthy, perverted, raunchy, ridiculous sex.”

The video, which stars Kimberly Kane, Lexi Swallow and Misty Stone, is available for pre-sale now and will be released on April 26.

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/teenage-wet-dream-katy-perry-porn-parody-coming-soon/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/the-oscar-curse-is-real-says-university-of-toronto-study/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/the-oscar-curse-is-real-says-university-of-toronto-study/#comments Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:24:59 +0000 Julie Sternman http://blastmagazine.com/?p=57601

Actress Sandra Bullock and then-husband Jesse James divorced after Bullock's Best Actress win at the 2010 Academy Awards (Media Credit/Jordan Strauss, WireImage)

The 2011 Oscars are just around the corner, and the ever-buzzed about “Oscar curse,” which proposes that women who win Best Actress at the Oscars are more likely to get divorced than their nominated counterparts, was recently put to the test by a case study conducted at the University of Toronto.

Amy Lee’s article for the Huffington Post entitled “’Oscar Curse’ Study: Researcher Weighs In” gives us a behind-the-scenes glimpse into some of the study’s findings. The study boasts the intriguing conclusion that Oscar-winning women are indeed more likely to get divorced than Oscar-nominated women. In fact, women who win Best Actress have a 63 percent chance of having a shorter marriage than the non-winning nominees. What’s more, the Oscar “curse” does not apply to men who win Best Actor.

The results of the study draw a link between Oscar “cursed” women and those living in the real world. The study’s results suggest that it is not just Best Actress winners who are fated to divorce, but that marriages of successful women across the board are more likely to go stale than those of lesser achievers. What is perhaps the most fascinating aspect of this study, however, is not its statistical findings, but the very ground in which it is rooted: the so-called “social norm.”

The Huffington Post interviewed one of the University of Toronto’s researchers, Tiziana Casciaro, and asked her why she thought that a Best Actress win affected women negatively but not men who won Best Actor. Casciaro said that there are “Multiple possibilities. One has to do with the general social norm that kind of requires a man to have higher professional and economic status over the wife. So whenever that social norm is violated, both husband and wife may feel discomfort – could be either one of them.” She suggests that any imbalance of this accepted norm can cause disruption in a marriage that is grounded in these social roles. It goes without saying, however, that not every man and every woman strive to fulfill these gendered roles, and not every relationship is based on a man who brings home the bacon and a woman who “knows her place” in the home.

It seems as though we have started to look at this particular norm as something to be expected, something that we can accept as a standard baseline. With this thinking, if a man is successful in his profession, he can look forward to greater successes in many other aspects of his private life. If a woman is successful in her professional life, she, too, has a number of things to look forward to: a lot of money, loads of success…and the fear of divorce.

But this study’s conclusion also raises questions: Does the same “curse” apply to women in relationships in which they were the breadwinners from the get go? Furthermore, in what way might this “curse” apply to gay couples, both in Hollywood and in the real world? These questions cannot yet be answered, but with the Oscars around the corner, on Feb. 27, we soon may find out the answer to the following: Will the notorious “curse” strike again this year, as it has stricken Halle Berry, Reese Witherspoon, Kate Winslet, Hilary Swank and Sandra Bullock in the past?

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/the-oscar-curse-is-real-says-university-of-toronto-study/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-men-turn-to-a-mistress-a-valentines-day-tutorial/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-men-turn-to-a-mistress-a-valentines-day-tutorial/#comments Mon, 14 Feb 2011 01:38:27 +0000 Susan Jay http://blastmagazine.com/?p=57306

Okay . . . I’m the person every woman loves to hate. I’m the Mistress.

Most women don’t want to think about me. They want men to realize their inevitable part in the scheme of things. That is, to honor their role in the relations between the sexes: after a look around among the women available, choose one, put a ring on her finger, and get on with basic plan. Don’t cheat.

As the alternative to this basic plan, or perhaps as an addendum to it, I don’t mind telling you my secrets for romance, in spite of the fact that I’ve rarely been the mistress of married men. Because I have been privy to the confidential confessions of what women have done to men – both as wives and girlfriends – to drive them either to boredom, or completely away, I will write an anatomy of the problem and the solution to a true romantic interlude.

Here is the wild ride of confidential abuse I have been privy to: “She used to pop pimples on my back when we were making love,” “If we had a party, she would show up thirty minutes late (also a time line for nights out) and I would have to entertain or wait,” “I only got a blow job three times in our marriage – and the last time was the night before I was served with our divorce papers,” or, my favorite, “Sex was so Goddamn boring – I just couldn’t crack the code . . .”

This may sound outrageously simplistic. I am just a mistress after all. The reason men love me? I will tell you. Before I go to meet any one of my lovers, I have one thought in my mind: Please let me please him.

Here is the Valentine’s Day formula — and it may not be as simple as it seems. As a mistress, I have always spent serious time thinking about my lover and all the things that really make him happy as the man I know him to be. So can you.

You know the man you’re about to have Valentine’s Day with. Forget the suggestions from magazines and popular self help manuals. Why should you take their advice? You have the inside line to what makes your lover happy. Remember the time he irritated you by being distracted by that football game while you were skimpily clad in a come-and-get-me outfit ready for romance? Guess what? Football turns him on.

Let me backtrack a moment and redefine what Valentine’s Day means to me. It is an opportunity to unselfishly give pleasure to the man in my life who makes me happy. I never think twice about whether it will be worth my while because of two things: I love to see the look on his face when I have guessed that thing he will love correctly. And, just as importantly, when he wants to pay me back, I know exactly what he can do to make me happy. I am a realist – I don’t expect a titan of industry to guess that I would love a trip to Paris. A pair of earrings is fine. I don’t expect a poet to buy me a pair of Manolo Blahniks. Poets are good for written tributes I will have in my scrap-book forever. I also don’t expect to be recompensed for the effort I put into Valentine’s Day (which they may have forgotten – or may have to postpone for a day, because they are one of a number of my men) to be repaid on the spot. I am always confident that “what goes around, comes around.”

Between the sheets, there is one rule of thumb: a man is never really happy unless he feels that when he has made love to a woman, he has made her happy. Forget this at your peril. On Valentine’s night do whatever you must to ensure that you, too, are going to enjoy the touch of the man you’ve chosen. Don’t let him get too drunk. Don’t forget to let him know that he’s better than anyone else at doing those little things he does to turn you on. Praise inspires — and men have been created to please us. Just reinforce the plan!

Ladies, what I’m saying is this: If he’s worth it, let Valentine’s Day be an opportunity to love him for who he is. Gear your conversation to the things that interest him. Give yourself over to those sexual pleasures that tantalize his taste as much as your own – after all, it’s only one night! If you love him, wouldn’t you want to spoil him once a year? Don’t worry about getting good value out of the effort you put into what you give. You’ll get it – I guarantee.

I assume I am writing to women who are selfish enough to want good value from every relationship they put their time into. I also assume that when you women go out to find men worthy of your time, you know what you want and go after it romantically with a “no holds barred” attitude

. . . and isn’t that what men love about you?

Happy Valentines Day!

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/why-men-turn-to-a-mistress-a-valentines-day-tutorial/feed/ 0