Saweetie knows her type and he's got eight inches in his pants, and I'm surprised just how often this song gets played on the radio -- you'd think a song that explicitly talks about fucking a big dick would raise somebody's eyebrows, but I'm not complaining...this is just one in a long line of songs about dicks that made airplay.
My Ding-A-Ling, Chuck Berry
A favorite of tweens given how blatantly penis- and masturbation-related it is despite its innocent lyrics and cheery tune (plus its sing-along refrain) make this one of the best of the dick reference tunes; it doesn't really have anything to do with size, but is more about proper care and handling of a ding-a-ling.
Big Ten Inch, Aerosmith
Along the same lines of My Ding-A-Ling, Aerosmith also packed some innuendo into a classic rock tune, bragging about how much his girl wants his big-ten-inch....record, although the verse leading up to it doesn't really sound like she's interested in anything that goes on a turntable.
Slide It In, Whitesnake
"It", of course, is his penis. By today's standards lyrics that consist of "you act like you don't want my dick, but I know you do" don't really fly, even though they still get a bit of airplay; however for the early 80s hair-band vibe this was par for the course for announcing sexual prowess. It's about the guy's desire, and the woman will catch up later.
Sledgehammer, Peter Gabriel
I mean, usually Peter Gabriel lyrics are pretty much abstract free verse that there's no point in trying to understand, but sometimes things come together, like everything in Sledgehammer; it's all about pounding, bumping, opening up sweet fruitcakes and feeding the rhythm, it just falls short of explicitly saying 'yeah, we're fucking in this verse'.
Short Dick Man, Gilette
It was years before I heard the uncensored one, since the 'short short man' version got some airplay in the 90s. While the 'short short' version tries a hand at obscuring the truth with overdubs and censorship noise, this version just gives up on any sort of innuendo and just says, nope, short dick men are unacceptable.
Work It, Missy Elliot
We're into the inverse of guys singing about how great their dicks are - society has given women the power to explicitly like sex, too, and Missy Elliot is definitely making that point in this song. If you've got a big [elephant noise], she wants it; I've always hoped there was an uncensored version where she actually says 'cock', but leaving that sound effect in keeps the naughty, irreverent blue humor of the rest of the song intact, and confuses enough people that KitKats used the song to sell how much their candy wanted to suck your dick or something.
Peacock, Katy Perry
I'm sure plenty of dick-pic jerks think this is speaking to them, but all Katy Perry is trying to say is she wants to see your peacock...cock....cock. And why not? When Katy Perry says to whip it out, you do not leave her disappointed. As a song, it's pretty weak sauce, but at least she's getting her point across.
Anaconda, Nicki Minaj
Women want dick, and being able to sing about it without hiding it behind naiive and innocent innuendo is long past, like miss Minaj here, who likes guys whose dick is as big as a tower. Liberally sampling Sir Mix-A-Lot's Baby Got Back, it not only acts as an homage but also a response that although guys like a nice ass, women with the nice ass can like a dick right back.
(10/30/19: Edited because I fucking forgot Missy Elliot)
Condoms are a must, unless you've been with your partner long enough to be comfortable swapping bodily fluids. I know, the guy's prerogative is to get his sexual fluids all over the place, but that's not OK most of the time. You need to keep that shit contained.
Note I didn't say anything about 'contraception'; don't get it in your head that since she's on the pill or has an IUD, or you've had a vasectomy, that condomless sex is fine by default. It's not even just a 'disease' thing, either. Swapping sex fluids is a special thing, and unless she's told you that you're that special, wrap it up, boys. Sex has levels, and condom sex is perfectly fine.
There's not just four bases, sex is less like baseball, more like a marathon; getting to have sex is the 13.1 marker, and if you get that far, there's still a lot of ground to cover until you reach that holy grail of perfect, mutual sexual satisfaction. Cover that ground gracefully and with the courtesy and safety of using a condom all the time.
The most common tip bandied about is to put a dollop of water-based lube in the tip, and from experience this does work; it's not a huge difference in feel, but as you have sex, the condom does slide around a little bit and the tension pulling on the sensitive skin of the tip isn't as pleasing as letting the rubber slip around a bit on the head.
Don't overdo it though - if you put too much lube on, it'll seep up your shaft and lubricate the whole condom, potentially causing it to fall off during vigorous sex. Accidental condom loss is a bad thing, make sure it doesn't happen.
Although condoms come in lubricated form, there's no reason not to add some water-based lube to the mix; the condoms don't come with a whole lot of lube on them, enough to do the job for some unexpected sexy time, but if you've got lube don't be afraid to use it. Note that water-based lube is critical: the silicone based lubes can damage the condom, causing them to break during sex.
Guys, it's also important for you to know what condoms work best for you. Go ahead and try some out, until you find the ones you like the best. If your previous experience is that condoms make sex worse, it may be that you're picking shitty condoms. For the most part, a generic condom will fit pretty much any penis and do the bare minimum, but there's plenty of condom shapes, sizes, and materials to see what works best for you.
Speaking of materials: stick with the tried-and-true latex condoms. They're the strongest and best tested condom material. There are a variety of non-latex condoms, which have improved in recent years; in my experience they're a little less stretchy than latex condoms, so make that part of your testing, to make sure they fit. Lambskin condoms are frequently recommended for the best feel, but don't use them with a casual partner: they aren't 100% effective against STDs, so why risk it when the synthetic condoms are getting so good. Don't skimp on price for condoms; if you're getting to have carefree sex with someone, why worry about a dollar difference in price? Invest in your pleasure and your health and it'll be a better experience overall.
Well, you're wondering: how do you test condoms? Buy some, and use them to masturbate. You've probably never thought about jacking off with a condom on, or thought it seemed futile, but how else are you going to find one that works?
A positive side-effect of using a condom while masturbating is you'll acclimate yourself to the feeling of condom sex. If the only time you have a condom on is when you're in the middle of intimate relations, of course it's going to feel foreign or unusual. Also, you'll save on your sock laundry because masturbating with a condom on means quicker cleanup, nothing spraying all over the place when you finish.
Some other quick tips that might seem obvious to some, but not everybody's a smart as you:
Don't use more than one condom at a time
Look at the thing before you put it on, so you have it the right direction and it's not damaged
Condoms are single use, don't reuse
Spermicides don't actually help much and can irritate sensitive skin, so don't worry about having it
So, there you go: ultimately, the key to condom success is to be aware of how condom sex works, and practice makes perfect. Nothing says "experienced lover" like a guy who doesn't bat an eye on condom use, and you don't want to look like a beginner, so get some condoms and figure it out.
If you've ever watched Married...With Children, one of the Fox Network's earliest successes, you've noted that they throw in some hot and sexy women on a regular basis. What you might not know, however, is that many of those sexy women came from the porn industry. Many had overlapping careers as models in girlie mags, but some shone particularly in adult film. Here's some of the most remarkable ones:
Letha Weapons was clearly hired for one skill: being able to throw around her huge tits. She appears as a stripper with massive jugs, and she excelled in the role. They only briefly show her from the front before the bra comes off, then all we get are censor-friendly side-boob glimpses:
Traci Lords had already reached a status of infamy over lying about her age to produce porn - but by the time she appeared on Married...With Children she was pursuing a mainstream film career, and she really wasn't that bad of an actress. She appeared in two episodes as two different characters, but most prominently as a dental assistant, creepily being felt up by Joe Flaherty:
The biggest star - who you've probably never heard of - was Teri Weigel. She was also one of the only recurring pornstars, appearing in four episodes as the character "Jade". Teri is also extremely prolific as a performer, with over a hundred film credits to her name, and while she's done a number of mainstream productions, she has worked steadily in porn since the 1990s.
After Season 7, Married...With Children was a huge hit and was sinking into being a caricature of itself - which wasn't so bad, given what a broad caricature it was to begin with. After that time, a wide variety of Playboy Playmates, Penthouse Pets and other girlie-mag stars appeared on the show, with Season 10 being particularly boob-friendly. These actresses were mostly "models", and the porn very softcore, so while there were more boobs, there were fewer that had been serious porn stars before appearing on Married...With Children. Boy, Ed O'Neill's 40s were a rough decade:
Science has been putting out a lot of information on the best times of day to have sex, what with circadian rhythms and all that. Is it possible you're fucking at the wrong time, and that's the reason for all the problems in your live? You never know -- here's what science says:
Fuck in the Morning!
Getting those endorphins flowing is better for starting your day than a cup of coffee, so this study says to fuck when you get up in the morning. Plus, you're already in bed together, and I assume you've both got to get up, so why not take advantage of the timing and just go to town, shower, eat a nice breakfast, and get on with your day!
A While After You Wake Up!
No, wait...don't fuck right away in the morning, give it about an hour for your systems to get up to speed, and maybe brush your teeth first?
Noon Sex!
Sweden thinks nooners are so important for employee morale that they're willing to pay people to fuck over their lunch hour. I can't argue with that logic; a lot of people do get a whole hour for lunch, and after the fifteen minutes of eating, what else is there to do? Have a quickie on the dining room table and get back to work happier than ever!
Fuck In The Afternoon!
This study shows that hormone levels are best about 3pm, so a little Afternoon Delight is in order to keep your sexual juices flowing. I know, a lot of you are like, "I'm at work, how is that gonna happen?" Well, most businesses give a 15-minute break about that time, so maybe your best bet is to find a willing and available coworker and cross it off both of your to-do lists.
You never want to do anything energetic with a full stomach, so maybe fuck before you have dinner, otherwise you might end up a lump on the couch without any means for actually getting into a lovemaking mode without triggering heartburn.
This survey actually asked people when they fuck (crazy, I know, right?) and the responses show that it's pretty much when you're most likely to find sexual partners in bed together and nothing pending on the docket. Weekday nights and weekend mornings? Crazy!
The common connection between all of these is that people have sex when their partner is available and ready to go, so make that your goal: don't set a reminder or an alarm clock for the "scientifically-determined best time" according to articles: the best time is whenever your lover is in arm's reach and you've got a few minutes of private time to spend with them.
It seems like every month or so, some news outlet reports that "Sex Robots Will End Humanity" -- since people like fucking robots so much, they'll stop having real sex, and then babies won't be born, and then there'll be no more humans around to build sex robots in the first place, which means something like superintelligent raccoons will take over and that will be it for the human race.
One common facet of this is that it's talking about men...men are buying the sex dolls, men are getting "virtual girlfriends", men are going to stop conceiving babies. The ass-backwards thing here is that nobody's talking about women; there have been a few articles about sex dolls designed for women, but they don't frequently go into using it as a replacement for male companionship.
And companionship is always mentioned in the articles, but never really reflected on: the one in the first link basically says that Japan has seen an increase in sex doll purchases as reported loneliness is increasing.
And that's the key to things: men aren't choosing to fuck toys instead of women; they're fucking dolls because they don't have the opportunity to fuck a woman as often as they want. If they find a willing flesh-and-blood partner, they'll be glad to make babies. The guys that explicitly prefer dolls to women, who are most frequently paraded out by 'weird news' interviewers, let Darwin have them. But nobody's acknowledging that if a woman wants to get fucked by a guy they want to fuck, robots aren't preventing that from happening. At least not yet. Terminator-style robots may want to prevent humans from reproducing someday down the road, under orders from the superintelligent raccoons, but for now sexrobots are funtimes for lonely people, not causing a population crisis.
I've known for quite a while that I've been marked as "sensitive content" at Twitter. I first discovered it by checking to see my scheduled tweets were showing up, but while not logged into Twitter. I got this lovely screen:
If you haven't heard of this relatively new aspect of Twitter security, here's an overview. There appear to be gradients; if I log in as my non-adult-user and turn off "Hide sensitive content", I can see CR_LF and its tweets in searches just fine. Erosblog seems to indicate that you can be banned even further, to a point where you don't even show up if sensitive content is what the user wants to see.
I discovered a bit of insidiousness during my testing: the CR_LF twitter settings showed "Hide sensitive content" as enabled, which I definitely had turned off a long time ago. So, if you're someone who wants to see naughty stuff, better plan on checking those settings on a regular basis.
I'm sure the reason I'm shadowbanned is due to the amount of nudity I post; it's nearly all Playboy-grade cheesecake images, very little actual sexual contact, but it's more skin than a lot of internet users want in their feed, so I understand. The rest of my content isn't much more 'sensitive' than a lot of non-shadowbanned sexperts I can still get to on Twitter while not logged in. For a while I was seeing weird retweets from hair care companies, presumably because a nude phone was tagged #Redhead, and mountain-climbing aficionados because of the tag #Outdoors; I blame this on SEO bots -- I do not doubt that there are business who will, for a price, make you look like a real Twitter user by following and retweeting based on tags and I definitely encountered quite a few of those in recent years. I often would reply back to a new follow, who obviously hadn't viewed my content, with a "thanks for following!" which was immediately responded to with an unfollow. That's their fault, not mine.
So, I'm at the crossroads of: "what does this mean?" On one hand, this makes it harder to get readers: I post quite a few affiliate links, both adult and non-adult, and getting clicks and sales are what keeps me rolling in Mello Yello and Cheese-Its. I want to reach as big an audience as I can, and being blocked doesn't help this.
On the other hand: the people I do reach are those who have deliberately asked to view the type of content I'm providing: these are opt-in readers. If I had a golfing blog, and Twitter had a "Hide Golf-Related Content" checkbox, I'd definitely want to only reach those people who have unchecked that box; it's Marketing 101. It's the reason everyone wants you to sign up for their email mailing list (which if you think about it, is a downright ancient method of reaching people during the internet epoch). It's why Subway wants me to take a survey to get a free cookie, along with submitting my contact info. Twitter is filtering users, but in a way that helps thresh out the vanilla normal people from those with a taste for the naughty.
This only really helps tweeters like me, who is aiming for a more prurient level of content. I can totally understand why this has an impact on sex educators and erotic artists, both of whom have a definite value to those who aren't super interested in adult content but still have a need for knowledge. The "sensitive content" label also envelops hate speech and other content I don't want to be associated with, so the audience I'm reaching may still not be exactly who I want as a reader. It also appears that people are getting shadowbanned for swearing too much, so the banning appears to bundle together a bunch of "blue" content which isn't necessarily a monolithic group of like-minded individuals.
If you look back through this blog, the tone tends to be irreverant, appreciative of women's beauty, and sex-positive whenever possible. As things got busier at work and I have less time for real blogging, I moved towards just tweeting interesting links I found (which, really, were most of what the blog was made up beforehand). Google, long ago, made it difficult to find adult content, thanks to safesearch and pagerank, and people have moved to walled gardens like Twitter and Facebook; Looking at my twitter statistics, things I post get a lot more traffic than if I had posted them at the blog. Blogging's weakness is that people have to seek out the content in the first place; RSS feeds and the aforementioned mailing lists were a way to push content to people who desire to see it, but randomly running across something via search terms is becoming more difficult. Twitter seems like the right place to post, have people interested in the content see the post, and maybe respond with a like, or retweet, or very rarely a comment. That interaction makes the content more visible to other like-minded readers more interested in consuming that content too.
So, I'm hesitant to say that the "sensitive content" filter on Twitter has defeated my purpose for being on Twitter: the shadowban has created a Twitter-After-Dark, which those who elect to view it can do so. Although it reduces the number of possible content viewers, it is filtering them to those interested in the content I post, and the drawback comes from there being users who are unaware that the content filtering is enabled on their account; those are readers I want to reach but can't.
The "Share Our Shit" movement is important, not just because of shadowbanning or Google search results, but because the only reason content can reach readers on the internet is through curation and recommendation; the reason Facebook and Twitter exist is for those functions. If you've got an audience, and you're also someone else's audience, passing along things your audience appreciates matters more than attracting users you've never seen before. That's value in content, and it can still be done while shadowbanned.
It does show me that keeping all the eggs in one basket isn't the best option either; I tried crossposting images to Tumblr with little response, but I also haven't been an active Tumblr user to begin with. It has made me look again at this blog, which has been organized the way it is for at least ten years now (optimized for a 1024px wide screen!). As the internet has changed -- rewarding walled gardens and shadowbanning undesirable content -- I'm going to look at revamping what I've already got here. Not eliminating any of the existing content, but looking at some of the other tricks of modern content providers, cross-connecting content and holding readers eyeballs, as a way of being a useful content provider. It's something I've been working on a while -- again, busy real-life makes the internet harder to devote time to -- but we'll see what I come up with.
The old story goes that a dude would fuck a knothole if given the chance, but, really guys, you need to be careful where you stick your dick. The penis is a somewhat fragile piece of equipment, and if you're not careful with it you'll impede your favorite pasttime by damaging it. So, take note of these places not to stick your dick:
5. Your Ex
This isn't necessarily about damaging the penis, exactly, but the emotions connected to it. You're ex is an ex for a reason; don't let the comfort of a known party to cloud your judgement by either making a booty call, or accepting a booty call, from someone that's a former sex partner. The fallout isn't worth it.
4. A spot of friction
A penis gets hard, sure, but the outside layer is soft and fragile. Most soaps don't provide a lot of lubrication, plastics are smooth but not really slippery, and humping anything covered in fabric is guaranteed to cause a rash. Even dry skin can be a bit of an irritation. Circumcised guys even moreso: there's less 'stretch' for you, which means the rubbing is going to leave a mark. Invest in some lube before you start rubbing against most materials. Make sure you use some real lube and choose your hump-targets properly.
3. Too basic or too acidic
Fucking some sort of fruit is a time-honored hobby of anybody with spare melons, but be careful which kind you partake in. If you're using something not designed as a sex lubricant, and it's significantly more acidic or basic than water, it's going to irritate your skin, and you're gonna have a bad time.
2. Anything too hard to break with your hands
The news loves a story about some guy who decides to fuck something made out of metal -- benches, machine nuts, weightlifting equipment, etc. -- and the aftermath in which a fire department needs to cut said item off the penis with the Jaws of Life. Even once a penis gets hard, it can engorge more during the excitement, causing it to get stuck, and once a penis gets stuck, the blood vessels are kinked closed so the blood can't get out and the penis can't go flaccid again...and now your dick is trapped. Make sure any place you stick your dick can stretch, unsnap, or be broken free without the help of twenty firemen.
1. Anyone who doesn't want it stuck there
It should go without saying, but some people turn into assholes when it comes to where they want to stick their dick. If the intended receptacle is another person, make sure they actually want that penis coming towards them. Like, actually wants it as much as you want to put it there. Imbalance in that amount of excitement is a sign you're not wanted there, and that's the last place your dick should be.
Saweetie knows her type and he's got eight inches in his pants, and I'm surprised just how often this song gets played on the radio -- you'd think a song that explicitly talks about fucking a big dick would raise somebody's eyebrows, but I'm not complaining...this is just one in a long line of songs about dicks that made airplay.
