The sculpture above is Greek, from about 100 BC...

 

Julia Gillard says comparisons between the Greek economy and Australia's are "absurd", and has lashed out at Tony Abbott for endorsing them.

The former head of the Future Fund and the Commonwealth Bank, David Murray, believes it is "easily possible" for Australia to suffer an economic downturn similar in magnitude to the one experienced by Greece.

He told ABC 1's 7:30 that Australia's net foreign debt is too high and the country's productivity levels are too low.

The Opposition Leader described the comments as a "timely warning" from someone well placed to consider Australia's economic performance in comparison to the rest of the world.

"The lesson of Europe is that countries can go very quickly from a strong position to a parlous position if things aren't well managed," Mr Abbott told reporters in Melbourne.

"At the moment, we've got a Government which has completely mishandled the mining sector which is the one sector which above all else has kept Australia going.

"With its endless taxes, this Government is putting the economic future of our country at risk."

But the Prime Minister has slammed the comments, arguing that they have the potential to undermine the confidence of financial markets in Australia's future.

"It is absurd to be saying that our economy is in the same circumstances as the economies of Europe or Greece," Ms Gillard said in Tasmania.

"From the Leader of the Opposition, that's a grossly irresponsible thing to say.

"I mean, markets listen to what political leaders say, this can have repercussions in the real world that matter for the Australian economy.

"Our economy is growing - it's going to grow at around 3 per cent this year, we've got unemployment just over 5 per cent, we've got low inflation, low interest rates, strong public finances - AAA-rated by every major credit agency for the first time in our nation's history," she said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-04/comparing-greek-economy-to-australia27s-is-27absurd27/4295674

Tony Abbott is an irresponsible idiott... Does David Murray drive a $250,000 burgundy Maserati... and warn us about imports?

 

 

Dr Smith said our criticisms of PM Julia Gillard are proof that our messages confuse young girls and ultimately promote the idea that “there is not a sphere of life where being sexy is not the ultimate achievement of a woman.” During her speech Dr Smith gave several examples of popular television and music videos that also influence young girls.

 

“In music video clips where women are often gyrating in lingerie – without Fatima's white picket fence to shield them. In film and television, where fictional worlds are largely populated by women who are young and attractive (and who may have had surgical intervention to increase their bust size or plump their lips).

In advertising, where women's sex appeal is used to sell everything from clothing to ice cream, and in which topless pole dancing mothers who have money shoved into their g-strings by men, as in the infamous Nando's chicken TV ad, are deemed by the Advertising Standards Board as "not incompatible with family values" and by the company itself as "a forthright display of empowerment".

In magazines, where female perfection comes courtesy of Photoshop, and, most pervasively, on the internet where millions of pornographic images and videos of women are readily accessible to anyone, including children. Even online criticism of our nation's first female leader often contains jokes about her sexual prowess and attractiveness. According to this logic, there is not a sphere of life where being sexy is not the ultimate achievement of a woman, nor a place where how she looks is not the most important thing about her.”

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/cultural-studies-professor-says-parents-shouldnt-be-suprised-by-risque-behaviour/story-fneszs56-1226488061144#ixzz28KSS6F59

 

See article at top... The relationship of what we do with sex is important in the way we define some parts of our relationships with other human beings. This may often calls for shared respect and/or love. In the long run what is important (or may be not) is that we enjoy happiness and do not suffer ill from what we do, sexually done or not... For the young people of today, the seemingly non-restrictions can be daunting, while for us oldies, the threats of punishment from experimenting might have been attractive...

At some stage, our social group will inform us awkwardly on what we may want... A family, a life without commitment, an intermittent relationship, whatever... In the past, there was mostly "one way" to be...

 

Sometimes ours choices can be displaced or enhanced by whom we associate or hitch... It's a lottery in which some ephemeral desires can lead to lifetime joyful commitments... All of which demand compromises and demands. These two last components are important for lasting relationships... often more important than love — especially when equality is desired with growing shared ideals, as corny as this may seem, becomes the driving force in all aspects, including sex.

 

Whether your a queen or a pauper, should you become notorious for bad or good, you are going to be targeted by the state... and the sex police...
Look now at the relevance of the royal family... Through the ages, kings and queens had to fight for their supper... They had to prove they were top dog... Whether the threats came from within or from outside the kingdom, the royals had to use every mean means to defeat the plots... Sometimes they had to pay ransom for their freedom. At other times they had to marry some unattractive damsel or beau to assure the continuation of the kingdom in the official dynastic sex process, while they also had their bit on the side — with men and women...
They had to be devious and hide this deviousness by appearing royally tough and fair-minded, using the law (specially created to protect them), the church and a coterie of arse-lickers, called lord this and duke so and so... Of course one or several of these would want to overthrow the rulers by secretly plotting against them, thus the rulers had a secret service with its ear to the ground to foil such plot...  Often the case of sex, or lese-Magesty (figurative or explicit rape of royal), was used against plotters. Sometimes a sexual intrigue was used to compromise the plotters into life in a dungeon...
Now the royals are obsolete in a democracy, apart from the pageantry and the illusion of traditions... They are lucky enough that some magazines are still after their most private moments and publish pictures of their tits hanging in the sun, otherwise the royals would totally fall between the cracks in the floor... 

Something's wrong here though... Some poor dole bludgers are being hammered by the press and the maddening crowds, for wanting the state to give them a pittance because there is no work available... Do something with your life: work work, slave if you must!... Then the same press and maddening gang are in awe of the royals doing peanuts while getting tons of gold for it. Sure, they're doing some charitable work... How hard is that, visit a hospital for a couple of minutes, write a cheque using state moneys and go to lunch? Sure one needs to learn decorum with a smile but.

And don't they get loved by the press, even those who are just in the side show alleys... Pippa's bum became more famous than that of Bo Derek and the whole thing nearly derailed our attention away from the wedding of her sister to a prince whose mum got done to a dinner because she was having... Let's not revisit this sad life.

Meanwhile, even someone like Assange can't escape a virtual canning from the press... For example the headline on the News Limited site (a Murdoch owned company) told us a few days ago: 
"Assange fears for his children. Wait. Children?" 
... Now, ponder for a second... This headline of course appears loaded with the unsaid: this man is a philanderer, a sex maniac, and he has CHILDREN? And he fears for them? Should he not have done what he did (expose the US with Wikileaks and indulge in Swedish sex)?... There you have it... 
But am reading something into this that is not written nor intended?... Are my own prejudices manipulating my interpretation or is the line designed to manipulate my prejudices? I believe the latter, since I know how marketing, headlines and punch-lines writing work. I do it myself with some degree of failure, but my antennas are well tuned to other people doing it...
The next paragraph is revealing: "Thought to be the father of a boy and younger girl, Julian Assange is keeping details private due to safety fears." Thought to be?... Then follows an article with details about the details...
Sex of course is used here to denigrate Assange in the eye of the public and suggest he is a "bad" father, while not saying so... Meanwhile, the sex case against him does not have any legs anywhere in reality — only in a crooked application of the law... It is but a foil to get him transferred to the US where some kangaroo court will hang him for treason...
Not new...

The other sad "sex" case coming our way is that of an aid worker, Pippi Bean, who while working in Libya had to go through a nightmare where sex claims were made... The whole affair sounds like the newly Islamised Libya government is there to make sure women are put back in their box, under their tent, with a small slit.
Pippi was brave enough not to fall for the trick of signing, even under pressure, a document in a language which she did not understand. "Unauthorised sex with someone" apparently was used against her though it never happened (even if it did, so what?). The real purpose of this was "surely" the intimidation of women, especially foreign women who could taint the revitalised Libyan men's sharia views — the men who think "women have to submit"... This is what Pippi thinks of the Arab spring in Libya:

Female workers in difficult environments needed particular care but also brought particular skills, she said, and organisations must improve the way they dealt with these issues.
Her other insight is about Libya. Leaving in those circumstances, she said, was ''soul destroying,'' because the country, in which the world has invested so much hope, is ''literally falling apart''.
''Everyone is talking about the new Libya. There's nothing new about it. They can't even secure Tripoli but we all need to pretend it's doing well,'' she said.
''The county is on a rapid decline and it will be facilitated by the international community's collective blindness to what's really happening.''

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/doubly-betrayed-aid-workers-hell-20121004-272a0.html#ixzz28NO8tAl5
-----------------------
And other samples keep flying our way about "the state" using our sex life for its own profit:

The engagement photograph showed Brian Edwards and Tom Privitere at their happiest, celebrating their love and upcoming marriage. Two years later, they were shocked to see it used in an advert opposing same-sex union.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19804286

Here, of course, we also see all the "conservatives", opposing gay marriage around the world. Is there a worldwide conservative conspiracy? You bet... All over the western world and its satellites, the conservatives use the same vernacular, the same words and the same concept to fight the idea. Bestiality and polygamy being next in line...
They have their instructions coming from "conservative" central, disseminated through churches and institutions. 

We have a long way yo go...

 

Hundreds of women staged an angry protest outside the main courthouse in Tunis as a hearing began into whether a young couple who have lodged a rape claim against police should face charges of ''immorality'' in a public place.
About 400 people demonstrated, furious that a charge had been introduced against the 27-year-old woman and her boyfriend. Two police officers are accused of raping the woman over a period of more than an hour on September 3 after surprising the couple in a parked car in a suburb of the capital.
The woman has recounted in media interviews how she had been in the driving seat, her boyfriend beside her, when three police officers approached. After threatening the couple with possible long prison terms if charged with ''immorality'', one of the police officers handcuffed the boyfriend and took him off to an ATM to extract 300 dinars ($190) from him. The two others allegedly took the woman into the back of their car and took turns to rape her.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/immorality-charges-whip-up-debate-on-arab-spring-gains-20121004-2724b.html#ixzz28OLjAU1b

Kevin Andrews boasts that his new book, Maybe 'I do' - Modern Marriage and the Pursuit of Happiness, took 20 years to research and cites thousands of studies.

He believes these studies back up his view that marriage is good for health and happiness.

But science has a habit of undermining those who use it to justify a pre-established moral position.

In this case, we're talking about the science which shows marriage is also good for same-sex couples and their families.

Andrews stridently opposes marriage equality.

In his book he declares same-sex marriage will lead to "group marriage" and undermine religious freedoms.

The science shows this is not true.

A comparative analysis of the effects of marriage equality in the first jurisdiction to allow it in the world, Holland, and the first in the US, Massachusetts, shows none of the negative consequences predicted by opponents of reform actually came to pass.

The study, led by Professor Lee Badgett from UCLA, looked for movements towards the recognition of multiple-partner marriages, infringements of religious freedom, declining rates of heterosexual marriages and changes in school curricula, and found none.

What she and her colleagues did find was increased commitment among same-sex partners, a greater sense of security and happiness among their children, and increased participation in family and community life for them all.

Other studies have come up with similar results.

Marriage equality promotes stability in same-sex relationships, and leads to healthier, happier families, as studies by Sharon Dane, Kimberly Balsam and Lawrence Kurdek have shown.

The denial of legal equality reinforces stigma against same-sex relationships and increases levels of depression, anxiety and even suicide among same-sex-attracted people. Evidence of this has been found by researchers such as Mark Hatzenbuehler, Sharon Rostosky, Gilbert Herdt andGregory Herek.

The evidence that marriage equality promotes mental and physical health is so compelling the American Psychological Association released a statement in support of the reform last year which was subsequently corroborated by the Australian Psychological Society.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4297374.html?WT.svl=theDrum

 

The small picturesque town of Kennebunk in Maine used to be known for little other than its proximity to Kennebunkport, the seaside home of George Bush snr's summer retreat and a place where the former US president spent much of his childhood.

Now however, the town has found itself the focus of national media attention for rather more unwelcome reasons following a sex scandal which threatens to embarrass some of its most high-powered and respected individuals.

They found out when police charged 21 men with "engaging in prostitution" and released their names. To the dismay of residents, the list included a prominent lawyer, a local estate agent, a financial adviser and a former high school hockey coach 

It began after Alexis Wright, a 29-year-old fitness instructor, was accused of moonlighting as a prostitute at the studio where she taught the Colombian dance programme Zumba. In a town of only 10,000 people, police claimed the premises had been frequented by up to 150 clients and that Wright apparently videotaped many of her encounters.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-zumba-teacher-her-secret-life-and-the-welltodo-clients-small-town-rocked-by-controversy-as-police-release-prostitution-list-of-shame-20121018-27sk0.html#ixzz29bjFSbUM


Is prostitution bad?... Why should prostitution be bad or illegal?... Morality?... Many kings used to have their bits on the side — men, women and boys. The bible is full of glorious kings (David, Solomon, etc.)  promoted by god  — and a zillion wives and concubines for sex... Mohammed had a nine year old wife amongst his 20 or so wives and he had sex with this kid... He also had concubines...
What does this mean? Some rich and powerful male geezers basically don't have to pay for the service... except in kind and maintenance of the harem and "courtisanes" which could amount to a lot more than a single fee... 
These days we try to enforce that a relationship is based on exclusivity and trust...  Sure a relationship, especailly marrage, is like an agreement we make and we try to honour this agreement... Wink wink...  I know some people who don't. They are not bad or worse people for this... It just make things a bit complicated in the trust department when they are found out... 
Selling sex should be a legal activity. It's called the oldest profession in the world for a reason. Anyhow little country town folks are horrified by the thought of their righteous folks not being so righteous after all?... The police, the church and the law — all is designed to make this a sordid state of affairs... Ease up...
The only way prostitution is bad is if it's not "healthfully" managed, in the sense of transmission of some disease... But having a fancy-free one-night stand can be more unhealthy in this regard...
Sex is pleasurable and not exclusively reserved for reproduction... Read article at top, below the picture...
Rumba rumba...

 

 

Make it fun: Inability to talk about sex is hurting our health.
When Adam Casey heard the news this week that HIV rates had gone up significantly for the first time in five years in Australia, he was not surprised.
The 26-year-old is a peer educator with a youth sexual health promotion group called YEAH, and he knows just how confused many young Australians are about sexually transmitted infections (STIs).
"So I was not surprised by the increase, but I was surprised how big it was [at 8 per cent]," he says.
Casey, a self-described "sexual health nerd", volunteers at music festivals, uni bars and schools, teaching others about STIs as well as promoting the idea that condom use can be fun.
It's the sexed-up equivalent of the old-fashioned condom demonstration on a banana, Casey says.
"We have got these crazy big red dongs we take with us … that look like alien penises," he says. "We call them 'big red'. The idea is to get people laughing, but with us, not at us".
Casey sees a range of misconceptions, from people believing they can't have an STI without having severe and obvious symptoms, to thinking testing will be painful.
It is estimated that one in 20 Australians aged 15 to 29 have an STI, and rates are increasing.
In the first three months of this year alone, almost 22,500 people around the country received a call from their doctor telling them they had chlamydia. A further 3600 were told they had gonorrhoea, and 500 more received the news they had syphilis, many of whom had carried the bug, undiagnosed, for more than two years.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/get-the-idea-condom-use-can-be-fun-20121019-27wo9.html#ixzz29mKI8gbz


Meanwhile: watch ABC TV Monday night 8 pm, October 22..."The Year Of Living Famously"... It's about Australian people who made a movie "about sex" as the famous actress Helen Hunt who plays in the movie tells us, in an interview in the preview...
Watch the preview: http://www.abc.net.au/austory/
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/yearoflivingfamously/default.htm

Another movie to see is "Not Suitable for Children" — in cinemas and/or DVD...

 

SYDNEY'S close-knit Dawoodi Bohra Muslim community is starkly divided over allegations of female genital mutilation made against some of its members, a court has heard, with debate raging in the community's online chat forums.
The revelations came during a failed attempt by a sheikh and a retired nurse from the community, who have been charged over the genital mutilation of two young girls, to have their names kept from the public.
Sheikh Shabbir Mohammedbhai Vaziri, 56, and Helen Magennis, 68, have been charged over the genital mutilation of a six-year-old girl and seven-year-old girl in separate incidents between October 2010 and July this year.

Police say Ms Magennis carried out the procedures on the two girls in suburban homes in Wollongong and Baulkham Hills while Sheikh Vaziri was allegedly an accessory - harbouring, maintaining and assisting those involved.

It is also alleged the sheikh later instructed members of the Dawoodi Bohra community to lie to police about what had happened.
Six other members of the community, including the parents of the girls, are also facing charges over the alleged mutilations.
In overturning a suppression order on Sheikh Vaziri's name and refusing to grant one for Ms Magennis on Thursday, magistrate Brian van Zuylen said there was much debate in the Dawoodi Bohra community about genital mutilation practices.

''From the [police] statement of facts there appears to be very different views from members of the community participating in chat forums,'' he said''Some seem to be supporting the procedures while other, more moderate members are vehemently opposed.''

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/muslims-divided-on-genital-mutilation-magistrate-says-20121108-290w6.html#ixzz2BfBpWlea
--------------------
See also:http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/18453

The use of the things is up to personal choice; I’ve been known to pack a few off-brand vag wipes for a long-distance plane trip, or a comic convention where I’ll be spending over eight hours in spandex. Plenty of people will stow a package of vag wipes’ less politically charged relatives, Wet Ones, for a camping or road trip.

No, the marketing is the bad guy here. At its core, it’s insidious shame-based nonsense; it follows that the thought process in the consumer is “Wait, if there’s a cleaning product available for this body part, it must be dirty”.

read more: http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/selling-vagina-insecurity-20130210-2e61u.html

Read story at top...

Given the human propensity to ‘judge books by their covers’ and the psychosocial impact of doing so [1], it is not surprising that scholars have attempted to delineate the physical features that lead to differential perceptions and treatment. In terms of women’s physical attractiveness, for example, a good deal of research has focused on the relative importance of traits such as body size and shape, leg length, hair colour and length, skin tone, and facial features [2]–[3]. By contrast, much less scholarly research has focused on women’s breasts, despite the sexual significance of breasts in most human societies [4]–[5]. Indeed, eye-tracking studies have indicated that, when judging the attractiveness of a woman, both men and women spend more time looking at the breasts and upper-body than any other bodily region [6]–[7].

Despite such evidence, the significance of prominent female breasts has proved difficult to explain from an evolutionary perspective, particularly as the human female is the only primate that has permanent, full-form breasts when not pregnant [8]. Theories that currently lack reliable evidence include the suggestion that the breast served functional roles such as milk storage for breast-feeding babies [9], comfort for nursing infants [10], and heat stress avoidance [11]. On the other hand, it is possible that biomechanical constraints as a result of sexually dimorphic fat deposition placed unique demands on human female morphology, which resulted in the selection of breasts [12]. Once enlarged, sexual selection may have enhanced the expression of permanently enlarged breasts [13], with breasts variously argued to act as a sign of nulliparity, age, sexual maturity, or fertility [14]–[17].

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0057623

 

from Fay Schopen

Why is Good Housekeeping's 'intimate test' on vibrators so shocking?

 

 

Vibrators became mainstream with Sex and the City in 1998 – but some people still seem confused about women using them

"Is it housekeeping though?" I have bumped into a male acquaintance while clutching the May edition of Good Housekeeping magazine, and he seems confused. The 129-year-old stalwart (91 years old in the UK) made headlines this week with a feature it sweetly and discreetly trails on its cover as "our most intimate test ever". A hundred Good Housekeeping readers, aged between 30 and 80, have tested a range of vibrators to find out if "they're hitting the spot" (If you're interested, the stylish, pebble-shaped Je Joue Mimi was the winner, scoring 77 out of 100 and collecting accolades for not being "scary"). Cue bewilderment from the male populace – my friend eventually decides the feature is a cynical stunt designed to make the magazine "sexy" – and sniggering from the tabloids. The Daily Mirror, for instance, trumpeted the news with the headline: "Housewives' favourite Good Housekeeping magazine shocks readers with SEX TOY review."

 

Well I never. The only really shocking thing about this story is that women using vibrators somehow constitutes headline news. I am in my 30s (OK, just) and as far as I'm concerned, vibrators went mainstream in 1998, when they were featured on the infamous episode of Sex and the City where Charlotte gets hooked on her Rabbit – a serious vibrating and rotating sex toy that apparently sold out after the episode was aired – and the rest of the gang has to stage an intervention.

 

I bought my own first vibrator around that time, from a lovely sex shop in Hoxton Square in London called Sh! where you are offered herbal tea as you browse, and men can only go in when accompanied by a woman. I tricked my boyfriend at the time into coming in with me, and when he realised what sort of shop it was he fled in terror and refused to come back. In retrospect we probably shouldn't have got married, but we are happily divorced now so all's well that ends well.

 

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/global/2014/apr/17/why-good-housekeeping-survey-vibrators-shock

 

and see article at top

 

‘Philosophers generally philosophise as if their sex lives did not exist, as if this vast continent of experience had no bearing whatsoever on their thinking,’ says Banki. ‘Jacques Derrida points this out.’

Banki believes that we have very little real idea if what happens in sex. Michael Foucault might have done wonders in exposing the secret history of sexuality in the west, but at its most elemental the fully realised erotic moment remains a problem to be solved.

Proximity, muses Banki, might offer a way in: ‘What happens to [our] thinking if we give more hospitality to sex?’

According to Banki, in the history of thought on sex there have been broadly two camps: the sex positive and sex negative. In the latter he sees Plato, Augustine and Kant, who broadly constitute a view that sex should be restricted to procreation and not pursued for its own sake. An undertow of the dangers of animality lurks in this classical view. In the positive corner are Nietzsche, Freud, Bataille, and Schlegel, not to mention De Sade.  And then there is Michel Foucault, who warrants a whole section of his own due to his landmark work on emergent sexuality in a modernising west.

Banki plays the part well of the fully embodied philosopher. In his spare time, he is the artistic director of festivals exploring sexuality in all its expressiveness.  Having organised workshops with titles like The Novice Orgy and The Dancing Whip, he is very much on the project of conjoining body and mind.

‘We don’t really know what sex is, what happens when we’re having sex,’ he says. ‘It’s very hard to situate it and pin down. Sex undoes our certainties, our self assurances, and destabilises our knowledge. This is where I get turned on by it.’

So, if sex can elude a starting point for deeper rational reflection, perhaps it belongs properly to the psychoanalyst.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/5406904

 

 

Been on the case for as long as I can remember... Read article at top... and : 

The state owns your sex life...

German sex shop chain goes Halal with Amsterdam's El Asira

Wednesday 04 June 2014

German sex aid company Beate Uhse, which runs the Pabo and Christine le Duc stores, is working together with Amsterdam company El Asira to focus on the ‘enormous Muslim growth market'.

El Asira was founded in 2010 and concentrates on the market for what it calls 'sensual wellness'.

‘In the west, people think sensuality means pornography but we are not a sex shop,’ stresses founder Abdelaziz Aouragh in the Financieele Dagblad. El Asira sells massage oils, lingerie and personal care products.

Aouragh says he was first approached by Beate Uhse in 2012 and had talks with the company’s Dutch CEO, Serge van der Hooft. ‘Even though I don’t want to sell 99% of the things they do, we got on extremely well,’ the Amsterdam entrepreneur told the FD.

Growth market

‘He respected our way of working, which complies with Islamic law. And he wanted to learn how he can best approach this growth market.’

The new range of lingerie and personal care products will go on sale in Beate Uhse shops and via the El Asira website in two weeks' time. They will also be available in chemists shops and via Bol.com.

- See more at: http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2014/06/german_sex_shop_

chain_moves_go.php#sthash.AqWqIRik.dpuf

 

See article at top...

 

Female Sex Drive

 

Series 16 | Episode 16

SCIENCE AND HEALTH27 mins

Sex is the spark that ignites many relationships. It seems to fade more quickly in women. Dr Newby investigates the science of female libido, as she asks - what does it take to restore a healthy sex life? #ABCcatalyst

• Next on:Thursday 5 Nov 2015, 10:30am (Repeat)

See articles from top...

 

 

There is a couple of shows on the ABC about the body and sex... One is about as inspiring as pimple on an adolescent face and the other one is about people not liking their own bodies. Both are about ugly people. Sorry. We're all ugly should we consider our reflection in truth.

Both shows are troublesome. Well, they're annoying. The first one with a comic, Luke McGregor, who is not the best looking person in the world, should have been canned the day someone thought about it. I can't really comment any further, because I did not catch the bug to watch it, thus I am very unfair — only saw the crass ads for it. I supposed it was made for young kids who have just discovered they have more than one hole to their body. In all honesty (this is a euphemism for "crap I believe"), all this sinks to the bottom of the cesspool with an attempt to "educate". Same with Hack Live... It's voyeurism without inspiration, but encouragement for low forms of copy cats.

Images of bodies and porn fiddles have been with us since time "immemorial" (bugger the freemasons). Many cave (shelter) paintings of the Aboriginal people going back many millennia  show the female form in all its spreaded legs fashion, with genitals centre stage. These paintings of course would have been part of the initiation of the pubescent young males — unless the painters were already onto the value of porn — or both.

More recently, though, in the muddled past of our confused civilisation that is still trying to overcome our general ugliness and weirdo natural parts, some people explained their resentment at seeing the naked flesh:

"I find your house is full of indecent pictures" said Mrs Disraeli to a hostess in which she and her famous husband had been overnighting... "There is the most horrible picture in our bedroom... It is Venus and Adonis. I have been awake half the night trying to prevent his looking at it". 

Now we know. Disraeli could have been a "pervert". It is likely that Mrs Disraeli's bod could not compete with those shapes of the magnificent best female goddess in the universe. She was worried about the competition which could have aroused some senses in her husband who may not have shown the amorous desires she might have secretly craved for but overtly rejected due to Victorian Puritanism of the time. 

Sorry, you, I did not mean to offend anyone when talking about ugly bodies. I'm not the prettiest bod for advertising perfumes for men, myself.

Wordsworth, the poet, traitor of liberal thoughts in his later life, might have had a stutter... When catching a glimpse of a sculpture of Cupid and Psyche kissing in the nude, exclaimed "THE DEV-V-V-VILS"

The paintings by Titian of the Venus touching herself with discreet enjoy was even too much for someone like Mark Twain who thought "it was a trifle too strong"... The Divinyls song about touching myself comes to mind.

As I mentioned before on this site, the Louvre storage rooms are full of vases and artefacts from the roman times, that depict homosexuality and other erections larger than life.

So the point of my article here is definitely not to praise two shows on the ABC — two shows that appear puerile and immature, without any style but bland moronism. I apologise. I could be wrong. I am too choosy. I need elevation.

"The nude, painted by vulgar men, is inevitably indecent" said Thoré... Presently, much of TV lacks indecency and is not much more than a low-meaning medium, with an unfortunate need to shock instead of stylise — all in order to survive the demand for ongoing crassness amongst us. We're sinking.

Style is what defines a civilisation. 

Porn can be elevated by style beyond wet T-shirt competition. 

Read from top.

 

 

In 2007, Cruz's legal team, working on behalf of then-Attorney General Greg Abbott (who now is the governor), filed a 76-page brief calling on the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to uphold the lower court's decision and permit the law to stand. The filing noted, "The Texas Penal Code prohibits the advertisement and sale of dildos, artificial vaginas, and other obscene devices" but does not "forbid the private use of such devices." The plaintiffs had argued that this case was similar to Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas' law against sodomy. But Cruz's office countered that Lawrence "focused on interpersonal relationships and the privacy of the home" and that the law being challenged did not block the "private use of obscene devices." Cruz's legal team asserted that "obscene devices do not implicate any liberty interest." And its brief added that "any alleged right associated with obscene devices" is not "deeply rooted in the Nation's history and traditions." In other words, Texans were free to use sex toys at home, but they did not have the right to buy them.

The brief insisted that Texas, in order to protect "public morals," had  "police-power interests" in "discouraging prurient interests in sexual gratification, combating the commercial sale of sex, and protecting minors." There was a  "government" interest, it maintained, in "discouraging…autonomous sex." The brief compared the use of sex toys to "hiring a willing prostitute or engaging in consensual bigamy," and it equated advertising these products with the commercial promotion of prostitution. In perhaps the most noticeable line of the brief, Cruz's office declared, "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship." That is, the pursuit of such happiness had no constitutional standing. And the brief argued there was no "right to promote dildos, vibrators, and other obscene devices." The plaintiffs, it noted, were "free to engage in unfettered noncommercial speech touting the uses of obscene devices," but not speech designed to generate the sale of these items.

In a 2-1 decision issued in February 2008, the court of appeals told Cruz's office to take a hike. The court, citing Lawrence, pointed to the "right to be free from governmental intrusion regarding 'the most private human contact, sexual behavior.'" The panel added, "An individual who wants to legally use a safe sexual device during private intimate moments alone or with another is unable to legally purchase a device in Texas, which heavily burdens a constitutional right." It rejected the argument from Cruz's team that the government had a legitimate role to play in "discouraging prurient interests in autonomous sex and the pursuit of sexual gratification unrelated to procreation." No, government officials could not claim as part of their job duties the obligation to reduce masturbation or nonprocreative sexual activity. And the two judges in the majority slapped aside the solicitor general's attempt to link dildos to prostitution: "The sale of a device that an individual may choose to use during intimate conduct with a partner in the home is not the 'sale of sex' (prostitution)."

Summing up, the judges declared, "The case is not about public sex. It is not about controlling commerce in sex. It is about controlling what people do in the privacy of their own homes because the State is morally opposed to a certain type of consensual private intimate conduct. This is an insufficient justification for the statute after Lawrence...Whatever one might think or believe about the use of these devices, government interference with their personal and private use violates the Constitution."

The appeals court had rejected the arguments from Cruz's office and said no to Big Government policing the morals of citizens. But Abbott and Cruz wouldn't give up. Of course, they might have initially felt obligated to mount a defense of this state law. But after it had been shot down, they pressed ahead, relying on the same puritanical and excessive arguments to justify government intrusion. Abbott and Cruz quickly filed a brief asking the full court of appeals to hear the case, claiming the three-judge panel had extended the scope of Lawrence too far. This brief suggested that if the decision stood, some people would argue that "engaging in consensual adult incest or bigamy" ought to be legal because it could "enhance their sexual experiences." And Cruz's office filed another brief noting it was considering taking this case to the Supreme Court.

Cruz and Abbott lost the motion for a hearing from the full court of appeals. And the state soon dropped the case, opting not to appeal to the Supreme Court. This meant that the government could no longer outlaw the sale of dildos, vibrators, and other sex-related devices in the Lone Star State—and in Mississippi and Louisiana, the two other states within this appeals court's jurisdiction.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

 

 

Read from top.

 

There’s one tidbit that almost everyone who has ever looked at the outline of an undergraduate art history course knows about the pre-eminent Victorian art critic John Ruskin. It may well be an urban legend, but it’s a great story.

On the night of his wedding to Effie Gray in 1848, Ruskin, who was also a noted writer, artist and philosopher, stood in front of his wife’s naked body, and was so disgusted by what he saw that he was unable to consummate the marriage. Six years later, the still-sexless marriage was annulled.

While Ruskin’s reasons for his (non-)actions have been the subject of speculation for art historians, writers and filmmakers for almost two centuries, the most-often cited possibility is that, being so habituated to the nude body as depicted in art, Ruskin’s almost primal disgust at his wife’s bushy mons pubis was what stayed his … hand.

And while it may seem absurd once you actually think about it, the idea that this fully grown, reasonably intelligent man could spend six years so disgusted by pubic hair that he chose abstention over sex has persisted for so long because the unrealistic depiction of women’s bodies is both ancient and universal. And it has real-world, damaging effects for those who live in women’s bodies.

read more:

https://overland.org.au/2017/12/mons-pubis/

 

Read from top.

in a comment above I wrote:

 

.... Images of bodies and porn fiddles have been with us since time "immemorial" (bugger the freemasons). Many cave (shelter) paintings of the Aboriginal people going back many millennia  show the female form in all its spreaded legs fashion, with genitals centre stage. These paintings of course would have been part of the initiation of the pubescent young males — unless the painters were already onto the value of porn — or both.

More recently, though, in the muddled past of our confused civilisation that is still trying to overcome our general ugliness and weirdo natural parts, some people explained their resentment at seeing the naked flesh:

"I find your house is full of indecent pictures" said Mrs Disraeli to a hostess in which she and her famous husband had been overnighting... "There is the most horrible picture in our bedroom... It is Venus and Adonis. I have been awake half the night trying to prevent his looking at it". 

Now we know. Disraeli could have been a "pervert". It is likely that Mrs Disraeli's bod could not compete with those shapes of the magnificent best female goddess in the universe. She was worried about the competition which could have aroused some senses in her husband who may not have shown the amorous desires she might have secretly craved for but overtly rejected due to Victorian Puritanism of the time. 

Sorry, you, I did not mean to offend anyone when talking about ugly bodies. I'm not the prettiest bod for advertising perfumes for men, myself.

Wordsworth, the poet, traitor of liberal thoughts in his later life, might have had a stutter... When catching a glimpse of a sculpture of Cupid and Psyche kissing in the nude, exclaimed "THE DEV-V-V-VILS"

The paintings by Titian of the Venus touching herself with discreet enjoy was even too much for someone like Mark Twain who thought "it was a trifle too strong"... The Divinyls song about touching myself comes to mind.

As I mentioned before on this site, the Louvre storage rooms are full of vases and artefacts from the Roman times, that depict homosexuality and other erections larger than life.

So the point of my article here is definitely not to praise two shows on the ABC — two shows that appear puerile and immature, without any style but bland moronism. I apologise. I could be wrong. I am too choosy. I need elevation.

"The nude, painted by vulgar men, is inevitably indecent" said Thoré... Presently, much of TV lacks indecency and is not much more than a low-meaning medium, with an unfortunate need to shock instead of stylise — all in order to survive the demand for ongoing crassness amongst us. We're sinking.

Style is what defines a civilisation. 

Porn can be elevated by style beyond wet T-shirt competition. 

Read from top.

--------------------------

 

 

I have mentioned Leda and the Swan somewhere on this site about something but can't find it... Google has given up... So I have repeated words I wrote (stolen from a few "reference" books) a while back (see above). But this is about the discovery of a new 2,000 year old painting in Pompei:

 

 

A "sensual" fresco depicting a woman having sex with a swan in a scene from classical mythology has been unearthed in a bedroom in Pompeii.

Key points:

• Fresco seen as exceptional because of direction Leda is looking
• Leda and Swan myth inspired Renaissance Italy artists
• Fresco was found in what is believed was a rich merchant's home

 

The figure of the legendary Spartan queen Leda being impregnated by the Roman god Jupiter — in the form of a swan — was a fairly common home decoration theme in Pompeii, which was destroyed in AD 79 by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius near present-day Naples.

But Pompeii archaeological park director Massimo Osanna praised this fresco as exceptional since it was painted to make it appear Leda was looking at whoever saw the fresco upon entering the bedroom.

"Leda watches the spectator with a sensuality that's absolutely pronounced," Mr Osanna told Italian news agency ANSA.

 

Read more:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-20/sensual-fresco-discovered-in-anci...

 

Read from top.

 

See also: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/34619

 

and: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/8011

Sir Elton John has criticised a Russian film company's decision to cut gay sex scenes from his new biopic Rocketman.

The local film distributor told state news agency Tass it cut scenes from the film to comply with Russian laws.

The British singer and the makers of Rocketman issued a statement saying they rejected the censorship "in the strongest possible terms". 

Sir Elton has previously spoken out against Russian laws banning "gay propaganda". 

• Elton falls short of Freddie at box office
• Elton John's best movie moments
• Russian jails drop yoga ban

In a statement shared on his Twitter page late on Friday, he described the censorship of Rocketman as a "sad reflection of the divided world we still live in and how it can still be so cruelly unaccepting of the love between two people."

"We believe in building bridges and open dialogue, and will continue to push for the breaking down of barriers until all people are heard equally across the world," the statement said.

 

Read more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48482872

 

 

Read from top.

A Condom Shortage Due to the Coronavirus Pandemic Might Happen—Here's What Experts Say You Should Do

Condoms may be disappearing from store shelves soon—and other forms of birth control could also be affected by the pandemic.

 

Thanks to the new coronavirus, couples are spending a lot more time together than they're used to. Suddenly, they have a greater opportunity for things that may have plummeted to the bottom of their priority list—like sex. 

But if we’re in for a COVID-19 baby boom, it might not be due to a widespread desire to procreate. A worldwide shortage of condoms could be in the cards, the world’s biggest producer has warned. 

Malaysia’s Karex Bhd, a company that makes one in every five condoms globally, was forced to shut down production for more than a week after the government imposed a lockdown to curb the spread of the new coronavirus. During this time, not a single condom was produced in any of Karex Bhd’s three Malaysian factories, reported The Guardian, resulting in a shortfall of 100 million condoms. 

 

Read more:

https://www.health.com/condition/infectious-diseases/coronavirus/condom-...

 

 

Read from top.

 

Remember:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/malcolm-turnbull-s-bonking-ban-i...

 

 

 

 

Stimulus checks are being spent on dildos, tigers, guns and stripper poles

Americans began receiving the first batch of coronavirus relief funds this week, and now many are taking to social media to brag about the assortment of purchases — both strange and savvy — they’ve already made with them.

While many are using the emergency cash to pay bills for necessities and living expenses, others are putting the money toward wild splurges.

Among the more trivial items people have reportedly used the extra bucks on is an inflatable dinosaur costume — although the buyer argues the $35 getup was totally worth it. “I actually have good use for it plus look at that price! I shoulda bought 2,” the proud dino suit owner tweets.

“F - - k it I’m buying a stripper pole with my stimulus check. We have to invest in our future,” tweets a future exotic dancer.

Some are jokingly planning to team up, so they can use their economic impact payments to buy a baby tiger. “Hear me out — Who wants to combine their stimulus checks with me, and we can buy a tiger,” writes one likely fan of “Tiger King.”

It’s hard to argue a canopied bed is ever essential, but one mom bought a princess-themed one for her kid. The same argument goes for a woman who used her check to buy a high-end sex toy, although she concedes she bought the stimulator only after paying off a credit card.

 

Read more;

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/stimulus-checks-are-being-spent-on-dildos-...

 

Read from top.

 

The bars and pubs are shut. Tinder dates happen remotely. And we’ve stopped spending hours on our work commute. So couples and singletons are finding themselves with more time on their hands to engage in other activities. Now sex toy companies say their sales have almost doubled re.

Video by: Izabela Cardoso & Fernando Teixeira

 

See all:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/reel/video/p089lfhk/how-self-pleasure-became-the-s...

 

 

Read from top.

A weekly speed-dating event created by and for lesbians in the UK has been axed after organizers were accused of transphobia, with activists insisting transgender women should be allowed to participate.

The row erupted last week after event organizer Jenny Watson shared rules for the get-togethers online, saying the meetings were limited to “adult human females” only, as was first reported by the Daily Mail.

“If you are male, please refrain from coming to the events, you are not a lesbian,” she added. 

Members of a local activist group in London proceeded to report Watson’s comments to her employer, deeming them “transphobic,” according to the Mail. In an interview with GB News Pundit Andrew Doyle, organizers also said a manager for a pub that hosted the speed-dating events worked with opponents to have them terminated.

The manager was eventually added to an activist group chat, where they vowed to do all in their power to have the gatherings canceled. In one message shared by Watson, they went on to propose “replacing it with an in-house speed set of dating nights with inclusivity at its heart.”

Another organizer, Kate Barker of LGB Alliance – a group which claims to “promote the rights of lesbians, bisexuals and gay men, as recognised by biological sex” – said she was told the move was a “commercial decision,” but argued the chat messages suggest otherwise.

“To find out that somebody from the organization that actually owns the pub is in that group, making it their mission to shut down an event held by their own employer, it’s a really peculiar situation,”Barker added. “To be a lesbian and have a women-only event is seen to be bigoted and exclusionary.”

Over the nearly five years that the speed-dating events were held, Watson said the group had run into problems with transgender participants in the past, describing one case of “inappropriate conduct in the toilets” to Doyle. 

“He was getting very close to one woman in particular; there was some touching involved. I spoke with him and he wasn’t very happy about that,” Watson said.

However, Barker insisted that it was “absurd” to label her or other organizers as bigoted or “anti-trans,” stating their rules have “nothing to do with trans people. We just don’t want men to come.”

 

https://www.rt.com/news/581335-lesbian-speed-dating-transphobia/

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW............................

 

 

Has the language of sex become too complicated?
Sexual vocabulary is saturated with anglicisms and new expressions, it's not easy to keep up, reports Maïa Mazaurette.

By Maïa Mazaurette

Do you know what making "a Pollock" is? To be honest, neither do I. Yet these words appear in the book Les Mots du Q ("Sex Words"), published by the rising French star of sexology: Camille Aumont Carnel – author and creator of the Instagram account @jemenbatsleclito. Is the new generation's vocabulary so different from mine? Do you need to know the definition of a "Pollock" to be in the know?

So let's start by bringing ourselves up to date: "making a Pollock" (in homage to the American painter Jackson Pollock, known for his use of the "dripping" technique, which involves dripping paint onto the canvas) involves staining your bedding by having sex during your period. With that crucial information out of the way, I'll leave you to finish your apple turnover.

Let's turn to the question that's been nagging at me: is our frenzy for new words excessive? 

 

READ MORE:

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/m-le-mag/article/2023/12/25/has-the-language-of-sex-become-too-complicated_6374548_117.html

 

SEE ALSO: https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/48763 (R 18+)

 

NEXT....

 

We went our different ways

I, dangerously sailing around the world

She, safely climbing another mountain

Possibly twice Mount Everest, in her beautiful orb

Not strangely, we so far never met again

Though one day, one night, maybe we might, 

In a strange daze, exhume the old organic delight 

Of her breasts gently teasing her own nipples

On my chest in frissoning ripples

during these wild nineteen-sixty-five days

As we could again embrace each other like long lost lovers

Though it was not love

That from our coop flew like a dove

As the existential of who we are and what we did

Is still ingrained in these moments of ecstatic follies

That nature gave us, gives us and are fading away

We may not recognise each others nor even dig

For the toil of years have damaged our aged bodies

Our faces crinkled like petals of fallen flowers

Our gait in need of a walking stick

Or being terminally sick

Our brains shrunk demented inside our head

And one of us may already be dead

Or gay

 

Life, beautiful, takes us away… fades us away

She was twenty-one, I was not thirty…

 

                     Robert Urbanoski — the Day after the Christmas Follies

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW............................