Oh, my lord, I just looked over to see what Volokh is doing with the vibrators. He's got a 1357-word post! You know, if you guys can go on long enough, women might not need vibrators.
Now, I'll actually read what Volokh says:
This is... a family blog, and you can’t very well start a family if you’re too interested in your vibrator.Well, hell! It depends on how you use it!
So here’s a circumstance I’ve wondered about. Imagine that a close single female friend (just a friend) mentioned to you that she has a vibrator that’s shaped like a highly stylized penis....Oh! These lawprofs and their hypos! In this one, a female friend volunteers that she loves her vibrator. Volokh says most people would think that's okay. Then, he changes the hypo — this is what lawprofs do with hypos — and the friend expressing love for the sex appliance is male. Volokh says "many people will think it’s a bit icky, in some hard to pin down way." He then explores 5 theories. You can go over there and read them. They all assume solo use of the vibrator, so it's really more about why people would rather think about a woman masturbating than think about a man masturbating. That's a matter of the sexual preference of the person doing the thinking.
पोस्ट्स
७२ टिप्पण्या:
Law professors are weird.
You say wanker like it's a bad thing ;)
It's all about the economy of supply and demand. And we all know which side is holding the commodity. Everything else stems from that.
And you know what? Now that I've seen a picture of Eugene Volokh, in that NYT expose' on law prof blogs, this vibrator thing is downright creepy:
It's like being privy to the sexual fetishes of that guy from Iowa on 30 Rock.
Ann,
Most men (well non-gay men) think of other men 'doing it' as oh yuck.
But if two women get it on (or just one) well that just strokes their innor lesbian feelings (you see I'm just a lesbian traped in a man's body myself...)
But this vibrator thing is kind of strange.
"You know, if you guys can go on long enough, women might not need vibrators."
But if they keep going on about vibrators, then women might need vibtrators.
Instapundit: "Vibrators are "popping up" everywhere."
Heh.
Indeed.
They told me if I voted for John McCain we'd see sex toys being marketed to kids at the Walgreens.
CHANGE: You can't get a chocolate malted at the Walgreens anymore ... but you can get an huge dildonic orgasm.
Hmm.
"You know, if you guys can go on long enough, women might not need vibrators."
So the barbie/supermodel argument about unrealistic stereotypes is bullshit, huh? It only applies when the females are on the defensive?
There's a mountain of science about average lengths (no pun) of time for men to climax, but biology be damned. It's the man's fault for not being more of a man.
"... many people will think it’s a bit icky, in some hard to pin down way."
It's flaccidly easy to pin down why this is "icky," seeing as how The Gheys are shoving them up their arseholes.
Ut is good at these law school hypos.
Yale or Harvard man?
As The Blonde notes, procreation notwithstanding, "It's not the same!!!!".
Kind of like breasts.
Irene said...
"You know, if you guys can go on long enough, women might not need vibrators."
But if they keep going on about vibrators, then women might need vibtrators.
Better yet, a man.
PS All these genteel ladies talking about vibrators and houses of ill repute and stuff.
Ever get the feeling men really are becoming expendable?
Or is it the fact we're not anymore?
I believe the sex postings are trying to get commenters horny.
"Instapundit: "Vibrators are "popping up" everywhere." Heh. Indeed."
The image is of the penis-shaped vibrator getting an erection. Quite aside from that fact that most vibrators are not penis-shaped, penis-shaped vibrators never assume a flaccid state.
There are some in the gay community that don't do any anal type activities.
I would never have anything go up my ass.
A short repost, with permission:
A vibrator is not limited to “solo play.” In fact, given the general difficulty for women in achieving orgasm through vaginal stimulation, a vibrator can be an extremely helpful tool in allowing both halves of a couple to experience an orgasm during an intimate session. Conversely, the number of situations in which a Fleshlight is instrumental or even necessary to ensure both partners achieve orgasm seems far more limited.
Additionally, a vibrator, even one clearly designed for genital use, can be used to provide sexual and non-sexual pleasure on other parts of the body (e.g. nipples for sexual; sore muscles for non-sexual). It is not surprising that a multi-use sex toy than can be fairly described as a “marital aid” is far more accepted than one designed only for solo masturbatory use.
Frankly, given that the comments on Instapundit and VC don't even consider the use of vibrators in a coupled context, I can only assume that Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Volokh are quite skilled or that Mrs. Reynolds and Mrs. Volokh (actually, is there a Mrs. Eugene Volokh?) are a might testy.
If you do choose to buy a vibrator, please use the Althouse portal to do so.
It's the spring season and the Law Profs minds are turning to carefully tuned critical analyses of SEX and more Sex. I say the posts are internet pick up lines written by these horny 100K per article guys at no extra charge.
The euphemism is power tools.
Maguro you made me LOL. I needed that (the laugh, I mean).
This is going to sound weird, but I don't get why women are supposed to "need" vibrators.
I don't like the way they've become just kind of assumed as required. They are not!
Frankly, I'd be creeped out if I dated a guy and found a anatomically correct blow-up doll in his closet. I'm not sure why we are supposed to react to vibrators differently, except for girl power.
MayBee...Speaking as a May Bee, men/drones are supposed to service queens, and they get no sympathy when they renege on their responsibilities. But women are the queen bees who must keep their orgasm skills in practice until that renegade drone finds his way back to the honey hive.
"A female friend volunteers that she loves her vibrator. Volokh says most people would think that's okay. Then, he changes the hypo — this is what lawprofs do with hypos — and the friend expressing love for the sex appliance is male."
It's really retarded when liberals who obsess over equality think we should be equal in regard to sex itself.
We're different.
You don't have a vagina. That's why the response is different.
Not rocket science. Our two sexes are different when it comes to sex. That's why we discriminate when it comes to sex.
Hello.
Unless you're some bisexual from another planet who thinks men can get pregnant, why on God's green earth would a different response surprise you?
We're different. Get over it.
This probably has something to do with Meademan, er Meademouse.
They even have vibes for mormonic women now, reportedly--the Rancho De Brigham, guaran-teeeeeeeeeed to make a gal feel like she's with some Big mormon king, his starseed wives, and a polygamous family out on the frontier...
A quick squirt versus a heaving erupting convulsing rumbling arrival and then a subsidence that won't subside. And the complaint is all on the female side. What about all those men who would like to get back to their machine shop or woodworking bench in the basement but have to hang around talking her down?
"Most men (well non-gay men) think of other men 'doing it' as oh yuck."
As a non-gay man I can tell you that I spend zero time thinking of other people doing it, regardless of their sex.
But now that you've forced me to think of it, I don't think of other men doing it as "oh yuck". I have a petty good understanding of the process which led to your birth, and (brace yourself!) it involved your dad "doing it".
From Volokh's post:
4. The Aesthetics theory: Naked women having sex are attractive and sexy. Naked men having sex are ugly (at least to heterosexuals, both men and women, and again I realize that this is a vast overgeneralization).
I'm included in the vast overgeneralisation. A naked men engaged in sex is super hot for me, including the realm of self-pleasure.
The caveat being, no dildos. Especially up the keister. That's just not...well, it's just not.
Cheers,
Victoria
You know, if you guys can go on long enough, women might not need vibrators.
Um, hello Xaviera Hollander to Ann Althouse: that's what oral sex is for. You get the woman to such a point, that bob's your uncle in a few strokes.
Jeez. Women.
There are some in the gay community that don't do any anal type activities.
I would never have anything go up my ass.
OMG, Titus...you're like Oscar Wilde. When I was a girl and had to research his trial for my 11th grade history class (yes, it was that kind of school), I was absolutely shocked to find out that he never took it up the rumpus. For me, that was the absolute definition of what is to be an homosexual male. I just presumed all gay men were into getting anal.
I'm included in the vast overgeneralisation. A naked men engaged in sex is super hot for me, including the realm of self-pleasure.
Um, hello Xaviera Hollander to Ann Althouse: that's what oral sex is for. You get the woman to such a point, that bob's your uncle in a few strokes.
I just presumed all gay men were into getting anal.
Penis fetish on Good Friday aside :-P what's not to like about female conservatives talkin' dirty!
Cheers indeed Victoria! Heh.
Cheers indeed Victoria! Heh.
Hehe.
You know, yesterday I Google Imaged something relating to a blogpost reply: I don't recall if it was Barbone/poodle, or what. But on doing so, I got all these vibrator pics. I was going to mention that in the reply, to raise a commentariat laugh, but I thought, "Talking about vibrators on Althouse? Perhaps a bit too much", so I didn't.
So imagine my surprise today.
We know that the average law review article costs about $100,000. (http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/what_is_the_cost_of_a_law_review_article_by_a_top_prof_estimate_is_100k). Let's assume that the average article comprises 50 pages, about 25,000 words (http://volokh.com/posts/1108060955.shtml), so the value per word (please, no arguments about whether cost equals value) is four dollars ($4). Applying this standard, Volokh's post is worth 1,357 x 4 = $5,428, and we're reading it for free. Show some respect, people!
women are the queen bees who must keep their orgasm skills in practice
Queen bees don't orgasm. Their role is to get pregnant and stay that way. So bee vibrators are a big no-no.
(My word verification for this comment is "bumbob". Pretty tricky, Ann.)
so it's really more about why people would rather think about a woman masturbating than think about a man masturbating.
Oh, sure, it's the old masturbatory double-standard.
A guy masturbating at the end of a first date is creepy.
A girl who slides down the banister is fun-loving.
On that note...
Tuning Fork Vibrating Dildo.
Oh man:
VICTORIA WINS THE THREAD!!!!!
The difference is simple.
1. Men would almost never masturbate if they had sufficient numbers of sexual partners readily available. If they COULD be doing it with a partner they desire, the WOULD be. They can't, so they aren't.
2. Men never have sufficient numbers of sexual partners unless they are extremely rich or powerful.
3. The degree to which men don't have a sufficient number of sexual partners is the degree of the man's weakness and undesirability.
4. Therefore, men who masturbate a lot are most likey to be seen as weak and undesirable. They have more horniness than their desirability level can handle.
Whereas:
1. Women, unless they are very very unattractive, are their own self-limiters on the number of partners they have.
2. Therefore, no matter how many partners they have, masturbation is never seen as weak or the product of desperation. It is always assumed that the woman COULD gain more sex, but chooses not to.
3. Therefore, a woman masturbating is not doing it from a position of weakness, but a position of strength. The woman's horniness that leads to masturbation is overflow on top of the sexual relationship she already wants and has. The woman not only has You, but is so horny that she wants MORE, which is hot.
Summary: Excess horniness in men is a product of their weakness. Excess horniness in women is a product of their hotness. Is there any wonder that the difference in attitude towards masturbation exists?
Imagine that a close single female friend (just a friend) mentioned to you that she has a vibrator that’s shaped like a highly stylized penis. It’s not too anatomically correct, just a normal vibrator. Assume that this came up in a suitable context, for example when something — a store you’re driving by, a joke you hear on the radio, a blog post you’ve just read — naturally raised the question, so it didn’t just come out of the blue (“You say you’re out of batteries? Speaking of batteries, I just LOVE my vibrator!”). What would you think?
Ha ha. The battery dialog is supposed to be the question "naturally raised?"
If a friend said that to me on the flimsy pretext of battery talk, I would think she was a total weirdo.
if you guys can go on long enough, women might not need vibrators
My father always said "Ladies first", and then he would wink. I'm pretty sure that he wasn't talking about opening doors for the ladies.
I thought in general law professors would use the name of their deans or other professors to keep the interest of the class. So is the vibrator in question named Reynolds, Althouse or Volokh? Of course Glenn points out over and over that something that is unsustainable won't go on forever... and then he has this thread about vibrators so I wonder if he isn't trying to tell us something.
And in response to a previous post from the gay guy who doesn't like anything up his butt it should be noted that you don't have to be a gay man to enjoy a little anal play. Lots of us heteros enjoy some with our wives.
I have wondered though at times that if the propensity to be gay is genetic then why can't the propensity to feel repulsed by gay activity also be genetic? That would not excuse discrimination but might help explain why the attitude is so universal and difficult to expunge.
Law professors are weird. really?
41 comments here. 12 about Law reviews
At this pace, Althouse, Volock and Reynolds will make baby seller a great candidate for SCOTUS.
How about the post poping up in your confirmation hearings?
This is going to sound weird, but I don't get why women are supposed to "need" vibrators.
I don't like the way they've become just kind of assumed as required. They are not!
It is really kinda weird. Some women masturbate by themselves, and others are appalled at the idea, but may actually do so during sex and be just fine with it then. At least with one, it wasn't that she couldn't orgasm, but rather, that she didn't want to stop doing so.
Not sure why some women are more comfortable with it than others. One may be that several I know who do, have been in and out of long term sexual relationships (esp. marriages), and sexually climaxing was something that they had gotten used to and enjoyed. But, as I said above, others just say "yuck".
The other thing to keep in mind though is that female sexuality seems to be broader than male sexuality, esp. when it comes to climaxing, and how it is done. Several I have known over the years could only climax with a vibrator. (And, no, Victoria, oral sex didn't solve the problem, but actually seemed to make it worse, where they absolutely needed their vibrator to go to sleep).
Another part of these differences in women is that some climax only vaginally, and for them, oral sex just doesn't do anything for them. And, a vibrator isn't much use either, for the same reasons. On the other hand, a dildo might be useful.
These "socially liberal" guys are just not as au courant as they think.
They need to spend some time with one of those lesbian socialist entrepreneurs who runs a 'sex tools' boutique.
What the hell are they bothering thinking about people and their vibrators if it doesn't turn them on? Inadequate lascivious prudes!
There are two separate types of female orgasms, are there not? Unlocking the key to both of them for your particular partner (or partners as the case may be, though truth be told, threesomes are too fleeting to really get to know where the "buttons" are). In any case, I have it on good authority that between the two, there is wide variance from woman to woman on which is stronger. Again, figuring out which she prefers and how to get there, in as many ways as possible, is the key.
As with just about everything in life, you can boil it down to a sports metaphor. You can't just keep throwing fastballs (no pun intended on the speed). You have to change things up, sometimes rapidly, by adding a few curves, screws, and knucklers (pun definite intended).
"There are two separate types of female orgasms ... "
My boyfriends browser history suggests there are far more than two types of female orgasm, at least according to the internet.
UT is a woman?
Who knew!!
Women, unless they are very very unattractive, are their own self-limiters on the number of partners they have.
A lot of men have some very strange ideas about women.
men who masturbate a lot are most likey to be seen as weak and undesirable.
Right. You do realize that this covers 99% of men, very much including you?
So how come no one has mentioned Ensign in this thread?
A lot of men have some very strange ideas about women.
If you were disagreeing with the "women as their own self-limiters" point with your statement, above, then welcome to our planet. I suggest you take a little longer studying human before jumping into a topic like this.
I was looking for something else and ran across this gift idea for my ex. It just seemed right.
Why?
It's dark under the blankets. Some women wouldn't know the vibrator from a cucumber. Meaning they can buy the size that fits on the "produce aisle."
Women get pregnant whether their eggs are shouting. Or not! Just about two generations back, and women got pregnant only after the man who chose them could prove he earned a living. In other words? It wasn't love. It was actually being able to take care of a family that made a man attractive. And, he only wanted a virgin.
Customs change.
Vibrators are probably profitable. And, if the TSA finds one in your luggage, there's a good chance this will be waved about.
Why is it the republicans who go after stories like these? Gosh. Instead of vibrators, maybe it's time to sell republicans Special Olympic helmets. They shouldn't be allowed to congregate without them.
Right. You do realize that this covers 99% of men, very much including you?
Of course I do, I made it clear that the only men who can break this pattern are the very rich or powerful. The key point is: the weaker and less attractive, the more subject to this a man is. So when people associate the concepts "masturbates a lot" and "that guy" then they are more likely to draw the conclusion, "that guy is weak and unattractive."
Try it. If you found out that George Clooney was a chronic masturbator, you would see him as weaker and more unattractive. Same with Bill Gates or any other extremely rich man. You would wonder, "what the hell went wrong with him?"
Whereas, if you found out that Scarlett Johansson was a chronic masturbator, you'd sure wonder something, but it wouldn't be "what the hell went wrong with her?"
I take it back:
With the exception of Freeman and Victoria, you're all weird.
You do realize that this covers 99% of men, very much including you?
If you're married, why are you masturbating all the time? I know that some people have spouses who don't like to have sex, but that can't be everybody.
It's like being privy to the sexual fetishes of that guy from Iowa on 30 Rock
Everybody knows about my sexual fetish. But that's okay, because it's a nice wholesome fetish.
Peter
"bob's your uncle"
Now, that's sexy!
It's like being privy to the sexual fetishes of that guy from Iowa on 30 Rock
Or being privy to the sexual fetishes of that professor from Ohio on 3rd Rock.
I'm not going to read any of these comments. Probably not one salacious observation in the lot. Fool me once, etc.....Can't they make a vibrator that doesn't sound like an alarm clock. A guy works hard all day, and then is kept up half the night by the incessant zzzzz's of his wife's vibrator. Please: a little consideration ladies.
Have you been drinking?
Crack Emcee wrote:
I was looking for something else and ran across this gift idea for my ex. It just seemed right.
Wow, Crack, did someone rat out your blog due to the Obama dildo? 'Cause I got a Content Warning before entering. :(
Ann, what about a couple in the context of marriage? Or what about a partner in a covenant relationship who "gets no satisfaction"? Are they still "dirty"? (not that you said that).
BTW, I'm a fiscally conservative Libertarian, for future reference.
I don't have a problem with marital devices, used in tandem or solo.
Vic,
Wow, Crack, did someone rat out your blog due to the Obama dildo? 'Cause I got a Content Warning before entering. :(
Did you see the date on that post? That's from years ago - when I had lots of readers - and nobody said anything.
I just realized yesterday I've lost my top ranking on Google for my own search term. That sucks. My tags don't even work anymore, because of the damned thing.
Ever since Michael Irvin got busted in that hotel room, I've never again presumed that the use of vibrators by men meant they were homosexual.
Anal play is "in" with the younger het's now too, it seems. Men and women. I guess it's a sensitive area or something.
(And you thought your fella was alone in spending a lot of time in the bathroom, really enjoying taking a good shit.)
Wait 'til Profs. Volokh and Reynolds get their minds wrapped around that one. That anal penetration and play aren't just for the gay crowd. Lol -- when that hits the ivory tower, imagine the posts we'll see!
http://books.google.com/books?id=KIu5wqdIb3QC&pg=PA341&lpg=PA341&dq=michael+irvin+vibrator+arrest&source=bl&ots=ZaL5_if4Z6&sig=Y3AZVehdqPNbNHHlZkx2A23ZBXQ&hl=en&ei=LOeyTfyQD4T00gGe46yyBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false
"Oh! These lawprofs and their hypos!"
For a moment there I thought maybe bob was your uncle.
Wait 'til Profs. Volokh and Reynolds get their minds wrapped around that one. That anal penetration and play aren't just for the gay crowd. Lol -- when that hits the ivory tower, imagine the posts we'll see!
~~~~~
Actually, as you say, younger folk are too busy doing it to talk about it, and most older folk are still too aghast/ashamed to render an opinion.
>
But not to worry as our blog mistress apparently, allegedly :-P likes it up the poop chute also.
mark f said,
March 22, 2011 at 15:04
Sigh. Unfortunately the LGM banning necessarily deletes all of Meade’s old comments (it’s a software thing, I guess). But if it hadn’t I could post a link demonstrating why your characterization of AltMeade sex is unfair. According to Meade they are quite active and adventurous and assfuck.
TMI as gain, those randy/depraved conservatives lol.
btw, pretty sure AA has achieved enough notoriety that she would now qualify for an unauthorized, uncensored celebrity sex tape!
solo estoy diciendo
Actually, when you say, more youthful folk are as well busy undertaking it to speak about it, and most more mature folk are nevertheless as well aghast
When you have nothing to do or unhappy? What should you do to spend the free time? How about the game? like to get Buy RS Gold in WOW, and how to have theRS Goldwith less money, is there anyway to get the for us? We need to think about this.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा