Yearly Archives: 2011

30 November, 2011

Last week the New York Times magazine published an article called “Teaching Good Sex”, about a coprehensive sex-ed class at a Quaker school in the United States that premises itself on an open discourse about sex and an embrace of sexuality. Al Vernacchio, Laurie Abraham writes, thinks that “if kids are starting to use their bodies sexually, they should know about their potentialities.”

Right now most sex-ed in America follows two lines of reasoning: that sex is an awful thing that shouldn’t be done, or that sex is an awful thing with which, as a last resort, a condom should be used. Varnacchio, alongside a smaller group of educators, believes that a comprehensive sex education for teenagers functions as a “force for good,” and that it should be approached realistically as heavily braided with risk, responsibility, and pleasure. He urges his students to “know their own minds, be clear about what they do and don’t want and use their self-knowledge to make choices.” He allows students to ask whatever questions they have and answers them frankly and from several perspectives.

One little note, Laurie Abraham also wrote a little follow up to her article that was posted on the New York Times’ 6th Floor Blog: “What Sweden Knows About Orgasms.” She writes this little anecdote about the experience of a sex-ed class in Sweden:

Q (Student). “What is an orgasm, and why do people talk about it so much?”
A (Teacher). “Orgasm is the moment of highest pleasure during sex, and that’s why people talk about it so much.”

Abraham’s point here was that American sex-ed neglects to talk about pleasure and desire in sex, thus alienating students, who are at the same time plugged into a media-driven world where graphic sexual imagery is rampant. She, and other writers agree, that if an open conversation about sex does not start in the classroom, it might begin in the places that do not foster nonjudgemental instruction on bodies, birth control, disease prevention, healthy sexual attitudes and relationships, and responsible choices.

Abraham brings up a topic about porn that several of her responses dilineated on: that if teenagers don’t get their sex education from educators, they will get it from porn, which will instill at a very early age unhealthy sex roles and stereotypes. While this is not obviously true of all porn, yes, we agree that if teenagers are only exposed to mainstream porn and not aware of how to have an open conversation about sex, it becomes much more difficult to have healthy sexual relationships. Amanda Hess talks about this very beautifully in her article, “An American Oddity: Sex Ed That Actually Talks About Sex.”

She writes:
“If we miss out on the basics at a young age, when do we evolve into full sexual adults, people who know what we want and how to get it? Proponents of “disaster prevention” sex ed seem to think that if we teach kids about sex at a young age, they’ll mature too quickly. I was educated on that assumption, and I’m still waiting to really grow up.”

This article appeared on the cover of the New York Times Magazine and was followed by many other articles responding to it. That’s great! We’re happy that the American media is beginning to accept sex positivity as a part of the mainstream conversation about sex. We also hope that this will draw more attention towards people like us who are working to create alternatives to the way that we experience sex.

Another interesting article following up this debate in Slate.


ribete lust

25 November, 2011

Many women have talked to me about their doubts… “Am I still a feminist if I…
-…wear high heels?”
-…cook dinner for my boyfriend?”
-…decide to stay home to take care of the kids?”

and also “Are people going to judge me for it?”.

I think it’s time to take into account modern feminism, this new way of understanding gender fights in our modern society, because although there are still many gender issues, it’s not the 1950′s anymore.

Feminism at its core aims at giving women the right to do exactly what they want to do. It’s ok to want to look nice, not because it’s our duty to look good for men, but because you should do whatever makes you feel good, healthy, strong… if you like it, wear it! It doesn’t matter since our looks aren’t (or shouldn’t) our only attributes, they don’t define ourselves as a person. High heels especially, they’re not a symbol of male domination anymore, they’re just a matter of fashion.

high heels

The difference is that now it goes both ways: men also take care of their looks, they cook, they take care of their kids… So go make a sandwich for your boyfriend! This oh so charming phrase doesn’t go with the sexist context anymore, since your boyfriend will probably cook the day after and wash the dishes…

As Hannah Woit explains here, feminism gives us the right to do what makes us truely happy.

Not doing certain things because it might trigger male reactions is also a kind of dependence, so do whatever the f*** you want! As long as it’s respectful to yourself and the others.

ribete lust

23 November, 2011

Hello everybody!

I would like to invite you to the Cabaret Desire presentation party to celebrate with the crew and I the release of the film and the hard work we’ve all put in.

It will take place in Barcelona, at Tinta Roja along with the Poetry Brothel and the performance of Cava Cabaret. So come have a drink with us and enjoy a great night!

For the occasion, the DVDs of Cabaret Desire will be available for 20€ instead of 30€, so take advantage of it!

Entry is 5€

ribete lust

17 November, 2011

A new DVD pack is now available on Lust Store: Shortbus + 9 Songs. I know many of you are looking to get the best of indie porn and build a nice collection of the best modern directors, so I try to gather all this material on Lust Store.
Shortbus by John Cameron Mitchell and 9 Songs by Michael Winterbottom are two of today’s most explicit indie movies.

Both movies are available individually on the store, but if purchased together as a pack it’ll allow you to save 20€.

9 Songs
In London, England, love blooms between an American college student, named Lisa, and a British glaciologist, named Matt, where over the next few months in between attending rock concerts, the two lovers have intense sexual encounters.

A group of New Yorkers get caught up in their romantic-sexual milieu converge at an underground salon infamous for its blend of art, music, politics, and carnality.

15 November, 2011

I recently discovered this debate about the “Hot Chicks of Occupy Wall Street” video by Steven Greenstreet as well as the tumblr blog.

So I wonder… what does it take for a woman to be taken seriously? Such a powerful movement and still the attention is drawn away from their message to their boobs.

I understand the feeling, really, empowered women are hot, but why take away their words, reduce them to “pretty faces” and expose them like cattle? Is that the best way to participate and help them?

Greenstreet defends by saying:
Wow, seeing all those super smart hot chicks at the protest makes me want to be there… Hmmm… Yeah, let’s go with that.

We instantly went to Tumblr and made [Hot Chicks of Occupy Wall Street]. Our original ideas were admittedly sophomoric: Pics of hot chicks being all protesty, videos of hot chicks beating drums in slow-mo, etc. But when we arrived at Zuccotti Park in New York City, it evolved into something more.

There was a vibrant energy in the air, a warmth of community and family, and the voices we heard were so hopeful and passionate. Pretty faces were making signs, giving speeches, organizing crowds, handing out food, singing, dancing, debating, hugging and marching.

via The Society Pages

This poor taste isn’t good at all for their protest and just removes credibility to their fight, especially since there had already been narrow-minded comments and “anti-sex hysteria” by the media.

Why not focus on their intelligence? their bravoury? their strength?

Here’s the video – what do YOU think?