Sex and Opium...

[Closet Desire]

Worse?

I'm curious about this underlying perception of a sensual picture or art or advert being described in terms of "worse". This presupposes that the image is "bad" in the first place and I wonder...is it really? If so, who is it bad for? And finally, why is it bad? My son and step son were both hiding top-shelf magazines under their mattresses when they were 13 or 14 so pretending we're shielding children from sex is ridiculous.

If all this protection is such a smart thing why do America and Canada (among the industrial countries) have the two highest rates of teenage pregnancy and the highest rates of STD? Should give pause to ponder.

We have two son's, both now seventeen, and a daughter who is 13. Let's be blunt about this. We write and publish erotica so not only do we have erotic books and images on our shelves and on our walls, but some of those books are written by us and some of the images are of CD-able herself. I hasten to add that we don't have any interest in what I guess you would call "hard-core" graphic magazines and videos. Just not our taste. Nevertheless, the children are surrounded by this and they have been told they are free to read any of it, without asking (they have). One son is in a long term relationship and having occassional sex. The other has had a few girlfriends, but no sex. Our daughter? Not interested yet. How do we know? Because sex isn't a "dirty" word in our house. We have candid conversations about sex, the risks, the precautions, and the concerns. Even the boys will talk to us about what's going on without getting defensive.

I don't think I have to say what the benefits have been for us personally. But, if you look at European nations which have more casual attitudes toward sex and who don't consider it ugly, dirty, nasty, or bad and you will find lower rates of teen pregnancy, higher ages before first intercourse, lower rates of STD, and lower rates of promiscuity as well as lower rates of sexual crime.

This ties directly with images that are sensual in nature. If one perceives these as bad or inappropriate then it is likely they consider other aspects of the erotic to be bad.

Just my thoughts...

By the way, as I said earlier, the reason Sophie looks so white is that the photo was taken at night, through a shop window, with a digital camera (you can see the reflection of Christmas lights in the town square). Necrophilia wasn't a part of this image!

 

[Cheyenne]

I personally think we should just have adverts for cunnilingus and to hell with the shoes or whatever it is they're trying to sell us.

Opps, I guess I didn't describe it quite graphically enough! Let me try again. The pic wasn't of oral sex, just plain old fucking with her on the edge of the sink and him standing in front of her facing her. You can see she is naked because of her bare back refected in the mirror. His ass is covered by the towel around his bottom. You can't see her breasts because you are looking at his back (and the shoes on her feet, attached to the legs wrapped around his body). So, you don't really see any naked body parts. But you know from the pose which two parts are connected at the moment!

I don't disagree that parents should be open about sex with their children. But I do think using an ad of teens fucking to sell shoes in a magazine aimed at young to mid-teenage girls isn't a good idea.

 

[Closet Desire]

Oh yeah...

...I agree with that. I think it's a little silly to use sex to sell anything unless the product, frankly, is about sex. I think perfumes and most fashion products have quite a lot to do with sex. Cars and cookies I'm not so sure about. Well, ice cream maybe...thinking of the Haagen Daz adverts which are very, err, well, oral in nature!

Aiming it at kids is pretty cheap, but it's also a reaction to the very real idea that kids are sexual beings long before they turn legal at 18. Where to draw the line? I don't know and won't venture to get into it since I'm past that age with my kids.

I think the Opium advert is about sex. I think most women will wear an expensive perfume not to impress the pimply clerk at the checkout stand, but to inspire something a bit more passionate or, simply, to make herself feel more passionate and sensual and I see nothing wrong with that...it's part of who and what we are...hopefully.

Sensuality, as opposed to cheap sexuality (sex as an act, men and women as objects) is such a wonderful dimension to our relationships that I cringe whenever I see it dismissed or criticised as dirty, nasty, or bad. It is a vital part of my relationship with CD-able and as important as the other things we share. I hate the idea of children who grow up in fear of someone thinking they are weird or cheap or dirty because they express their sensual selves.

 

[Closet Desire]

Okay...new advert...

...chew on this one...or drool...whatever. Is this cheap? sexy? too sexy? insulting? playful? funny? Thoughts?

http://213.130.40.107/wonderbra.jpg