Spent part of the evening last night in the darkroom, making contact sheets of the photo shoot I did Wednesday.
You know, even as jaded as I am, there’s something about the girl-on-girl thing that just gets me where I live. Which puts me, I think, pretty solidly in the majority; I don’t think you can ask for a more typical “guy thing” than that.
Yeah, I know, I hate to be cheesy and cliched, and I am at least a reasonably enlightened guy, but, I mean, damn!
So what is it about the “hot lesbian action” thing, anyway? It’s a cliche that guys are into this sort of thing because…well, we are into this sort of thing. It’s depressing, really; there’s nothing rational about it. It just grabs us by the back part of the brain–the part that knows nothing of reason–and says “Hey! Hot girl on girl action! Gimmee some of that!”
I had a cognitive science professor back in my college days who swore it was biological. Said it crosses all cultural and educational lines, and theorized about how humans are the only primate whose females don’t have an obvious outward sign that they’re sexually receptive, but that guy-on-girl action is more likely to raise a territorial/competitive reaction, whereas girl-on-girl behavior is clear and unambiguous evidence that the females are sexually receptive and there’s no male there to represent a challenge…
I dunno. I think that’s a difficult theory to support.
But still. Damn!
makes about as much or as little sense as the theory that women paint their lips red to mimic in heat female baboon bottoms. 🙂
Women paint their lips red to mimic female baboon bottoms? That’s a new one on me. Does anyone really say that?
I’d venture a guess that women paint their lips for the same reason they use eyeliner–accentuation of detail. But the female babboon bottoms sounds more amusing. 🙂
yeh, some social scientist type. Read it years ago in Psychology Today. Clearly it made an impression, lol! The point is supposedly to mimic the redness of the nether lips, and make men think about wanting to screw us. Or our mouths, lol!
I think that theory of sexual evolution was based on female chimps (not baboons) getting pink in estrus. But recently it’s been shown to be, if anything, a coincidence. Chimps are 5 million years divergent from us, but bonobos (which are only 2 million years divergent from humans) are closer evolutionarily, don’t get pink with sexual stimulation and don’t have an estrus.
The male preference for red lips (of both varieties) and areolae probably comes from the tendency for skin to flush during sexual excitement. So men have been bred to respond to that particular flushed color, believing that the woman is in the mood. So someone caught on to the idea of faking that particular color in order to keep a guy around… and lipstick was invented.
Sexual evolution and the origins of sexual competition are really, really complex.
Hmm. Somehow, I’m very skeptical about that theory. It sounds too “Just So”…”And that’s why dogs can’t talk!”
Or maybe it’s just me…but the pink nether regions of a babboon in heat really don’t do anything for me. 🙂
maybe not for your civilized brain. But doesn’t your dick get hard when you see big ripe pouty flushed moist lips shimmering just below your nose? 🙂
Um…no.
Told you I was jaded…
makes about as much or as little sense as the theory that women paint their lips red to mimic in heat female baboon bottoms. 🙂
Actually, what you’re talking about isn’t “hot lesbian action”, it’s “two straight women with frosted hair, 3 inch nails, and spike heels pretending to pet each other and puckering their botox-injected Mick Jagger lips at the camera”.
Real “hot lesbian action” consists of two butch women who could pass for men grinning at each other and flirting, kissing, snuggling, and fucking with larger-than-real-life dildos. Oh, and after two or three hours of foreplay getting down to the real sex.
(Can you tell I have issue with the porn industry?)
Oh, and your professor was wrong: bonobos also don’t have any obvious outward sign of sexual receptivity because, like humans, they fuck for fun and group bonding. Actually, bonobos have waaaay more sex than humans. And they’re all into bisexual group sex, too. 🙂
Also, woman-on-woman sex isn’t cross-culturally accepted. In fact, western/European cultures are pretty much the only ones where it is accepted — in most of the world, the concept of non-heterosexual relations is usually met with mobs who beat and kill the suspected deviants, if they aren’t killed by their family first, that is.
“Actually, what you’re talking about isn’t “hot lesbian action”, it’s “two straight women with frosted hair, 3 inch nails, and spike heels pretending to pet each other and puckering their botox-injected Mick Jagger lips at the camera”.”
Chicken or egg. I think the porn industry likes to present the idea of highly idealized, abstracted lesbianism precisely because it gets us where we live.
“Real “hot lesbian action” consists of two butch women who could pass for men grinning at each other and flirting, kissing, snuggling, and fucking with larger-than-real-life dildos.”
Yeah, I know. The majority of my female friends are lesbians, for some reason probably involving either a cosmological joke at my expense or some weird form of universal karma I’d rather not think about. (I fact, i have a very close friend–a lesbian, natch–who tells me that this isn’t my real life–this is just a trial run for my next life, when I’ll be reincarnated as a lesbian.)
So I’ve seen the real live, girl-on-girl thing. And, I mean, damn!
Don’t think I’ll ever get too jaded for that.
“Also, woman-on-woman sex isn’t cross-culturally accepted. In fact, western/European cultures are pretty much the only ones where it is accepted…”
Well, to be fair, he didn’t say it was cross-culturally accepted. Only that men from almost all cultures find it a turn-on. In fact, the fact that it is such a turn-on for us might just explain some of the cultural taboos surrounding it…
this isn’t my real life–this is just a trial run for my next life, when I’ll be reincarnated as a lesbian.
This is a Test. This is only a Test. If this were a Real Life, you would be given instructions on where to go and what to do.
Woah. That’s really deep, girl. *boggled yet intrigued*
I can’t take credit, I read it somewhere. So if you really think it’s deep, not my good. And if you’re teasing and mean it’s the opposite of deep. . . hey, not my bad either! 🙂
Most everything I say that has any significance whatsoever is something I read somewhere. To fill in the gaps in my brain. If I have an author’s name, I give credit where due. Otherwise, it’s just “Anon” as usual. 🙂
No, I was serious – that really is deep.
Actually, what you’re talking about isn’t “hot lesbian action”, it’s “two straight women with frosted hair, 3 inch nails, and spike heels pretending to pet each other and puckering their botox-injected Mick Jagger lips at the camera”.
Real “hot lesbian action” consists of two butch women who could pass for men grinning at each other and flirting, kissing, snuggling, and fucking with larger-than-real-life dildos. Oh, and after two or three hours of foreplay getting down to the real sex.
(Can you tell I have issue with the porn industry?)
Oh, and your professor was wrong: bonobos also don’t have any obvious outward sign of sexual receptivity because, like humans, they fuck for fun and group bonding. Actually, bonobos have waaaay more sex than humans. And they’re all into bisexual group sex, too. 🙂
Also, woman-on-woman sex isn’t cross-culturally accepted. In fact, western/European cultures are pretty much the only ones where it is accepted — in most of the world, the concept of non-heterosexual relations is usually met with mobs who beat and kill the suspected deviants, if they aren’t killed by their family first, that is.
Women paint their lips red to mimic female baboon bottoms? That’s a new one on me. Does anyone really say that?
I’d venture a guess that women paint their lips for the same reason they use eyeliner–accentuation of detail. But the female babboon bottoms sounds more amusing. 🙂
“Actually, what you’re talking about isn’t “hot lesbian action”, it’s “two straight women with frosted hair, 3 inch nails, and spike heels pretending to pet each other and puckering their botox-injected Mick Jagger lips at the camera”.”
Chicken or egg. I think the porn industry likes to present the idea of highly idealized, abstracted lesbianism precisely because it gets us where we live.
“Real “hot lesbian action” consists of two butch women who could pass for men grinning at each other and flirting, kissing, snuggling, and fucking with larger-than-real-life dildos.”
Yeah, I know. The majority of my female friends are lesbians, for some reason probably involving either a cosmological joke at my expense or some weird form of universal karma I’d rather not think about. (I fact, i have a very close friend–a lesbian, natch–who tells me that this isn’t my real life–this is just a trial run for my next life, when I’ll be reincarnated as a lesbian.)
So I’ve seen the real live, girl-on-girl thing. And, I mean, damn!
Don’t think I’ll ever get too jaded for that.
“Also, woman-on-woman sex isn’t cross-culturally accepted. In fact, western/European cultures are pretty much the only ones where it is accepted…”
Well, to be fair, he didn’t say it was cross-culturally accepted. Only that men from almost all cultures find it a turn-on. In fact, the fact that it is such a turn-on for us might just explain some of the cultural taboos surrounding it…
yeh, some social scientist type. Read it years ago in Psychology Today. Clearly it made an impression, lol! The point is supposedly to mimic the redness of the nether lips, and make men think about wanting to screw us. Or our mouths, lol!
this isn’t my real life–this is just a trial run for my next life, when I’ll be reincarnated as a lesbian.
This is a Test. This is only a Test. If this were a Real Life, you would be given instructions on where to go and what to do.
Woah. That’s really deep, girl. *boggled yet intrigued*
I can’t take credit, I read it somewhere. So if you really think it’s deep, not my good. And if you’re teasing and mean it’s the opposite of deep. . . hey, not my bad either! 🙂
Most everything I say that has any significance whatsoever is something I read somewhere. To fill in the gaps in my brain. If I have an author’s name, I give credit where due. Otherwise, it’s just “Anon” as usual. 🙂
I think that theory of sexual evolution was based on female chimps (not baboons) getting pink in estrus. But recently it’s been shown to be, if anything, a coincidence. Chimps are 5 million years divergent from us, but bonobos (which are only 2 million years divergent from humans) are closer evolutionarily, don’t get pink with sexual stimulation and don’t have an estrus.
The male preference for red lips (of both varieties) and areolae probably comes from the tendency for skin to flush during sexual excitement. So men have been bred to respond to that particular flushed color, believing that the woman is in the mood. So someone caught on to the idea of faking that particular color in order to keep a guy around… and lipstick was invented.
Sexual evolution and the origins of sexual competition are really, really complex.
I had theorized that the interest in the “hot lesbian action” thing is the less threatening activity for a man to preserve the lines of what is considered by himself as acceptable. You can identify with any of the characters there and still fantasize of a heterosexual relationship, whereas in watching an opposite-sex couple you could -god forbid!- rest your eyes on the man. “Lesbian action” seems safe from a macho point of view. But again, who knows, it never got me too excited anyway.
Hmm. This is another one I find hard to accept.
I’m straight, and when I see a man and woman getting it on, I “identify” with the man in the sense that I’m turned on by the prospect of taking his place.
But when two women are making the beast with two backs, it’s not really an identification thing at all. I don’t imagine myself as being either of them, if that’s what you mean by “identifying.”
I think what you’re saying is tatamount to saying that heterosexual men identify more with women than with other men…which seems to be a very peculiar position to take. 🙂
Could be, I am not sure of anything anymore. I have had male friends who have back off from erotic/porno pictures where there is a naked man. They found the vision of a penis disgusting; that’s where my theory started.
But again, I could be wrong. I find the images of both men and women erotic per se and attractive, so I know that I am biased in this one… Or unbiased, depending how we look at this.
I had theorized that the interest in the “hot lesbian action” thing is the less threatening activity for a man to preserve the lines of what is considered by himself as acceptable. You can identify with any of the characters there and still fantasize of a heterosexual relationship, whereas in watching an opposite-sex couple you could -god forbid!- rest your eyes on the man. “Lesbian action” seems safe from a macho point of view. But again, who knows, it never got me too excited anyway.
First, let me say that I object to the description of all lesbians as ‘butch women who could pass for men.’ Besides which the two aren’t (that and qualifying for ‘hot lesbian action’) mutually exclusive.
That aside, I also generally find two girls making out more ‘interesting’ than a girl and a guy. And I’m not a boy, so it’s not a competition thing. I think it is something more related to the sexual interaction and sexual energies involved, although I can’t really take it farther than that…
I object to it, too. What I wrote was hyperbolized for the purpose of contrast… to show, in a way, that while the majority of men think of “hot lesbian action” as what they see in porn videos, the reality falls somewhere in between the porn industry’s version and what I wrote previously. My partner and I pretty much show the whole range: she couldn’t pass for a man without a serious lifestyle change, while I get mistaken for one about half the time.
I was in an odd headsapce, likely due to being at a kinky con all weekend where I felt uncomfortably too young and too queer for that crowd. My apologies.
“What I wrote was hyperbolized for the purpose of contrast… to show, in a way, that while the majority of men think of “hot lesbian action” as what they see in porn videos, the reality falls somewhere in between the porn industry’s version and what I wrote previously.”
That can be said of almost ANY porn–it’s so highly abstracted and idealized that it really bears little resemblance to reality at all. But the porn doesn’t create the tastes; rather, the porn merely reflects popular turnons.
Like I said before, I think the “hot lesbian action” is such a staple in cheesy pornography precisely because it’s such a turnon, not the other way around. Porn doesn’t dictate taste; it reflects it. Pornography that doesn’t appeal to its target demographic fails commercially.
As an aside, it does seem to be true that many women find girl-on-girl action just as fascinating as men do…even, bizarrely, women who self-identify as straight (like my wife, for example, who isn’t intersted in having a female lover but is nevertheless turned on by “hot lesbian sex”).
That’s ok, no offense taken really. Really. 🙂
First, let me say that I object to the description of all lesbians as ‘butch women who could pass for men.’ Besides which the two aren’t (that and qualifying for ‘hot lesbian action’) mutually exclusive.
That aside, I also generally find two girls making out more ‘interesting’ than a girl and a guy. And I’m not a boy, so it’s not a competition thing. I think it is something more related to the sexual interaction and sexual energies involved, although I can’t really take it farther than that…
No, I was serious – that really is deep.
I object to it, too. What I wrote was hyperbolized for the purpose of contrast… to show, in a way, that while the majority of men think of “hot lesbian action” as what they see in porn videos, the reality falls somewhere in between the porn industry’s version and what I wrote previously. My partner and I pretty much show the whole range: she couldn’t pass for a man without a serious lifestyle change, while I get mistaken for one about half the time.
I was in an odd headsapce, likely due to being at a kinky con all weekend where I felt uncomfortably too young and too queer for that crowd. My apologies.
Hmm. Somehow, I’m very skeptical about that theory. It sounds too “Just So”…”And that’s why dogs can’t talk!”
Or maybe it’s just me…but the pink nether regions of a babboon in heat really don’t do anything for me. 🙂
Hmm. This is another one I find hard to accept.
I’m straight, and when I see a man and woman getting it on, I “identify” with the man in the sense that I’m turned on by the prospect of taking his place.
But when two women are making the beast with two backs, it’s not really an identification thing at all. I don’t imagine myself as being either of them, if that’s what you mean by “identifying.”
I think what you’re saying is tatamount to saying that heterosexual men identify more with women than with other men…which seems to be a very peculiar position to take. 🙂
“What I wrote was hyperbolized for the purpose of contrast… to show, in a way, that while the majority of men think of “hot lesbian action” as what they see in porn videos, the reality falls somewhere in between the porn industry’s version and what I wrote previously.”
That can be said of almost ANY porn–it’s so highly abstracted and idealized that it really bears little resemblance to reality at all. But the porn doesn’t create the tastes; rather, the porn merely reflects popular turnons.
Like I said before, I think the “hot lesbian action” is such a staple in cheesy pornography precisely because it’s such a turnon, not the other way around. Porn doesn’t dictate taste; it reflects it. Pornography that doesn’t appeal to its target demographic fails commercially.
As an aside, it does seem to be true that many women find girl-on-girl action just as fascinating as men do…even, bizarrely, women who self-identify as straight (like my wife, for example, who isn’t intersted in having a female lover but is nevertheless turned on by “hot lesbian sex”).
maybe not for your civilized brain. But doesn’t your dick get hard when you see big ripe pouty flushed moist lips shimmering just below your nose? 🙂
Um…no.
Told you I was jaded…
Could be, I am not sure of anything anymore. I have had male friends who have back off from erotic/porno pictures where there is a naked man. They found the vision of a penis disgusting; that’s where my theory started.
But again, I could be wrong. I find the images of both men and women erotic per se and attractive, so I know that I am biased in this one… Or unbiased, depending how we look at this.
That’s ok, no offense taken really. Really. 🙂