Recently I've been wondering how to construct the most rousing sexy text. For a while I was working with gardening analogies - you know, shovels and dirt and stuff. But I'm not sure if it's been particularly successful, here's a few between a friend and I. I was trying to scare her, because sometimes she gets embarrassed in gender studies classes when people talk about their sex lives...
Me: I want to penetrate you with a shovel
Friend: I'll use that shovel to dig you out.
Me: I'm dirty. You need to tie me up and force me to submit with your vibrating bullet.
Friend: Or worse. The Force of the Feather.
I don't think I was particularly successful at setting the mood. Firstly, I've never gardened in my life so I don't really know what it's all about. Secondly, I sense that fucking in a garden would be like a beach - except probably a bit more moist. Finally, perhaps sticking with the 'shovel/phallus' paradigm is a mistake, because lets face it - it sounds like something out of American Psycho, and no one wants to find Brett Easton Ellis on the other end of a sexy text message.
David Wygant gives a few tips on the sext. I've paraphrased them for you:
1. Make sure you've either had sex before, or talked about sex with each other before you start the hot-and-heavy words.
2. Go 'right past' the small talk. I'm not sure what he means by this, because most of my small talk does involve sex. Or sexualities, genders, trans people. How I've always wanted to have groupies. I think what he's saying is to not start the sext-adventure with 'how are you today?' or 'we're having chicken for dinner'.
3. Don't ever pressure anyone. I think he's trying to tell people to always keep things hypothetical: 'if you come over tonight', 'if you do that i might have to do this'.
He gives an abysmal example of some texts he shared with his ex-girlfriend. Check them out here. I needed to give away with this David-guy, because the first highlighted words on his bio are 'he's a regular guy', and no one wants a sext from a regular guy.
Having done away with David Wygant the 'dating coach' that fox news recommends, I'm left with just one question: should we be using analogies for penises and vaginas like in romantic/erotic fiction or is it better to go with a more literal approach?
Examples, anecdotes, suggestions? Let me know. While you think about it, maybe this will get you in the mood..
Evilboy.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Life back on track
One of my first posts here was about becoming the linch-pin of organised crime in the Brunswick area. Whilst I've yet to make any substantial deals with the local ruffians, I do live next door to suspected dealers and I have begun practicing my mad-skillz and intend to perform a hostile take-over of my tutorial. Here's what has conspired...
I have a gender-studies arch nemesis. We'll call her Sheila Greer - always talking about violence against women and other IAMWOMANHEARMEROAR atrocities. I'm not really into this business - I would much prefer to work away at an essay on True Blood, discuss why I want to bone Foucault's rotting corpse and name my first child after Judith Butler. Lets face it, drag makes for a better essay than patriarchy - so passe.
Anyway, Sheila Greer and I had a tutorial together last year and seemed fairly intent on arguing every point each other made. I seem to recall having a heated debate about niche porn and rape scenes. I have a penchent for rape-scenes - so visceral. They just seem to fall into an argument about horror films and post modernity. This is not to say I condone rape - obviously I do not, I just condone rape fantasies. I come across as less creepy that way.
Long story short we've made a pact to run our last gender studies tutorial as best as we can in order to silence our somewhat daft tutor who thinks that the term 'gender instability' has ambiguous political connotations (I know - what a cunt! How dare she have an opinion). So I figure I'm on my way to gangster-living because:
- I have organised a hostile take-over of someone else's domain.
- I have made a temporary peace agreement with my foe.
- It's all in the name of rendering someone incapable of work.
- There were witnesses. I have henchmen!
I'll leave you with this track. Whilst you listen to it, imagine me and Sheila Greer walking in slow motion towards the economics and commerce building of Melbourne uni with shot-guns in our pockets and stern faces. It all ends with an array of corpses in the G05 building near the water fountain at quarter past 5 next Wednesday afternoon.
Live in Fear of My Gender-Wrath!
Evilboy.
I have a gender-studies arch nemesis. We'll call her Sheila Greer - always talking about violence against women and other IAMWOMANHEARMEROAR atrocities. I'm not really into this business - I would much prefer to work away at an essay on True Blood, discuss why I want to bone Foucault's rotting corpse and name my first child after Judith Butler. Lets face it, drag makes for a better essay than patriarchy - so passe.
Anyway, Sheila Greer and I had a tutorial together last year and seemed fairly intent on arguing every point each other made. I seem to recall having a heated debate about niche porn and rape scenes. I have a penchent for rape-scenes - so visceral. They just seem to fall into an argument about horror films and post modernity. This is not to say I condone rape - obviously I do not, I just condone rape fantasies. I come across as less creepy that way.
Long story short we've made a pact to run our last gender studies tutorial as best as we can in order to silence our somewhat daft tutor who thinks that the term 'gender instability' has ambiguous political connotations (I know - what a cunt! How dare she have an opinion). So I figure I'm on my way to gangster-living because:
- I have organised a hostile take-over of someone else's domain.
- I have made a temporary peace agreement with my foe.
- It's all in the name of rendering someone incapable of work.
- There were witnesses. I have henchmen!
I'll leave you with this track. Whilst you listen to it, imagine me and Sheila Greer walking in slow motion towards the economics and commerce building of Melbourne uni with shot-guns in our pockets and stern faces. It all ends with an array of corpses in the G05 building near the water fountain at quarter past 5 next Wednesday afternoon.
Live in Fear of My Gender-Wrath!
Evilboy.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Infans
Ingredients:
Development Psychologist
Free Access to frequent MRIs (once a month or thereabouts)
One or more Parent(s)
One Teacher
One Psychoanalyst
Literature:
Lacan
Freud
A lot of Child Psychology
Some neuroscience
Theories of subjectivity pertaining to at least three different schools of thought.
Method:
To attempt to return to what Lacan calls the 'infans' stage - to a mode of being like a baby's in which I forego my subjectivity for a period of time and dissolve my self-hood in relation to Others - I would first need to engage in a relationship with my Parent(s) that excludes discourse. I could either:
1. Immediately cut myself off from the outside world and only interact with my Parent(s). No use of language would be permitted. My Parent(s) would have to engage on a pre-determined regiment of feeding, bathing, changing diapers etc. I would be confined to a house/room in which only myself and Parent(s).
2. Slowly eliminate aspects of my cognitive behaviour. For example disengage with greetings, followed by goodbyes followed by particular words, actions until I forget completely how to speak and act the way I and Others expect me to.
Both these scenarios would require a period of about three years in order to forget discourse altogether (or not at all depending on the experiment's success) and then a slow period of re-engaging myself with language and theoretically re-configuring my subjectivity.
Queries? Ideas?
Future-Evilboy Salutes You.
Development Psychologist
Free Access to frequent MRIs (once a month or thereabouts)
One or more Parent(s)
One Teacher
One Psychoanalyst
Literature:
Lacan
Freud
A lot of Child Psychology
Some neuroscience
Theories of subjectivity pertaining to at least three different schools of thought.
Method:
To attempt to return to what Lacan calls the 'infans' stage - to a mode of being like a baby's in which I forego my subjectivity for a period of time and dissolve my self-hood in relation to Others - I would first need to engage in a relationship with my Parent(s) that excludes discourse. I could either:
1. Immediately cut myself off from the outside world and only interact with my Parent(s). No use of language would be permitted. My Parent(s) would have to engage on a pre-determined regiment of feeding, bathing, changing diapers etc. I would be confined to a house/room in which only myself and Parent(s).
2. Slowly eliminate aspects of my cognitive behaviour. For example disengage with greetings, followed by goodbyes followed by particular words, actions until I forget completely how to speak and act the way I and Others expect me to.
Both these scenarios would require a period of about three years in order to forget discourse altogether (or not at all depending on the experiment's success) and then a slow period of re-engaging myself with language and theoretically re-configuring my subjectivity.
Queries? Ideas?
Future-Evilboy Salutes You.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)