Hey there, traveler!

LiveJournal is a great service, but it offers zip in the way of visitor-tracking. Therefore, I have a favor to ask of you: please leave me a comment letting me know who you are, and how you ended up here. No more detail than you're comfortable with, of course. Thanks much.

"I could tell by the way she dressed that she was totally shallow."

"You just think you're happy."

"People who are into that are sick, and should be punished."

"People who look like that are unhealthy, and should be punished."

( My sex life. Let me show you it (text only) )
Wow. Still kinda dazed

Yesterday, I got a comment on this old post about fat politics. In the post, I quote (to criticize) a comment I found on another journal: "Fat can be helped....
People can eat less, and exercise more and make themselves less fat.
If they choose not to... (and no I don't buy the thyroid and genetics excuses. If I saw your ass in the gym four days a week and you said that, I would buy it, but you don't so I wont.)" (first elipsis mine; second his.)

Yesterday's comment was the fourth I've gotten that cited the writer's health and exercise history in some detail, in responding to that quote. It's certainly a relevant and logical response, but something has been bugging me about that approach.

Yesterday, also, via Paul Krugman, I found my way to Herb Stein, who quotes Milan Kundera as follows:

If you meet a madman who says that he is a fish and that we are all fishes, do you take off your clothes to show him that you do not have fins?

In addition to being great general advice about coping with the range of opinions on the net, this striks me as particularly apropos to the discussion at hand.

Now, the analogy is not perfect. We live in a time and a place where the Lipo-ichthoanthropists are, if not completely in charge of the show, then at least firmly ensconced in the mainstream. Nonetheless, I feel like treating "You don't have a right to have the body you have; I'm mad at you for it" as a rational thing to say distorts the whole subsequent debate in the direction of fishman country.

UPDATE: Link at the beginning fixed. I think.

This morning I turned to the comics section of the Boston Globe, and found an advice column with what may be the most amazing example of sexual procrusteanism Evar.

Lets recap: Procrustes was an innkeeper with an unusual hobby. If his guests were too short for his bed, he'd stretch them to fit. If they were too tall, he'd trim a few inches off their tops or bottoms to ensure a better night's sleep. Theseus eventually terminated his activities with extreme prejudice, as they say.

The way I've been evoking his name in this journal is with respect to people who try to reconcile their politics and their sexuality, either by explaining that their sexual desires are correct and everyone else's are wrong, or by scolding themselves for having desires that fail to dovetail sufficiently with their politics.

Imma introduce another bit of personal jargon before I get to the quote in question here: the echo-chamber effect. Here was my first stab at describing it:

After some time reading their testimonials and forum, I realized that world-views like this are immensely self-reinforcing. Many of the messages begin with something like, "What a relief it is to see stories like mine." That has a flipside: in the climate they've established, it would take a very brave woman to say 'my libido is higher than my husband's.' It would take a very brave man to say 'my libido is lower than my wife's.' I'm sure Paul and Lori have heard hundreds of absolutely true stories confirming their prejudices by now.

It is very common both on and off the net for a prevailing opinion to appear even more dominant than it is, because those who hold the contrary are much less likely to chime in, and invite attacks and derision from that apparently unanimous throng.

What if someone speaks up anyway? What happens then?

Now we get to the column I read this morning. Dear Margo's querent of the day has a husband with a low libido. They don't have as much sex as she wants, and she is obviously conflicted about whether this is a legitimate subject for her to complain about. Margo does affirm that it is, but here's her second sentence: "And like many women, I’m sure it’s not just the sex that matters, but the closeness and affection it communicates."

A woman comes out and says "I want more sex," and the immediate response is "and by that, dear, I'm sure you mean snuggles."

Fuck you, Margo. Fuck you.

At Kramerbooks today, I thumbed through Do Androids Sleep with Electic Sheep?, a book about the intersection of SF and porn (and wasn't Re/Search publishing dissolved at one point, when the people doing it broke up? Anyone know the backstory there?). Looking through it, I immediately noticed the names Thomas Roche, Annalee Newitz, and Violet Blue. I was hooked and half-reeled-in.

Then I looked at the back cover copy: "Depictions of the future, irregardless of the form they take, always address the present as well." I put he book down and backed away slowly. I am not prepared to pay for writing by people who consider 'irregardless' a word.

(title stolen from Blaine in the bOINGbOING comments; link via a RL friend who probably doesn't want the mention)

I have in the back of my mind a list of topics that I should have written about by now but haven't. The absence can be because i'm not at all sure I have anything fresh or interesting to say, because I think the subject is over-discussed, because my own views are still gelling, or simply that I just haven't gotten around to it.

The subject of rape is one any feminist male top has to think about, and to approach humbly and carefully. I've never felt particularly well-qualified to pontificate on it, seeing my role here as (for once) more to listen than to speak.

Recent heated debate elesewhere on LJ, however, has driven home to me that the matter of rape is not as settled as I liked to think.

Now comes the hard part, at least for you, Dear Reader. The inspiration of this post is the essay Married Sex by economist and alleged real live grownup Robin Hanson. It is a bad essay: sloppily reasoned, vague, pedantic, and blisteringly misogynistic, in a la-la-la head-in-the-clouds sort of way. I can't recommend it. On the other hand, it is pretty short.

I'll summarize, but I can't pretend to be imartial. Hanson asserts, based on comically flimsy evidence,* that "[m]arriage is a deal men enter into part to get sex.... But due to complex female sexuality, the man is supposed to accept the sex part of the deal fluctuating from day to day and year to year for unknown and unexplained reasons."

I shall quote his conclusion in full, because it's short and astounding:

I see two general ways to avoid this time-inconsistency problem:

1. Obligatory Sex – more explicit norms about the frequency and nature of sex, norms wives are expected to meet even when less in the mood. Perhaps wives would have to do something unpleasant, like exercise lots, when there was no sex.
2. Nonobligatory Other – remove something wives want lots from the usual set of stable husband contributions, so husbands can threaten to withhold that without being a pariah. Perhaps the expectation that he sleep at home [added: or maybe a big budget he could spend on extras for him or her]?

So he has two proposals: one is to punish women for only having sex when they choose to, rather than when their husbands do. The other is to take aways their financial autonomy, presumably so they'd be dependent on their husbands to feed and clothe them.

Now, I confess that this whole line of reasoning feels rather alien to me. I would much rather jack off than have sex with someone who isn't interested. That's the aesthetic realm, though, and not the moral.

The question that has convulsed portions of my RL friends list is: is this an intriguing line of reasoning, or a marital-rape apologia?

Let's try a thought experiment. Let's replace the "lots of exercise" in Proposal 1 with a mild electric shock. Fundamentally the same thing, right? A little physical incentive to get wifey to do her duty.

Now, the threat of a sufficiently severe electric shock would be tantamount to rape, right? So now we've elegantly reduced the problem to a nice quantitative one. At what voltage does this go from an inoffensive bit of social engineering to an act of sexual violence?

Lets put this another way. Hanson is concerned that women have too much control over when and whether they have sex. That is the 'problem' to which he is looking for solutions. So there's my wake-up call. Saying "I think women should get to choose when and whether to have sex" doesn't go without saying after all.

I think women--and everyone else as well--have a right to choose when and whether to have sex. I will labor to support and defend that right. I do not consider attacks on that right to be "thought-provoking," abstract, or trivial.

* Wouldn't you know that it had to involve the New York Times Magazine?

1)Your right to your desires is absolute and inalienable.

2)No one else has any obligation to fulfill those desires.

A friend who's a more prolific and professional writer than I IM'ed me:

Someone sent this to me as a story idea. I think it's more up your alley: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/10/femimint-hygiene-mints

Presumably, she thought of me as someone who reliably gets steam shooting out his ears at mass media based on the presumption that women's bodies are filthy, disgusting things unless they have been tanned, toned, waxed, folded, spindled, pasteurized, homogenized, thinly sliced, and individually wrapped in cellophane.

I think I only have one observation in this case, though. Sometimes life imitates art; other times life just imitates bad old jokes.

Have I mentioned recently that urbpan is made of awesome? Yesterday he posted his Top 5 Synonyms for "Cloaca."

I enjoyed this picture a whole lot. Found via Bacchus of ErosBlog, who asserts that it's an actual old European Perrier ad.

Part 4--over half an hour of over-the-top steampunk siphon clam action for 99¢!

I realize my objectivity is questionable, but to my mind, this is the payload--the scene for which the rest of the story was essentially just set-up. I think it's a funny, hot, surprising scene. I hope you will too.

A few days late and...still a dollar, here it is:


22-minute MP3 for 99¢

This episode introduces Eleanor Pertwee, a clergyman's daughter with an extraordinary talent.

I crave feedback, so listen and let me know what you thought.

I got me one o' them newfangled Facebook Page things, after a period of confusion about pages and groups and accounts. You "friend" an account, you see, but you "fan" a page. Or a flame. Or, if the whole thing has you a little overexcited, yourself. (You "join" a group, which makes up in clarity for what it lacks in neologism.)

At any rate, there 'tis, and it will give me the warm fuzzies if you "fan" it. More experienced FB hands are urged to recommend cool & exciting things I should do with the page, especially since Facebook's Support pages seem to be remarkably full of instructions that simply don't work.

Vinnie Tesla

Promote Your Page Too

So, yeah. Circlet's having technical difficulties. I'll post a link when Part 3 goes up.

Comparisons to previous works is a little tricky here. I like Lisabet Sarai's Thorne Smith comparison, except that I hadn't actually heard of Thorne Smith before (he wrote humorous Jazz Age contemporary fantasy novels). "An S&M Gilbert & Sullivan" is probably ill advised. "P. G. Wodehouse, with more bestiality" is also probably not the tack we want to take. "If you combined the mad science of Girl Genius with the playful eroticism of Xxxenophile" might be more on target.

That Audiobook Thing

So what's going on with Ontological Engine is this: Circlet is posting new chapters every Wednesday. Chapter 3 goes up day after tomorrow; the exceptionally perverse (if I do say so myself) fourth and final chapter goes up on the eleventh. Chapter 1 is free for nothing; the others are a buck each.

Ota Discovers Fire

I got word today that Circlet has accepted my sorta-werewolf slangy high fantasy story for their e-book anthology The Long Journey Home.

Tales of Tesla Hall

I also got a very warm rejection note for Miss Pierce's New Position, praising the story, but calling it a mismatch for the antho I submitted it for. This means that now it's time to turn my hand to a Daedalus & co. book proposal.

Ruthie's Club

Turns out Ruthie's quietly disappeared a few months ago. Apparently, Ivan has been having some scary health problems, incompatable with running a weekly web magazine. Please keep him in your thoughts.

22 minute MP3 for 99¢.

12-minute MP3 file

Please be nice to Circlet's server and download rather than streaming.

ETA: Link is currently b0rked. I'll update this entry again when it's back up.

The link should be working again. Let me know if you have any problems.