Tag Archives: making love

Why Our Assumptions About Male And Female Promiscuity May Be (Very) Wrong


When it comes to assumption, we tend not to question them, by default. That’s why they’re assumptions. It’s literally in the definition. It’s entirely natural to make assumptions, especially when they have some sort of inherent logic to them. It’s just how we, as a species, make sense of a chaotic world that we’re trying to survive.

The problem is, as I’ve pointed out many times before, our caveman brains aren’t wired logic. They’re wired primarily to help us survive and reproduce. That’s why our brains are so prone to all sorts of logical fallacies. That’s also why it’s hard to let go of assumptions, even when empirical data a very different story.

This brings me to our assumptions about sexual promiscuity. I’m hope I have your attention now because I knew a bland article about logical fallacies, caveman logic, and false assumption wasn’t going to get anyone excited. Put it in a context that’s both sexy and relevant, especially to an aspiring erotica/romance writer, and there’s much more appeal.

Sexy or not, the issue of assumptions in our sex lives are a lot more relevant in the era of “fake news” and “alternative facts.” These days, people are more likely to cling to their assumptions than ever before, even in the face of obvious evidence to the contrary. Hell, “South Park” even did an entire episode about this concept.

There are all sorts of complex psychological and social reasons for this, some of which I’ve covered before in other less sexy discussions. However, I’m not going to belabor those concepts. Most people know that humans can be exceedingly stubborn, even when faced with undeniable data that counters their assumptions.

That becomes a bigger problem, though, when you’re actually trying to make sense of something on an academic level. Our collective sexuality is one of those things that we try to study and understand, even if our efforts turn out to be disturbingly wrong. I like to think we’ve gotten better at it in the modern era, but sometimes fresh data reveals there’s still room for improvement.

This leads me to one of the most common assumptions about sexuality and the particulars of sexual promiscuity. You’ve probably heard it articulated at some point. It’s the basic structure surrounding male promiscuity versus female promiscuity. It goes like this:

  • Men are promiscuous because sperm production is cheap and there’s an biological incentive to have sex with multiple females in order to sire multiple offspring
  • Women are more selective about their sex partners because bearing children is risky and requires resources, which incentivizes securing men who will stick around to care for those children

There are all sorts of jokes and colloquialisms about this, men being dogs and women being angels. It’s also reflective of the most obvious double standards surrounding male and female sexuality and for most people, it makes sense.

A man can have sex with a thousand woman and, in theory, sire a thousand children. Ignoring the egregious child support payments this man would have to pay, it is consistent with the biological imperative to survive and reproduce.

Conversely, it makes just as much sense for a woman to secure a male partner who won’t just have children with her, but stay with her and invest in raising those children with her. This bears out in the many benefits ascribed to two-parent households.

However, if these assumptions were so logical and so biologically sound, then that would be reflected in the data we gather about our sexuality. Logic should be consistent with data, right? That’s the entire foundation of the scientific method, after all.

This is where the details get sketchy, but in a sexy sort of way. In an article from The Conversation, much of the biological data behind these assumptions about sexual promiscuity among men and women gets an added bit of scrutiny. In doing so, some revealing details emerge. Here is a brief excerpt that should raise a few eyebrows, among other body parts.

The common belief was that males and females were radically different. Moreover, attitudes about Victorian women influenced beliefs about nonhuman females. Males were considered to be active, combative, more variable, and more evolved and complex. Females were deemed to be passive, nurturing; less variable, with arrested development equivalent to that of a child. “True women” were expected to be pure, submissive to men, sexually restrained and uninterested in sex – and this representation was also seamlessly applied to female animals.

Although these ideas may now seem quaint, most scholars of the time embraced them as scientific truths. These stereotypes of men and women survived through the 20th century and influenced research on male-female sexual differences in animal behavior.

Unconscious biases and expectations can influence the questions scientists ask and also their interpretations of data. Behavioral biologist Marcy Lawton and colleagues describe a fascinating example. In 1992, eminent male scientists studying a species of bird wrote an excellent book on the species – but were mystified by the lack of aggression in males. They did report violent and frequent clashes among females, but dismissed their importance. These scientists expected males to be combative and females to be passive – when observations failed to meet their expectations, they were unable to envision alternative possibilities, or realize the potential significance of what they were seeing.

The same likely happened with regard to sexual behavior: Many scientists saw promiscuity in males and coyness in females because that is what they expected to see and what theory – and societal attitudes – told them they should see.

There’s much more to the article and I strongly recommend everyone take the time to read it, in full. It’s somewhat long because it references a lot of old research on animal behavior, as well as cultural attitudes towards sex and gender. However, the underlying theme is fairly clear.

The assumptions about coy, reserved females and aggressive, promiscuous males aren’t clearly reflected in the observed data. In fact, cultural attitudes going all the way back to the Victorian Era may have influenced our interpretation of the data, leading us to negate anything that countered those assumptions. That’s confirmation bias at its most basic.

This is similar to the message in the book, “Sex At Dawn,” which basically argues that our caveman ancestors had much better sex lives than we did. In that context, male and female promiscuity plays out in a very different way that also clashes with many of our assumptions.

In both “Sex At Dawn” and the article, the data seems to suggest that promiscuous females have higher rates of reproductive success. Biologically speaking, this makes sense because she’s getting a diverse sample of sperm and the higher quality material eventually finds a way to win out.

I’ll resist the urge to paint too crude a picture, although I will say that women pursuing a variety of men and attempting to weed out the best among them should not be too shocking. When you’re looking to find love and/or a baby daddy, you want quality and you can’t really be sure of that quality unless you find ways to test it. That’s not quite as dirty as it sounds, but it’s close.

With men, the data also clashes with the assumptions that men need only hump as many things with a pulse as possible. The article questions the idea that sperm is cheap and men’s contributions are purely resource-driven. The data actually suggests that men exercise a considerable degree of selection in choosing their partners. Just having a pulse and a vagina is not the only criteria.

As is now also well-documented, sperm production is limited and males can run out of sperm – what researchers term “sperm depletion.”

Consequently, we now know males may allocate more or less sperm to any given female, depending on her age, health or previous mated status. Such differential treatment among preferred and nonpreferred females is a form of male mate choice. In some species, males may even refuse to copulate with certain females. Indeed, male mate choice is now a particularly active field of study.

In essence, men are capable of being selective and downright loyal to their partners. Women are also just as capable of being sexually open, seeking out a variety of lovers in search of quality partners, both for social and reproductive success. In that sense, the promiscuous tendencies of both genders are a lot more level than any Victorian Era assumption would have us believe.

Add on top of this the documented health benefits of sexual promiscuity, as well as the sexual mores of our hunter/gatherer ancestors, and it’s increasingly clear that our assumptions about the sexual promiscuity are not consistent with biology, logic, or reality in general.

In a sense, our society already reflects this. The growing prevalence of blended families shows that the Victorian ideals that later played out in 1950s sitcoms aren’t accurate reflections of human nature. I doubt that this data will shatter the various assumptions that many still have on sexual promiscuity, but as with most excuses, they can only clash with reality so much.

Leave a comment

Filed under gender issues, polyamory, sex in society, sexuality

My Ideal Romance Movie (And Why It Will Never Get Made)

When it comes to things men avoid with their lovers, going to a cheesy romance movie ranks right up there with cleaning a clogged toilet. Going with your girlfriend to see a generic love movie is almost a rite of passage for a couple, acting as proof that you’re willing to inconvenience yourself just that much in order to see her naked.

Some men actually do like romance movies, but most won’t ever admit it. I did recently when I highlighted my favorite romance movie of all time, “Crazy/Beautiful.” I might be undermining the status of my man card, but I could care less. I get enough weird looks from other men when I say I find Hugh Jackman sexy. If they think less of me because of that, then that’s their problem.

In talking about my favorite romance movie, though, it occurred to me that there haven’t been a lot of quality romance movies lately. I’m not saying every one of them have been garbage, but I can’t recall too many that really stood out or weren’t the sub-plot of a superhero movie.

At the moment, romance movies are almost like westerns in that they’re out of style. Unlike westerns, though, some romance-heavy movies are making an impact, namely the “50 Shades of Grey” franchise. Say what you will about those movies, and many have, but it did make money. That’s the only excuse Hollywood needs.

There will always be a market for romance, to some extent, because we’re a romantic species. We all seek love in our lives. Romance, despite what the bitter dispassionate cynics may say, resonates with all of us and it should. That’s part of why I write romantic sexy novels.

So rather than spend too much time trying to find another romance movie that appeals to me like “Crazy/Beautiful,” I’m going to try something else. I’m going to create a list, of sorts, to describe my ideal romance movie. Like I’ve done with other movies, I’m going to keep it simple and concise.

I’m not smart or successful enough to write an entire script for the perfect romance movie. I can only offer tips, concepts, and a general framework for such a movie. For the sake of shameless branding, I’m going to call them my “Passion Rules.” Since I emphasize passion so much in my novels, I might as well embrace that brand.

With that in mind, here are Jack Fisher’s unofficial rules for making the perfect romance movie. If any Hollywood producer wants to strike the right chords and soak the maximum amount of panties, then these simple passion rules will help in that effort.

Passion Rule #1: The Romance Must Be (Unapologetically) Sex-Positive

This is the most important element of any powerful romance movie. That’s not to say that it has to rely entirely on sex, sexy scenes, or sex-centered plots. That’s what porn is for. By sex-positive, I mean that in the tradition of superheroes like Deadpool and Starfire.

Sex and physical intimacy can’t be the center of the relationship, but it can’t be an afterthought either. In the real world, people express their love through sex. Priests, mullahs, rabbis, and monks may hate that, but that’s what’ people do. It’s fun, intimate, and enjoyable on so many levels. A good romance movie should not shy away from that.

The romance doesn’t have to exist because of great sex. The great sex needs to exist because of the romance. It shouldn’t be a complication, an issue, or an obstacle. There are enough nerdy coming-of-age stories about horny teenagers trying to get laid. In a sex-positive romance, the sexy parts complement the passion.

That also means those parts aren’t pornographic, but they aren’t heavily censored like a 50s sitcom either. They should be willing to show breasts, butts, and genitals in all their glory. If you want sexy, romantic love, you can’t and shouldn’t censor it. Granted, that may earn this movie an R-rating, but given the box office returns of the “Deadpool” movie, that doesn’t have to be a deal-breaker.

Passion Rule #2: The Romance Must NOT Rely Or Depend On A Love Triangle

This is only a rule because love triangles are so inherently toxic that they might as well be the romantic equivalent of a spastic colon. I’ve gone on record as saying that love triangles are an affront to romance in both the real world, the fictional world, and any other kind of world. As such, they have no place in an ideal romance movie.

It’s not just because love triangles require that one character get screwed while the other two come off as assholes. The very concept devalues the romance itself, creating the impression that these two characters have to be together just because another romance didn’t work.

That’s part of why I deemed the Cyclops/Jean Grey/Wolverine love triangle in X-men the worst love triangle of all time. It makes every character involved look bad. It also creates the impression that these characters have to be in love, rather than actually wanting to. Short of dead animals and poop jokes, I can’t think of anything less romantic.

For any great romance movie to work, it cannot be the product or catalyst for a love triangle. There can be ex-lovers involved. There can even be a few broken hearts along the way. However, the story cannot revolve around two people loving each other despite or because of other romantic entanglements. It’s both counterproductive and frustrating to everyone involved.

Passion Rule #3: There Must Be Time, Energy, And Depth To The Romance

In many other movie genres, from over-the-top action movies to psychological thrillers, there’s usually some sort of romantic sub-plot. From the “Transformers” franchise to “Erin Brockovich,” there’s usually an effort to squeeze a little romance into a larger plot.

There’s nothing wrong with this and I totally support it. However, if you’re trying to make a real romance movie, you can’t use the same approach that Michael Bay uses in movies with giant robots. In those movies, the romance has to be wedged in between the scene where cities are blowing up and aliens are invading in order to keep the plot concise within a two-hour movie.

If the goal of the movie is to craft a compelling romance, it has to replace those invading aliens with the kind of time, energy, and depth that goes into making a romance work. It can’t always work like “Titanic” and unfold in the course of a few days. There has to be a sense of progression and effort for both characters.

It’s not enough to just meet in a bar and find each other attractive. Each character has to have a particular motivation that fully complements the other. That’s how strong romances form in real life. In a movie, those same elements can be pushed even farther by Hollywood magic. If you don’t think that has any appeal, then you haven’t seen “Magic Mike.”

Passion Rule #4: The Obstacles The Romance Faces Must Not Be Forced Or Contrived

This rule is related to the previous one in that it it’s a natural byproduct of romance being wedged in between alien invasions. Again, I’ll reference the “Transformers” movie because they do everything right and wrong with respect to these tropes.

The primary romance in the first two movies, Sam Witwicky and Mikaela Banes, is entirely built on a foundation of running from killer robots. That’s how they come together. That’s how their relationship progresses. That’s really the only obstacle we ever see them facing together.

In a sense, their romance is forced by circumstance, namely an invasion of killer transforming robots. That’s not exactly a catalyst for meaningful romance. A romance built around the adrenaline rush that comes with fleeing from killer robots is not a romance that’s built to last.

Every romance faces obstacles. Not all of those obstacles have to involve running from killer robots. They have to be stressful, meaningful, and even a little dangerous. More than anything else, though, they have to be something that both characters seek out together. By making it a shared journey, the romance becomes that much more epic.

Passion Rule #5: The Lovers Must Not Be (Entirely) Dependent On Each Other

This is one of those subtle rules that you don’t really notice until you scrutinize a romance. In some respects, it’s Disney’s fault for making the concept of the fairy tale romances so damn popular. As a result, we don’t always realize when a romance is less a romance than it is a dependence.

It’s something that plays out in cheesy love songs as well, the idea that someone loves another person so much that they need them. It’s not just that they want to be with them. They need to be with them or they’ll die. That may make for a good song by a generic boy band, but in terms of meaningful romance, it’s downright unhealthy.

I’ve talked about the thin line between love and obsession. Some movies do lousy job of walking that line, creating relationships where the characters can’t stand on their own two feet. It’s even more apparent in shows like “The Big Bang Theory” and “True Blood.”

Too many characters depend on others to be interesting. It makes the romance feel less genuine and the characters more bland. For any romance movie that looks to check the right boxes, it has to establish that this is not that kind of relationship. The characters should be individuals seeking to make each other better and sexier. That’s the core value of any great romance.

Passion Rule #6: The Little Things In The Romance Have To Matter

Related image

The most epic romances in movies, TV, and sexy novels like the ones I write all involve some sort of epic journey where two people come together in a powerful, meaningful, and hopefully sexy sort of way. That’s a big part of what makes romances like Romeo and Juliet, Jack and Rose, or Superman and Lois Lane so iconic.

However, that epic journey is just one side of the coin. The other, which many movies ignore, are the little things that make a romance great. Those are the same little things that help some couples stay together for decades. It’s those subtleties between the characters that make their romantic journey feel meaningful.

Now, I’m not saying my ideal romance movie has to dedicate a full half-hour to two characters listing all the quirks they love about each other. Those quirks should reveal themselves throughout the journey that the story takes them on. They can’t just love each other when they’re at their most passionate. They also have to share that love when they’re at their most dispassionate, as well.

This might be the hardest element to incorporate into a movie. Then again, we have movies about stoners losing their car and snakes on a plane. If Hollywood can make movies about that crap, then they have no excuses when it comes to romance.

I hope that got hearts racing and panties moistening to all those who read it. Even for those who claim to not care for romance movies, I hope this offers some intrigue. We all need love in our lives. A good romance movie is like a free piece of cake. It inherently makes our day better.

Now, here’s why a movie like this will never happen. First and foremost, it has never been cool or manly for men to like romance movies. I’m sincerely trying to change that with my novels, but it probably won’t change much within my lifetime. Since the 18 to 35-year-old male demographic is one the most sought-after demographics in the economy, we can’t expect Hollywood to ignore them.

A romance movie like this, which actually emphasizes romance, would have limited appeal, if only because it wouldn’t translate as well to international markets as giant robots. It also couldn’t be watered down to a PG-13 rating, which every movie seeks these days to appeal to the most people possible.

A movie like this would also struggle to find the necessary actors and actresses. As I’ve pointed out before with the flaws in creating quality erotica/romance, most of the Hollywood elites are reluctant to take their clothes off and get too sexy. There’s still a stigma against getting too sexy, even if movies like “Deadpool” and “50 Shades of Grey” are changing that.

At the moment, there are too many forces working against a movie like this. A lot would have to change, both in terms of the movie industry and the attitudes of movie-goers, for something like this to ever happen. Then again, if a movie like “Crazy/Beautiful” can still work, then maybe I’ll live to see the day when a movie this romantic and sexy happens. I may not be able to inspire it with my novels, but I’m sure as hell going to try.

Leave a comment

Filed under Celebrities and Celebrity Culture, Jack Fisher's Insights, Marriage and Relationships

A Piece Of Furniture (Specifically) Designed For Sex?

Every so often, in between writing sexy novels and sharing sexy thoughts, I come up with ideas that I’m not sure what to do with. I don’t know whether or not I can turn them into novels. I can’t really relate them to more serious issues, like religious extremism or sex robots. However, they’re ideas I just can’t seem to forget or throw away.

This is is one of those ideas that just kind of came to me when I was taking a shower. Now, I don’t deny that a lot of great ideas come to me in the shower. I’m naked, dripping wet, and feeling sexy as hell. That usually does wonders for my mind. This, however, kind of came from nowhere and it’s best summed up in one question.

Is there a piece of furniture specifically designed for sex and if so, what would it look like?

This isn’t an exercise in caveman logic or some kinky thought experiment. This is an honest question about the fundamentals of sex. When it comes to kinky ideas, be it sexy role playing or sexy Halloween costumes, we humans can be astonishingly creative. Just look up something called “Furries” and be prepared to clear your browser history.

When it comes to simple pragmatics, though, we kind of have a blind spot. We tend to give so much thought to the kink that we overlook the basics. Now, I’m not saying that’s wrong or misguided in any way. It’s because people give so much thought to kinky stuff that I have a potential audience for my novels. In this case, though, I think we can stand to be a little practical.

When most people think about the furniture people have sex on, they usually think of a bed. That’s the most basic and common site for sexy time, be it romance or a one-night stand. It more than does the job, but let’s not miss the trees from the forest here. A bed, as a piece of furniture, wasn’t designed specifically for sex. It was designed for sleeping. I’ll give everyone a moment to stop rolling their eyes.

Think about the rest of the common furniture we use. From recliners to coffee tables, they’re all designed with a specific purpose in mind. Granted, that doesn’t stop people from having sex on them. The basic rule of thumb is that if it’s physically possible for two people to have sex on a piece of furniture, they have or they will at some point. That’s just the power and breadth of human ingenuity/horniness.

That leads me to wonder, though. Has a piece of furniture ever been designed specifically for the purpose of sex? If not, what sort of features would that piece of furniture have? It’s one of those overly-obvious ideas that has exceedingly sexy implications.

Now, I get that there are some kinds of furniture with distinctly sexy twists. I also get there are some beds that accommodate sex more than others. However, for this kind of furniture, I’m talking about something that is designed specifically to maximize sex.

Since I’m not an artist or an engineer, I can’t provide detailed schematics. If I could, then I’d have patented this sexy idea long ago and sold it on “Shark Tank.” I’m not saying the idea would’ve made me a millionaire. I’m just saying it would’ve raised a few eyebrows for all the right reasons.

That said, I can imagine a few important features for a piece of furniture like that. It’s one instance where being an erotica/romance writer gives me an edge, of sorts. My novels are filled with situations about people finding creative ways to have sexy, make love, and everything in between. I’ve already thought this partially through without knowing it.

With that in mind, here are few of the key features of this sexy piece of furniture that I think should be included. I admit the need for such features varies between couples. Everyone makes love in their own unique way. Ideally, this piece of furniture will help maximize every one of those ways so here we go.

  • It is about the size of a small sofa with dimensions specifically designed to accommodate and support two people

  • It has a slight incline, which ensures maximum leverage and visibility between partners

  • It doesn’t have a handrail or anything on the sides, but there are strategically-located gripping areas so that partners can maintain a certain level of balance during sex

  • The surface must be smooth and soft, ensuring that naked or partially-clothed bodies can move effortlessly along its surface without uncomfortable chafing

  • The base must be wide and sturdy in order to accommodate high amounts of physical exertion

  • The surface must be easy to clean and/or replace in order to minimize the stains caused by various sexual fluids

  • The entire unit must be light and easy to move from room to room

  • The unit must also be customizable for people of different body shapes, preferences, and physical capabilities

I know some of these details are either common sense or overly general. That’s the point, though. The furniture I’m describing here is all about pragmatics. It’s designed specifically for sex, lovemaking, and everything in between. It’s meant to accommodate one-night stands, quickies, and intimate lovemaking that goes on for hours. It’s not something you fall asleep on. It’s something you have sex on.

I imagine this description conjures all sorts of different images in peoples’ minds. I don’t claim that my ideas of sexy furniture are the same as anyone else’s. I also don’t claim that I would use this piece of furniture the same way as someone else. The key here is both pragmatics and flexibility. Put them together and you’ve got something that makes a great thing even better.

Image result for sexy look gif

Again, this is just my overly-kinky idea. I’m sure plenty of other people who are much smarter and more capable than I am have other concepts for sexy furniture. If so, please share those ideas with me. I’d love to turn this into a sexy debate, of sorts. What exactly would the perfect piece of sex-enhancing furniture look like? It’s hard to say, but it’s fun to think about.

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

The Orgasm Gap: Biological Or Psychological?

When it comes to talking about an issue, I generally avoid the kind of crisis fear-mongering you’d see on a CNN special report, a Fox News segment, or an Alex Jones podcast. More often than not, those who resort to fear-mongering are a few steps too close to fitting their heads for tin-foil hats.

However, I’m about to bring up an issue that I believe really is a crisis. It does warrant a little fear-mongering, if only because it directly affects the erotica/romance industry, of which I’m trying to be part of. That’s because it involves orgasms.

Usually, my posts about orgasms are of the fun, positive, sexy variety. That’s to be expected. It’s not hard to make a discussion about orgasms fun. Unfortunately, it’s also not hard to make that discussion dire because when a significant portion of the population isn’t having them, then I consider that to be a big problem.

This isn’t just the sexy musings of an aspiring erotica/romance writer. This is a real issue. There really is an orgasm gap, so to speak. Men, not surprisingly, don’t have a hard time achieving orgasm. Thanks to an unfiltered imagination and internet porn, an orgasm for a man is as routine as a morning cup of coffee.

For women, however, it’s a very different story, one I wish were relegated to the kinds of sexy novels I write. The data doesn’t lie. Women are having a harder time taking a trip to O-town during intimate moments with their male lovers. Regardless of whether you’re a radical feminist or a douche-bag frat boy from an 80s teen movie, we know that’s not fair. Given the universal joys of orgasm, that kind of disparity just isn’t tenable.

Why is this an issue though? Why does this orgasm gap even exist in the first place? Evolution has given both genders a wonderful incentive to have sex, make love, and everything in between. What’s keeping us from enjoying it?

By and large, there are two major theories to explain this injustice. One theory says this gap is primarily due to biology, which is bad news for women because it means the gap is impossible to close. The other says the cause is psychological, which is somewhat less dire because it means the gap can be addressed, albeit with expensive therapy.

Most of the time, when there are two competing theories about why something exists, the truth often lies somewhere in between. In some instances, though, such as the case of creationism and evolution wherein one is definitively right and the other is a religiously-motivated fever dream, the truth is not so balanced.

So with respect to the orgasm gap, which theory is correct? I’m not a scientist and am woefully unqualified to be one. Thankfully, there are some scientists out there who value equal access to orgasms as much as I do and they have done research on this. These people are the true heroes of the erotica/romance world. So what did their research find?

Well, a recent TED talk by Peggy Orenstein does a nice job of summing up these results. I’m not saying her talk is definitive. These TED talks never are. However, her conclusions have some pretty powerful implications and not just for our collective sex lives.

There’s a lot to unpack here. As an aspiring erotica/romance writer, it reveals some major flaws in the proverbial narrative that is our intimate lives.

Parts of her talk definitely resonated with my own personal experience. I remember sex ed when I was in high school. Since my community wasn’t run by uptight religious zealots, I had the good fortune of receiving a fairly comprehensive education about sex, especially compared to Texas standards.

They were pretty thorough, talking about everything from contraception to childbirth. When it came to certain body parts, though, I do recall a distinct difference. Descriptions about male anatomy and how a penis works was fairly concise. Most of my male classmates didn’t learn anything they hadn’t already found out and were fairly assured that their manly bits were operating fine.

When the time came to discuss female anatomy, however, I sensed a distinct shift in mood. Everybody, girls and boys alike, shifted like they were trying to hide a nasty fart. The intricacies of female genitalia wasn’t so much about their beauty or aesthetics. It mostly boiled down to the idea that blood and babies come out of it. That’s about it.

On a personal note, I’ll just say I learned about the existence of the clitoris from “South Park.” What’s that say when a comprehensive sex education program from a major school overlooks something that can be gleaned from watching “South Park?” I’ll give everyone a minute to stop banging their heads against their desk.

Then again, self-image is something every teenager struggles with. I certainly did, but I had a damn good excuse because of my horrible acne problem. It’s one of those things that improves with maturity. Sure, some people mature faster than others, but most of the time, it’s women who do the maturing so how does that orgasm gap not disappear?

This is where the psychology, it would seem, overpowers the biology. Make no mistake. Our thoughts and attitudes can influence our bodies. Anyone who has tried to sleep the night before midterms knows this all too well. Then, there’s the attitudes that we, as a society, collectively impose on each other.

In this case, it’s an attitude we impose on women. Whether by the spirits of angry Puritans or the agendas of old men who vomit uncontrollably at the thought of their daughters having sex, we tell women that they’re not supposed to enjoy sex that much. They’re told the orgasm disparity is normal.

There’s supposed to be this orgasm disparity between men and women. Somehow, this disparity is supposed to keep society intact so that people don’t waste too much time enjoying orgasm. This is where Orenstein gets really personal when she recounts the woman who says:

“I guess we girls are just socialized to be these docile creatures who don’t express our wants or needs.”

The girl who said that claimed to be this fiery, assertive woman. That should reveal just how powerful these attitudes can be.

It’s not just one type of attitude either. Orenstein points out how girls see their vaginas with shame while boys let their dicks hang with pride. Being proud of a body part tends to affect it. I used to play baseball. This works with arms. It works just as well with genitals, if not more so.

However, I think Orenstein overstates genital attitudes in some areas, ignoring the fact that men will shave their balls and undergo circumcision to avoid being aesthetically unpleasing. That’s something that affects both genders more than she lets on.

That said, I agree with her wholly when she brings up one of the most telling details about the orgasm disparity. When same-sex partners are involved, that gap disappears quicker than a cold beer at a Red Sox game in July. This is where the biology theory starts to fall apart.

Now it may seem obvious on some levels, the idea that same-sex lovers can climax at the same rate. It makes intuitive sense. They’re two people working with the same equipment, so to speak. Naturally, they would know how to make that equipment perform.

I don’t doubt that’s part of it. I also think there’s more to it and Orenstein seems to agree.

“Girls’ investment in their partner’s pleasure remains regardless of the gender of the partner. So in same-sex encounters, the orgasm gap disappears. And young women climax at the same rate as men. Lesbian and bisexual girls would tell me that they felt liberated to get off the script — free to create an encounter that worked for them.”

How telling is that? Put women in a situation where certain attitudes about sex and female pleasure don’t apply and they can enjoy a trip to O-Town as much as any man. As an erotica/romance writer, it brings tears of joy to my eyes.

So the orgasm gap disappears with same-sex partners. That’s all well and good, but what about the women out there who can’t get too horny around other women? What about the women who actually want to share the joy of orgasm with men? Well, Orenstein gives hope to those women too when she cites surveys done in cultures that aren’t haunted by the spirits of angry Puritains.

Consider a survey of 300 randomly chosen girls from a Dutch and an American university, two similar universities, talking about their early experience of sex. The Dutch girls embodied everything we say we want from our girls. They had fewer negative consequences, like disease, pregnancy, regret — more positive outcomes like being able to communicate with their partner, who they said they knew very well; preparing for the experience responsibly; enjoying themselves. What was their secret? The Dutch girls said that their doctors, teachers and parents talked to them candidly, from an early age, about sex, pleasure and the importance of mutual trust. What’s more, while American parents weren’t necessarily less comfortable talking about sex, we tend to frame those conversations entirely in terms or risk and danger, whereas Dutch parents talk about balancing responsibility and joy.

Let’s all take a moment to thank the Dutch. Let’s also take a moment to understand what this reveals.

Again, no theory is truly definitive, but Orenstein lays out fairly concisely how the orgasm gap is largely a psychological issue. Men define satisfying sex by their orgasm. Women define it by the ability to please their partner, which sets the bar low and ensures an unequal outcome.

That means we, as a society, should set new standards and I can say with a fair amount of certainty that men are all for that. How do I know this? Well, let me let all the women out there on a little secret about us men that really shouldn’t be a secret.

We WANT you to have orgasms when you have sex with us.

It’s true. Men really do want the women they have sex with to orgasm. Most of the time, they don’t want women to just lie there and act like a glorified barbie doll with a pulse. They actually want their partners to feel pleasure.

It shouldn’t require a real stretch in logic. Men understand that if women feel a lot of pleasure during sex, then they’ll want to do it more often with them. More sex makes us happy. We have a powerful incentive to make sure you women share in the joys of orgasms. The problem, albeit a sexy problem, is that it requires a mutual effort.

I believe we can close that orgasm gap for coming generations. I can only do so much as an erotica/romance writer, but we collectively can do so much more. When the day comes where men and women can expect to have an equal potential for orgasms during sex, then we will have achieved true equality. I look forward to that day.


Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Skills In Love: A Personal Conflict

There are a lot things I wish I learned in school. In talking about various conflicts between love versus sex, perception versus reality, and violence versus the horror of seeing exposed nipples on a TV screen, I’m reminded of just how badly school prepared me for the world. Granted, I was miserable at school, but at least learning something would’ve softened the blow.

As much as I loathed school, there is one skill I wish they had taught. That skill involves finding love, forging relationships, and actually connecting with someone romantically. This feels like one of those incredibly important skills that we should all learn at a young age. Most kids figure out how to maximize the benefits of orgasms. Far fewer learn how to enjoy the benefits of loving relationships.

My family, as much as I love them, has been giving me the same advice since the Clinton Administration. They say, “It’ll happen when it happens.” They could say the same thing about me playing the lottery, which is not very discouraging. I’m over 30 now and being single at this age is starting to really concern me for reasons that may affect my ability to describe my personal life with a straight face.

I get it. Romance is one of those things you can’t predict. Nobody can really control how they fall in love or who they fall in love with. That’s a big part of what makes it so exciting and mysterious. It’s why romance/erotica writers like me have an audience.

However, finding romance is not like playing the lottery. It’s not one of those things that is complete and random chance. Our ability to find love is, unfortunately, one of those skills that varies from person to person. Some are just better-equipped than others.

I’m not just talking about women who have big tits and good social skills. I’m not just talking about men who have six-pack abs and a fat bank account either. Those aren’t skills. Those are a product of a genetic lottery and/or an ability to afford a good plastic surgeon. We can’t really control those factors. However, there are some we can control.

In finding love, there are a few skills that are more vital than most. We need to know how to communicate. We need to know how to empathize, read body language, and present ourselves in a compelling, affectionate way.

Some say these skills are innate. They’re part of being human. I say eating is part of being human as well, but some are far better at doing it than others. We can’t put the eating skills of a chef at a five-star restaurant on the same level as someone whose diet consists primarily of Doritos and Ramen noodles. For a skill like finding love, we need to know more than the ingredients.

This is where the issue becomes personal for me. Growing up, and all throughout my schooling, I did not develop good social skills. I wasn’t a total pariah, but I was often defined by my social awkwardness. I would avoid crowds. I avoided talking to others in class. I made few friends. Naturally, I was miserable. Being a self-centered little shit, I didn’t realize my misery was mostly my fault until I became an adult.

I’ve done my best to catch up in recent years. Going to college, getting a job, and becoming closer to my family has helped me gain some of the skills I failed to learn in school. I think I’m a better communicator now than I was in my early 20s. I can carry on a conversation and not sound like a regular on “The Big Bang Theory.”

That said, if one of my old teachers were to grade my skills, I’d be lucky to get a C at best. I am still, despite my best efforts, very socially awkward. I struggle to start conversations. I struggle to approach people. I really struggle to seek out the opposite sex and express a romantic interest.

This has already hindered my personal life in many ways. I mentioned in an earlier blog post that I went on a date earlier this year. I met a girl through a friend and we went to see the X-men movie together. I thought it went well at the time. Now that I look back on it, I think I my social awkwardness sent the wrong message. There were other mitigating circumstances, but I don’t think I did my part to show my interest.

Would learning more skills in high school have helped? Would I have gone on another date with that girl if I had been a bit more skilled in the art of romance? I don’t know. I can’t know for sure. However, I do know that this is a skill I need to work on in my personal life, if only to help me relate to the romance/erotica I write.

I will say this though. As much as I struggle to converse with someone in the physical world, I do believe my skills in the digital world are above-average. It’s not just because I met my first girlfriend online and that relationship once involved a sexy trip to Victoria’s Secret on the holidays.

In terms of skill, writing has always been one of my strengths. I sucked at a lot of things in school. Essay questions and papers wasn’t one of them. Ask me to carry on a conversation with a stranger and I’ll be lucky to avoid a slap in the face. Ask me to write an essay or craft an elaborate story and I’ll flex my skills like an oiled-up body-builder.

If I am going to find love one day, it probably won’t be through my conversation skills. It’ll probably come through my writing skills. In that sense, my ability to craft good romance/erotica isn’t just vital for my career. It may very well determine whether or not I find the love of my life. The stakes are pretty high, but if I’m going to confront this conflict, I might as well do it with my greatest skill.

In other words, challenge accepted!

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Finding Sexiness In The Little Things With Jack Fisher

Everybody has their own unique turn-ons, turn-offs, mood-setters, and mood-killers. Human beings are diverse, innovative, and at-times downright weird in what turns them on. I’m not just talking about exotic fetishes or elaborate role playing either. There really is no one way to make a man or a woman horny.

Whether you’re straight or gay, male or female, monogamous or polyamorous, your sexual wiring is entirely unique to you. Sure, you may share your tastes with some people. Hopefully, you share it with a loving and passionate partner who knows all the right combinations to heat up your loins. Whatever your romantic situation, these proclivities are still unique to you and make up a significant part of our personality.

Having dipped my feet into a few hot-button, controversial topics like radical feminism, porn addiction, and the impact of religion on sex, I feel the time has come to lighten the mood a bit on this blog. If possible, I’d like the made the mood a little sexier. It’s October now. Halloween is just around the corner. That means we’ll all have an excuse to channel our spookier proclivities.

In a perfect world, we really wouldn’t need such excuses. We’d be able to freely share our sexual proclivities and explore them without fear of shame or scrutiny. Sadly, we don’t live in a perfect world, as our irrational attitudes towards circumcision show. So we have to use impersonal blogs and private clubs to discuss such things.

Accepting the many imperfections of this world, I’d like to use this backwater blog of mine to share in those proclivities. I won’t ask what few viewers I have to get too personal. I understand that’s an unreasonable request from someone who is a long way from achieving his goal of being a successful erotica/romance writer. So I’m willing to do what 95 percent of the internet won’t and be reasonable with my audience.

In that spirit, I’m going to list a few of the little things that I find sexy. Now when I say sexy, I don’t necessarily mean these are fetishes of mine. There are no clubs for these little things, at least not that I know of. Rest assured though, I do check for these things and as far as I can tell, these are just personal proclivities that I happen to have.

I won’t list everything that I’ve ever found sexy. That would take multiple blog posts and there are only so many hours in the day. Plus, I had some awkward teenage years. There are some things I’d rather not list, discuss, or even acknowledge.

With that in mind, here are a few little things that I, an aspiring erotica/romance writer, find sexy.

Sexy Little Thing Number One: Women in Sweatpants

There are any number of sexy garments that a woman can wear. Hell, the “intimate apparel” industry is a $10 billion chunk of the economy. I understand and appreciate all those sexy garments. Yes, I mean all of them.

That said, there’s just something inherently alluring about a simple pair of sweats that’s not to baggy, not to tight, and much easier to get off than a pair of skin-tight jeans. I can’t say for certain that sweats look as good on a man, but I can say that a woman wearing sweats will make my twisted mind wander into sexy domains.

Sexy Little Thing Number Two: Badass Female Soldiers

I don’t think this will surprise anyone who has followed this blog, but I have a thing for heroes and superheroes. I’ve cited superheroes as a prime example of a romance of equals. I’ve cited superheroes as example of sex-positive female characters. Naturally, I’m going to find heroism sexy on some levels.

Since the superheroes in my favorite comics are fictional, I find myself drawn to the women who serve this wonderful country. With their badassery, they protect this wonderful land of freedom, liberty, and spray cheese in a can. How can I not find that sexy on some levels?

Sexy Little Thing Number Three: A Simple Casual Sigh

Now what do I mean by this? How can a simple sigh be sexy? Women can do so many sexy things with their voice. Why else would sexy 1-900 numbers have racked up so many phone bills in the mid to late 90s?

For me, a simple sigh sends so many subtle messages. There’s enough obscene dirty talk in internet porn and “50 Shades of Grey” these days. There’s a time and a place for that kind of crude, overt dirty talk. There’s also a time and place for something simpler and subtler. Those times are woefully underappreciated.

Sexy Little Thing Number Four: A Woman Who Cheers At Sports.

I know sports are supposed to be a “guy thing.” I get that 95 percent of all sports prey upon our testosterone-soaked brains, bombarding us with manly feats of ass-kicking manliness in the name of winning that sweet, sweet championship and all the bragging rights that come with it. It’s part of the culture.

We, as a society, don’t expect women to share the same passion for sports that men do. Those expectations are unreasonable and flawed. Women can like sports too. I don’t deny that. I just find the women who aren’t afraid share in this manly passion a special kind of sexy. I see a woman wearing a football jersey and I can’t help but smile.

Sexy Little Thing Number Five: Sharing A Tub Of Ice Cream

There are all sorts of sexy turn-ons involving food. Make no mistake. There is an entire fetish that mixes food and sex in the weirder, messiest, most extreme way possible. I won’t describe it because I just ate and I’d like to keep the contents of my stomach in place.

This little act is not like those. For me, this is more romantic than it is sexy. Who doesn’t love ice cream? Who doesn’t love something sweet and savory? The idea of sharing it with a lover, eating out of the same tub and using the same spoon because we don’t care where our mouths have been, just has this special allure.

So there you have it. Those are five little things that I find uniquely sexy. I’m sure I’m not the only one, but I feel like we all need to appreciate the little things every now and then, especially the things we find sexy. It reminds us that not everything has to be some elaborate setup in a Las Vegas honeymoon suite to be sexy.

With all that said, I’d like to open the floor up to what few commenters I have on this blog. Please share with me what little things you find sexy. It doesn’t have to be weird. Actually, it would be downright interesting if it were weird because I might be able to incorporate that into my novels. In that case, weirdness is optional.

Weird or not, please take the time to share it! I’d love to hear what others find sexy. It’s a weird and wonderful world we live in. We should find sexiness wherever we can and celebrate it!

1 Comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights