Vibrators vs Corn Flakes, Graham Crackers, Circumcision and... Monkey Spankers?
Image from the Babeland product page for the
"Monkey Spanker" toy for men.Megan of Jezebel brings up a great point!
A male colleague of mine remarked to be recently that writing about vibrators is a Jezebel scribe's rite of passage. And, it's true, we totally write about vibrators a lot; in fact, I popped my own vibrator-story cherry not that long ago! It is a rare day, however, that any of us writes about male masturbatory aides — and, when we have, we usually focus on Real Dolls and how vaguely disturbing we find the men who are into them. But then I saw this article in The Independent today about the surge in men purchasing all sorts of things to their dicks into or up their butts, and I realized that it wasn't just sex dolls I find vaguely disturbing... and that that's kind of sexist of me.
I mean, why is it that the mental image I have of a guy who utilizes sex toys is someone kind of creepy? Is this fleshlight any stranger-looking than a rabbit, really? Why is it that I am fine with a guy jerking off with his hands, but if he's jerking off in something I'm vaguely disturbed? Why is it not remotely strange to me that men would buy things to shove up their butts — or to have their partners shove up their butts — but, still, looking at this picture of something the would stick their dicks in, some reptilian part of my brain goes "Ewww."? Even the author of the article, Tanya Gold, admits to masturbating with mechanical aids, but seems to find male sex toys — from the pocket pussies to the pussy-in-a-jar devices to the blow-up and real dolls — disturbing in their appearance and what they say about the men who utilize them.
I'm not sure sexism is the right word for the impulse for judging men's masturbation, ahem, differently from women's but she's right about the double standard.
"Blossom Sleeve" toy for men.I'm the first to agree that the, um, highly stylized attempts at representing disembodied vulvas is disquieting and probably disturbing to people with the actual parts. That could be projection on my part though because I'm disquieted by the no-less "realistic" disembodied erections you see in a lot of sex toys for women. Fortunately many sex toys, for both men or women, aren't really anatomical at all -- consider the very novel, but allegedly quite effective "Monkey Spanker" toy for men in the photo, above.** But I digress...
I can think of two other reasons why we might feel more squeamish about male masturbation than for women. The first being that for many mainstream cultures, now and through much of history, have (believe it or not) placed a *huge* emphasis on male chastity. Several major religions and related medical traditions.*** (See Ayurvedic medicine, for instance.) In the West, from roughly 1825 to 1975, doctors were convinced that ejaculation in general and (male) masturbation in particular were the root causes of tuberculosis, insanity, curvature of the spine. The original Boy Scouts was founded to help divert young male minds from "self pollution." John Harvey Kellogg invented corn flakes, Charlie Post cooked up Postum and Grape Nuts, and Sylvester Graham invented Graham flour and Graham crackers because they believed bland, whole-fiber foods temper hot lust. And the tradition of non-religious male circumcision was introduced and successfully promoted by physicians because it was believed to inhibit masturbation in boys and men. It was as much an article of medical faith in the late 1800s that "excess" ejaculation was as life-shortening as the (much more well-founded) belief that smoking is life-shortening today. That's a *lot* of propaganda, and the late 20th Century, when the idea that masturbation-as-health-hazard was finally put to rest. And, well, *perversely* it *really was* the case that due to convention and social pressure those who *did* masturbate, or admit it, really could be seen as marginal or socially suspect. (Compare it to the reaction today to people who won't wear seat belts or won't car-seat their children -- at this point if you haven't gotten the safety message, and can manage to ignore all the dashboard lights, there really *is* something else going on.) And the late 20th Century just wasn't that long ago -- some of us still remember it quite distinctly. :-) Anyway, that's one good reason.
"Fleshlight" toy for men.The other is that (soapbox here) the classic feminist construction of women as the sex class has it backwards. In fact it's more accurate to say women are (prescriptively and proscriptively) supposed to be the restrained, chaste, non-sexual "no-sex" class, whereas men are held to be the reflexive, relentless (every seven minutes!), think-with-the-little-head, fuck-anything-that-moves, fuck-anything-that-*doesn't*-move (Megan mentions "Real Dolls," for instance, but drunk-date rape is a lot more problematic) sex class that perpetually threatens the chastity and propriety of "delicate flower," "hey, my *mom* was a woman!" femininity. And so male sexuality, while considered utterly predictable, is also a commodity produced in quantities that far exceed demand.
Oh, see also the universally degrading "why buy the cow when the milk is free" philosophy advanced by the patriarchy as a means to induce men to marry... once they're deemed "worthy" to receive the woman's *father's* consent. Given that Patriarchy functions not only by treating women as domestic livestock but also as a system for controlling men via *access* to sex, then that system is overridden by what author Neil Stevenson wryly termed "manual override."
"Aneros Prostate Stimulator"
Oh, and one last thing. Recently, in the last year or so, several women have confided to me that they're running into more and more men who now prefer masturbation to sex. With *them.* And whereas *tradition,* not to mention the "no-sex" class paradigm, says they ought to be relieved not to have to endure men's lustful advances, *reality* says women desire and enjoy sex no less than men and consequently a "I see you as just a friend" isn't so, well, hot. No, obviously the plural of anecdote isn't data, nor am I ready yet to accept the generally breathless claims that, say, Japanese men are losing interest represents a real trend. But if it really does *become* a trend, and if toys for men become as sophisticated for men as they've become for women then I wonder if at some point traditional disgust or distress at male masturbation would flip over into resentment.
[** Note: Clicking the images in this post will take you to the corresponding pages at Babeland. I'm not at all affiliated with Babeland but that's where I've nicked all accompanying images so it only seemed fair. They're a good company though and the original store's here in Seattle. Worth a visit if you're in town. --fl]
[*** Male chastity being distinctly, well, distinct from male virginity. --fl]
I think the reason fake vaginas are more disturbing than fake penises ties directly into the "no-sex class"--we're so used to the idea that fucking a woman is somehow defiling her that we subconsciously want to protect the honor of even imaginary women. You're just using that helpless piece of plastic, you cad!
None of the toys look like fun to play with with someone else.
...Forgot to close your italics tag, didn't you?
Anyway, I've heard that there actually is a problem with masturbating all the time - some people who do that have trouble getting off with penetrative sex with another person. This can especially be a problem for hetero partners if the guy has the problem and they want to have children the natural way, if you know what I mean.
Interesting.
I think the reaction many women like me have is somehow tied to the power we have over you. My friend calls this power "the slow, unyielding pull of the Vaginal Wrench." The Vaginal Wrench can turn any nut, no matter how tight, by simply withholding. Pussy-whipping, unlike the regular whipping, is done by not allowing the pussy to be used.
These toys render that power obsolete. How can I entice, coerce, or otherwise convince a guy into doing something he might have doubts about if I can't withhold sex? Whether it's marriage, a better house, remembering our birthdays, or taking out the garbage, that dangling pussy in front of his nose is the carrot that has pulled many a man out of lethargic inertia and into action. For good or for ill, the Vaginal Wrench is a tool that has built empires.
What convinces an ordinary, average man to work in a hateful job for the money when he'd be satisfied with a lower paying job? He wants the car, the house, the power, the prestige. Why? Well, he's an ordinary, average guy. If he doesn't have a nice car and a good job, we don't look at him twice, because he's a loser. So he and his types go out and work and build and earn and we look and say, nice car, good clothes, looks like he knows his way around ... is he single?
When someone tells us about a single guy they know that we should meet, what do we say next? 1. What does he do? 2. What does he look like? (This last is to find out whether or not he's fat and bald without actually asking that. We don't care about his eye color. Tell me if he has hair and can see his toes.) Tell a guy about a single girl and he'll ask for #2 first - "what does she look like?" #2 question for guys is often, does she have kids - has she been worn down by child rearing already and therefore has less interest in sex? Guys don't typically care what we "do," other than as a conversation opener.
Unreasonable, yes.
I only notice this because, in my relationship, I can't use the Vaginal Wrench to turn my guy. I have to use reason, logic, fair debate. The terms of the social contract has changed. He doesn't need me for sex. He can go for years without. He has control over that, and therefore, I have not that control over him. It changes the whole dynamic of the relationship. It puts him in charge where in another relationship, I'd be calling the shots.
If men liked masturbating more than fucking, we women'd end up more like ... well ... like men.
Also, I love the fact that the CAPTCHA words were "come injuries." Because that one device at the end looks like it might cause one.
I wouldn't have a relationship in which I felt thta I had to use the "Vaginal Wrench." What's so bad about reason, logic, and fair debate? And even at that, there's a much wider swath of territory those don't cover -- territory where there's no absolute right and wrong, just two people who hopefully care enough about each other to find a solution that works for both, in which both partners are willing to give a little (sometimes a lot) when it really matters to the other person.
(Substitute whatever number works for you if "two" is not appropriate.)
I agree with Monique. If I have to withhold sex to get someone to take out the damn garbage, maybe I don't want to be in a relationship with them.
Also, men wanting to have sex with me doesn't usually feel like power to me. If they're desperate about it, it can be scary and threatening. If I'm not as interested in having sex as they are, I'd much rather have them whack off and leave me alone!
I think fake vaginas are more disturbing than fake penises for the same reason that calling a guy a dick isn't as insulting as calling a woman a cunt. It's a grave insult to call a woman a cunt; a minor one to call a man a dick. Insults to women often involve sex. Similar terms for men don't carry at all the same connotations. (Slut vs. stud, etc.) Male and female body parts exist in completely contexts.
(I don't remember ever finding dildos at all creepy; I do find the fake vaginas creepy. I think it's because of the social context of male and female sexuality and the meaning of objectification of their body parts. I mean, phallic representation has been part of demonstrations of power for, what, forever?)
kudos for the Neal Stephenson reference:)
I've just recently gone on antidepressants and the change in the dynamic of my relationships has been incredible.
My last relationship ended because my partner felt insecure and unattractive because I didn't want to have sex as much as she did. To which I said, well, that sounds familiar....
[It does sound familiar. Because even if we counted *only* antidepressant users and ignored all the other possible causes for libido lowering or loss there are millions, and millions, and millions of people who were in your situation. Yet our expectation is that if someone isn't interested in us it we think it means *we're* not interesting. Instead of our partners being stressed, distressed, depressed, or medicated. Or, heck, just naturally has a lower libido. Which is why I'd like to get people talking about it. Thank you, nosmo. --fl]