Fan Contest: Win A Copy of Tomb Raider XXX!

One of my porn-savvy fans clued me into this deal this morning and I felt compelled to share.

Basically, it's a way to win a FREE copy of Tomb Raider XXX: An Exquisite Films Parody and some autographed promotional posters -- and when is high-quality free porn EVER a bad idea? I've checked it out, and it gets my hearty Sex Nerd stamp of whackworthiness. And it has enough of a plot to keep you from fast-forwarding through the non-nekkid parts, and the action sequences are pretty good too . . . for porn.

"Dear Abby . . . " Gets Larry Flynt's Opinion On Porn. No, Really.

Gotta love this. Dear Abby consults Larry Flynt (!) on an issue of pornology. (NSFW -- duh!)

It was inevitable, as porn goes mainstream, that it would come up in polite conversation, and as arbiter of all things advicey, Dear Abby naturally couldn’t help advise someone who had a porn question.

Basically, it was the typical “Why do men like porn so much?” question women ask, as if there was one right answer. The venerable Mr. Flynt rose about the temptation to make a cheap shot or a joke and gave the industry-respected and approved answer:

Men like porn so much because we like to look at naked chicks (we’re more visually stimulated). Women like written erotica because they like to read about rich, successful vampires/werewolves with giant dicks and billions in the bank – but who only have eyes for the slightly-nerdy-but-irresistible-to-everyone heroine.

Dear Abby deferred to Flynt’s judgment on the matter, as well she should. But it marks an important watershed moment in our society, when the most rarified elements of middle-America social instruction are discussing the merits of boobies.

It makes me proud to be an American.

This Just In: Porn Doesn't Cause Rape

An outstanding post over at Porn For Women by the esteemed Ms. Naughty shows some pretty intriguing statistics for all of those who assume that more porn = more rape. In fact, the opposite is true. Ms. Naughty pulls out a couple of impressive statistics to back her up, but among the most telling is this:

One of the more interesting academic articles dealing with this issue is by Anthony D’Amato from Northwestern University School of Law. His paper Porn Up, Rape Down discusses the idea that there was an 85% reduction in sexual violence over the 25 years to 2003 (and the rate has kept falling since the paper was published). He goes on to posit that not only does porn NOT cause rape, he suggests that it may actually reduce rape, either by serving as a release valve or by demystifying sex. He concedes that the correlation does not equal causality and suggests further research.

So he can definitely say that Porn doesn't cause rape, or even encourage the levels violent rape, statistically speaking. But I'm gonna call it: Porn reduces rape. More of those violent meat-heads who once prowled the parks and streets in search of sexual release are now whacking off to German dungeon porn and Brazilian fart porn and Japanese . . . well, you-name-it porn, a bag of Fritos on their belly and a box of tissues at their side. If nearly free on-line internet porn helps reduce the number of women who suffer sexual assaults every year, then I for one don't think that's too high of a price to pay.

But next time a feminist or white knight gets in your face about porn "contributing to rape culture", haul this little statistic out. In point of fact, porn has reduced violent rape (either that or "abstinence-only" education is the reason, take your pick) which should, in any reasonable person's mind, be the ultimate measure of "rape culture".

The problem is that too many feminists over the years -- and especially the current Old Guard feminists -- have tried to broaden the category of rape to such ambiguous extremes that to them "rape culture" includes the kind of hook-up culture that their younger spiritual descendants see as just another weekend. There was a time when (according to feminists) a woman could even decide she was raped after-the-fact, or if she was drinking then she could decide that any sexual contact was rape if she felt bad about it afterwards. And when feminists tried to broaden the category to include pretty much anything with the label of "bad sex", then that undermined the very real problem of violent rape in our culture.

They attempted to conflate any less-than-ideal sexual liaison or "demeaning to women" portrayal of sex with rape, and most porn fell within that. Yes, there were problems with the porn industry back then, from under-age performers to overt violence in the actual movies. But the industry quickly became regulated as it became prominent, putting safeguards into place to ensure no under-aged performers would be used again, and making a conscious and conscientious decision to remove violence against women from porn themes. That wasn't because they were required to by law, that was because they recognized both the hurtful message such fare sent and because they wanted to tap into the potential of a large female market that recoiled at such rough portrayals. Don't forget, there are an awful lot of women in porn, and they don't like domestic violence or sexual assault any more than any other women. Less, actually, since many performers have had negative experiences like that in their lifetimes, usually before they got to the industry.

I think we're beyond that kind of silliness as a culture now, but the 1980s contention that porn contributes to rape should be well and truly dead at this point. Thank goodness.

"Ian, seen any good porn lately?"

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

The Blue Pill Or The Red Pill? Two Approaches To A Happier Marital Sex Life. And One Sucks.

In the course of doing some research for a professional project, I came across a couple of books which both purport to solve the age-old problem: How to get your wife to keep having sex with you after the honeymoon.

This is mostly a male issue, but it’s one that’s increasingly important to a lot of middle-aged men. And almost all married men. So with that in mind, I picked up “How To Get Your Wife To Have Sex With You”, by Logan Levkoff, Ph.D., a sex researcher. I was recommended the book by the Good In Bed site, which includes a lot of sex experts, including one of my faves, the other Sex Nerd, Emily Nagoski.

So Dr. Levkoff is a sex expert. In fact, she’s “A recognized expert on sexuality and relationships”, according to the site (although it fails to mention who granted her that recognition) and “a thought leader in the field of human sexuality”, whatever that means. As far as academic credentials go, she’s an AASECT certified sex educator, she received her Ph.D. in Human Sexuality, Marriage, and Family Life Education from New York University and has an M.S. in Human Sexuality Education and a B.A. in English from the University of Pennsylvania.

So she’s got some initials. She’s got some diplomas. On paper, she should have the answers. But does she have the goods?

I’m afraid to say, gentlemen, that no, she does not.

This book is essentially a long female manifesto of how you, too, can become the perfect Blue Pill Beta. That is, it encourages men to sacrifice their own sexual interests for the sake of their wives’, with little understanding or appreciation for male sexuality at all. Indeed, for a sex expert Dr. Levkoff seems profoundly ignorant of some basic issues of modern male sexuality, when applied to this particular situation.

A better title for the book would be “How To Capitulate To Your Wife’s Idea Of Sex To Minutely Increase Your Chances Of Having Any Kind Of Sex At All.”

Dr. Levkoff starts off in an utterly condescending manner in failed attempt to make it "easy to understand" for us poor, stupid males. She explains why wives don’t want to have sex with their husbands: “You guys act like such babies sometimes and we have those already.” She actually says that in the first few pages. It's a section dripping with barely-disguised contempt for masculinity.

If a male sex expert (such as myself, or even someone with initials after their name) began a self-described sexual manifesto with “You girls act like such controlling be-yatches sometimes and we’ve dealt with enough of those in our lives already”, you can imagine that there would be hell to pay. But Dr. Levkoff has no problem savaging men in general, and in particular on the subject of our sexuality. The subtext is clear: In a functional relationship, women naturally do not want to have sex with the men who have pledged their lives and fidelity to them. It’s our job, then, to make any sex that does happen occur. Because otherwise, wives would just rather not.

Great way to start off, Dr. Levkoff. I’m feeling more empowered already.

She completely ignores the potent role sexual rejection has on the male psyche, and the natural consequences of that rejection. Rejection is OUR PROBLEM, she tells men, not their wives. If your wife doesn’t want to have sex with you, according to Dr. Levkoff, it’s your fault, not hers. If she doesn’t want to have sex with you, then you’re supposed to ignore the deep, biting feeling of personal despair and loss of self-esteem that this entails, and “don’t take it personally”. Even though it’s the most personal possible subject.

There is virtually no discussion whatsoever about how a wife’s sexual rejection of her husband naturally transforms into emotional distance and sexual objectification in his mind – a handy hint to all of the wives out there. And there are no helpful hints about how to keep from spiraling into despair and depression over continuous rejection by the only person you’re legally allowed to have sex with. Just an admonition that you shouldn’t take her rejection personally because “it’s not about you”.

It’s about her.

That’s right, as Dr. Levkoff sees it, your sex life as a couple is about her, not about you. It’s her needs that matter, not yours. Your needs are a given, a constant, and therefore something she can comfortably ignorable. The fact that SHE is the one rejecting YOU, that doesn’t enter into the equation at all.

And that’s just the introduction.

In the first chapter of the “Out of Bed” section, Dr. Levkoff starts off her manifesto by insulting the erection. Not a good start. Ladies, Rule Number One For Dealing With Dudes: Never Diminish The Penis. Got it? Learn it by heart. Seriously.

Apparently the whole “men like their erections, and their penises in general, and generally don’t appreciate it when you diminish them” message didn’t get across to Dr. Levkoff during her professional education, because throughout the book she treats them with disrespect and thinly-disguised scorn and condescension. There is little respect for the organ, or the use to which it is put – at best, it’s amusing to her; at worst, it’s an annoyance that wives can do without. While she casually mentions how vibrators aren’t replacements for “a hot blooded man” in the extensive section of the book dealing with vibrators, she fails to enumerate her reasoning in any convincing fashion. In fact, she gives far, far more attention to sex toys than the penis in this book.

That should tell you something.

Throughout the book Dr. Levkoff treats men like idiots who have never heard of foreplay. While a certain amount of that is understandable, given the erotic ignorance of some men, the fact is that most men actually seeking answers in Dr. Levkoff’s book have likely long ago studied all about foreplay. Indeed, most men in a sex-lite marriage would be thrilled to death to indulge in foreplay, instead of the “Oh, GOD, you want to do it again?” quickies they survive on. The complaint of men who are searching for these answers usually has little to do with their willingness to enjoy foreplay. It’s when their foreplay doesn’t come to fruition that they become frustrated – and Dr. Levkoff has little to offer during that instance except “get over it”.

She declares “Begin the day with a hug” . . . and apparently no expectations of sex from your wife. Her attitude seems to be that if you remove every last thing that is bothering her then she won’t have any reason to turn you down . . . unless she just doesn’t feel like it, in which case you just need to get used to it. Expecting sex after you’ve devoted your day to the kind of intense arse-kissing and ego-massaging of your wife, often to your own detriment, is just a bad idea, according to Dr. Levkoff. If she does have sex with you, it won’t be because of anything you do or don’t do, it will be purely because of her whim and her grace. “Begin the day with a hug” is indeed great advice for men who follow Dr. Levkoff’s book, therefore, but the rest of the sentence should read “. . . because that’s about as close to her vagina as you can reasonably expect to get.”

Other examples of great advice from the book? Don’t piss her off. Dr. Levkoff freely acknowledges that women use sex as a weapon to keep and maintain power in their marital relationships: “We will hold a grudge and the last thing we’ll want to do is give you sex.” In no way does she suggest that this application of power is unfair or exploitive, demeaning or harmful. As a matter of fact, she seems stubbornly proud of this willingness on the part of wives to cut off their husbands if they irritate them. So a vital part of her program involves utterly capitulating to your wife in an abasing attempt to lure her into sex. Because, as the good doctor points out, “We’d rather withhold than give you what you want”.

Of course, when a husband withholds non-sexual physical affection or verbal affirmation from his wife, that’s considered “emotional abuse” in some places and by a number of sex therapists, because that hurts your wife’s feelings. Your feelings – especially about sex – clearly just do not matter to Dr. Levkoff here. The important thing is to keep from pissing off your wife.

Dr. Levkoff goes on to recommend that you shower your wife with appreciation –and of course she doesn’t have to appreciate you in return – in the form of near-constant attention to her. You should buy her things, be emotionally vulnerable to her, be verbally expressive of your (only positive) feelings about her, and flatter her incessantly. You should be willing and eager to listen to what is going on in her life (although Dr. Levkoff has little to say about how involved and interested she should be in yours) without expectation that this will lead to sexual intimacy. But I do give her credit on this point: she graciously admits that, gosh, sometimes women use rote “I love you” responses too, and maybe they should put a little more effort into it.

In Dr. Levkoff’s plan, daily undying expressions of love and heartfelt devotion without any reciprocation are expected, if you want to get laid by your own wife. “It’s the stuff of cheesy romance novels and we don’t want to hear it all the time” she says, inadvertently putting her finger on a serious part of the problem.

Allow me to digress a moment to explain to the ignorant:

Romance novels fuel female romantic fantasy life. While this is usually a good thing, they also promote certain tropes which give highly unrealistic expectations to women about how real relationships work. In romance novels the hero is always tall, good-looking, rich, successful and in love with the heroine for no good specific reason except she’s beautiful. He always struggles with his desire for her and ends up passionately declaring his love for her, no matter how much of a miserable creature she is, his absolute need to be with her to the exclusion of any other person or thing being foremost in his mind. The romantic hero routinely reveals his deepest emotional vulnerabilities which she – and only she – can evoke. And he does this like six or seven times each novel, until any sane man who has experience in a relationship wants to throw up.

Here’s a hint, ladies: span style="font-style:italic;">real men don’t do this. You shouldn’t expect real men to do this. You can be a real good man and not do this. In fact, the number of men for whom this is possible are usually either gay or players. In other words, you should be immediately be wary of any man who actually can do this.

But the deep, eloquent, heartfelt declaration of love from your man is right up there with the moans and howls that porn stars use when they fake an orgasm. It builds up the same kinds of highly unrealistic expectations, the same inevitable disappointments, and the same dissatisfaction with your marriage that watching too much porn can for your husband. Romance novels are about FANTASY, after all. At least, that’s what women keep telling us. So the next time you want your dude to bust out with the expressions of undying love, perhaps you can find it in your soul to talk a little dirty to him during sex, and see how natural it feels when you do it. End of digression.

But the point is well-taken: wives are getting their cues for what constitutes “romance” from such things as romance novels and soap operas and supernatural thrillers written from the vampire’s point of view. Which means that the romantic expectations they have of their husbands are highly unrealistic to begin with. Does Dr. Levkoff address this glaring discrepancy in inter-gender relations? No, she invites men to start reading “erotic” romances instead of watching porn, essentially telling them to capitulate – once again – to their wives’ ideas and ideals about sex at the expense of their own.

She brings up that old marriage counselor standard for saving marriages, Date night (duh!), although she’s quite explicit about what this entails: YOU plan dates for US. YOU can BUY US things and ENTERTAIN US, without any expectations for reciprocation or even appreciation. Levkoff trots out the trite old “just make her a mix tape” suggestion as if it’s a novel idea. News flash: most of the guys reading this book tried that long ago. Hell, for some dudes the mix tape is the only game they ever had.

And then there’s this heartbreaking lie: If you clean the house, you get laid.

I’m going to call bullshit on that one.

The myth that women do all of the housework is long over, and within my generation the split is about 50/50 now. If your mileage varies from that, you’re an exception in this day and age. It may be even more tilted in favor of husbands, once you add in yard, house and lawn maintenance into the equation.

Here’s the fact: your wife might freak out over a messy house, but cleaning it won’t get you laid. It won’t get you a BJ. It won’t even get you bragged about to her girlfriends. It might get you verbally appreciated – the first time – but after that it’s expected and goes unrewarded. Sure, she might be able to unwind more in a clean house – I’m sure we all would – but the reality on the ground is that any house with kids is always going to need more cleaning. Using that as an excuse not to sleep with your husband is both gallingly disrespectful to him and a tacit admission of control and manipulation on your part.

And so on.

Mostly this book is tacitly about female entitlement, and what women “deserve”. Nowhere in the book does it mention a man deserves jack squat. It reads like a litany of female entitlement and male blame: if a couple isn’t having sex enough, then the answer is always about how HE isn’t doing it right. Obviously the way to cure this is for HIM to re-design his sexuality around HER needs and desires, according to the good doctor. If she’s stressed about housework, it’s because HE isn’t doing enough. If she’s stressed about her body image, it’s because HE isn’t paying her enough compliments. Even when she occasionally drops us a bone by admitting that women have some responsibility for their own sexuality in the relationship, she rationalizes it away as “that’s just the way things are”. Get used to it.

She’s condescending. She’s insulting. She treats men like the idiots she obviously takes them for. In the same book that she complains that men shouldn’t watch porn when they have a willing partner in the next room, she also explains how it ordinarily takes many long hours of foreplay for a woman to be ‘ready for sex’. (So much for a “willing” partner . . .). With the picture she paints in this book, including the focus on how much non-sexual intimacy a man should have to perform before he is granted access to sex by his wife, one would wonder why any husband would demean himself over that length of time for the pleasure of twenty minutes of erotic mediocrity, when he could have big busty co-eds at his fingertips on-line without expending more energy than locking the door.

In fact, for a sex researcher, she seems to have an abysmal understanding of male sexuality beyond the basic “men want to have sex all the time” thought. The underlying premise in this book is that if a husband doesn’t piss off his wife and kisses her arse all the time – essentially capitulating to the feminine ideal of romantic and erotic love at the expense of the male ideal of sexual romance and adventure – then the woman in your life will graciously bestow on you that which you seek.

Maybe. If you’re lucky. And she feels like it. And if she doesn’t, then don’t take it personally, it’s still your fault, and you probably screwed it up somewhere along the line anyway, so you don’t really deserve it.

Most galling, she compares marriage to a fairy tale, and expects the men who are her supposed audience to relate to that analogy. It stands to reason, as “marriage-as-fairy-tale” is clearly at the heart of the female marital fantasy. But let me spell something out for the good doctor, and all of the women who are reading this: Men do not, and have never, envisioned a successful marriage as a fairy-tale romance. And anyone who purports to know male sexuality enough to be able to sling around the term “sex expert” should recognize that.

Women see marriage as a fairy tale – it’s there from the moment they watch their first Disney movie, if not before. The culmination of every successful romance novel is the heroine and the love interest heading down the aisle. It’s so commonplace that professional romance writers even use it as shorthand for the end of the book: “HEA”. To women, the wedding is the prize that they get at the end of the passionate courtship, the culmination of all of their romantic thoughts and feelings. There’s a reason why it’s usually the bride, not the groom, who’s freaking out over wedding preparations. It’s her “Princess Moment”, when her husband takes her away to live in a state of bliss like some Prince Charming.

Only, that’s not how men see marriage. It’s not a fairy tale. We know it’s a lot of hard work because we saw what our fathers went through with our mothers. We know all of the downsides from the start, including just what might happen if children become part of the equation. We saw the looks of despair and suffering on our fathers’ faces every time they sacrificed some shred of dignity or respect on the altar of their marriage. That’s no fairy tale.

When men decide to get married, and marry a particular woman, they aren’t seeing it as a fairy tale come to life, they’re envisioning it as a never-ending porn flick. Our “Happily Ever After” includes frequent, lusty, adventurous sex – the kind of sex we usually get in the months leading up to the marriage, if we’re lucky, as our intended brides try to keep us from bolting. Our HEA has spontaneous oral and lazy Saturday mornings and lunch-hour surprises and regular weekends away for mind-blowing hotel sex and far too much of the household budget spent on lingerie and sex toys. It involves explaining scratches on your back when you whip off your shirt at basketball practice. It involves telling an attractive stranger who asks for your number that you’re happily married, without having to explain just why you’re happy you got married.

To men, the idea of marriage revolves around the idea of access to sex with our wives, with just about everything else as a secondary issue. It has little to do with declarations of undying love or doing a load of laundry. As much as we value their companionship and friendship, sex with our wives is a central – if not the central – component to our conception of marriage. You take the sex away, or reduce it to occasions memorable for their rarity, not their inspiration, and you kick a supporting pillar out from under the marriage whether you recognize it as such or not.

Because one glaring issue that Dr. Levkoff ignores or takes for granted is that the men reading this book, who are obviously distressed about their marital sex lives and want to repair the problem, aren’t looking at it from a “how can we add spice in the bedroom”-Cosmo-article perspective, where the price of failure is an indulgence in some retail therapy and a grande mochacino. The men who are reading this book are doing so because they are, consciously or subconsciously, contemplating infidelity, and they are desperate for options.

That’s the part that she takes for granted: the competitive nature of the situation. Dr. Levkoff blithely assumes that the men who are reading her advice are going to remain faithful to their wives regardless of the sexual situation in the marriage. She pretends that they have no other options. She presupposes that they will have to either capitulate to the whims of their wives at the cost of their own sexuality and sexual interests, or they will live just have to learn how to live in a low-sex marriage. She ignores the very real possibility that a man who tries her betamizing approach and does not get the desired response will eventually end up with recourse to Craig’s List, an office affair, or the good old fashioned neighborhood massage parlor.

In an age when a man can get sex delivered discreetly to his door with an email and a credit card, and where the number of single women looking for husbands has hit epidemic proportions, men have far more practical options for infidelity than ever before. When he can go to a website that guarantees a no-strings-attached discreet affair with a like-minded dissatisfied wife of some other husband, or a lusty single woman seeking some other woman’s unappreciated husband, it's hard to think that he can get consistently rejected for sex by his wife and not seriously contemplate an affair..

Believe me, there are plenty of folks who think the grass is greener out there. The middle-aged husband who unsuccessfully begs his wife for sex is going to look like a rock star to some other woman out there who will be more than happy to appreciate him sexually while she’s appreciating the security he provides her. The alternatives are there, they’re easy to find, and the only thing holding most frustrated husbands back from plunging headlong into the sexual smorgasbord they see online every day is a heroic dedication to their marriages and their wives and their families.

The rise of internet porn has likewise provided a sexual outlet for the husband that Dr. Levkoff does not fully appreciate in her book. Yes, she mentions it – somewhat distastefully, even as she graciously agrees that masturbation and fantasy is good for both men and women – but she doesn’t appreciate the magnitude of what it can mean within a marriage, both positive and negative.

For good or ill, porn has raised the level of competition in marriage by exposing husbands to a nearly endless variety of erotic whackfodder, offering documentary proof that women other than his wife “do those things”, and some with breathtaking regularity and eagerness. It has contributed to liberalizing sexual mores in our culture in a way not seen since the early days of Cosmopolitan and Playboy.

No longer does the simple possession of a vagina make a wife irresistible to her husband – now she’s expected to know how to use it effectively. If women have high expectations of men, thanks to romance novels and softcore vampire smut, then you can blame porn for men having higher expectations of their wives than they did a generation ago.

The draw is almost irresistible to the frustrated male rejected once too often. Indeed, the one leads to the other: men naturally disconnect and distance themselves after a rejection, and go into hard core (excuse the pun) objectifying mode when they are sexually rejected . . . and porn lets them do that better than Half Off Wing Night at Hooters. The advantages are clear: Internet porn doesn’t need foreplay. It doesn’t need to be told you don’t think it looks fat in those jeans. It doesn’t have to be assured, or flattered, or appreciated, and you are always assured of the outcome before you go there. You know if you watch porn, you’re probably going to have an orgasm. It’s quick, easy, and comforting to the soul. To married men, internet porn is like a sexual safety net.

But it’s not “real sex”. We know that. You know that. We never thought it was, and we never wanted to replace “real sex” with porn. But especially where a disparity of desire – or serious relationship issues – conspires to make everyone’s life miserable, porn is a way to keep the pressure off and keep you from doing something stupid.

But I digress. The upshot is that this is the perfect book of advice for the Blue Pill dude who wants to learn how to kiss his wife’s butt more, and maybe get laid a little bit more, maybe. The tone of the author to the intended reader is condescending and at times insulting, and despite the author’s credentials as a Ph. D. there is a startling lack of science in this book. Hormones are only touched on briefly, and only in the context of women’s hormones. Pheromones are barely mentioned at all. Men’s sexual needs are treated as a trivial option, and there is nothing here to help a man in a low-sex relationship convince his wife to take it up a notch – on the contrary, relying on this book will, indeed make your wife happy . . . but your penis won’t be impressed.

Next time, I’ll take a look at the book on the same subject that’s taking the Manosphere by storm: Athol Kay’s Married Man Sex Life Primer 2011. If this is the Blue Pill book for men to try to get laid in their marriages, Athol’s book is the Red Pill book – and it doesn’t suck. In fact, it seems to actually work.

Bree Olson and Charlie Sheen: Tigerblood And The Making Of A Love Goddess

When you work in the porn industry, it’s always a little vicarious thrill to see one of our own intrude into the mainstream world, something that’s happening with a lot of frequency now that we’re all aTwitter and porn itself is becoming mainstream. Lately, pornstars have been in the mainstream news in all sorts of ways, from Stormy Daniels’ consideration of a possible gubernatorial run, to Lisa Ann's devastating parody of Sarah Palin, to Tiger Woods’ multiple trysts with pornstars . . . and now we have official Hollywood Bad Boy (and star of the tepid Two And A Half Men sitcom on CBS, where he presumably plays one of the complete men -- sorry, haven't watched it. Porn beckons . . . ) Charlie Sheen stealing away someplace tropical with a hot blonde graphic designer and former Adam & Eve Contract Star Bree Olson.

I’ve interviewed Bree, and she’s a sweet girl. Not only is she a great performer with an incredible body and a lot of enthusiasm for the work, but she has a girl-next-door smile that just beams. Like many in the industry, she wasn’t at the top of her graduating class – and she’s had her share of personal trauma – but she was also an outstanding performer and represented one of the world’s premier Adult brands for three years (incidentally, Adam & Eve turns 40 this year . . . no, really!).

After she left the big label, she moved on to do some work for other houses, including one I’m eagerly anticipating. It’s rumored that she starred in the New Sensations’ yet-to-be-released adult parody of Buffy The Vampire Slayer. And according to reports, she is, at this point, “retired” from the industry so that she can spend more time with her new “family”: actor Charlie Sheen and graphic designer Natalie Kenly.

It’s one of those whacky Hollywood style polyandrous relationships that are doomed to be temporary, but I can’t fault Sheen: Bree is a hottie, and you just have to appreciate a girl who has wanted to be a porn star since she was a child. No. Really. Bree really does love sex that much, especially anal sex, and her aspirations have been for porn stardom since before it was wholesome for a young lady to consider that as a proper career. She loves what she does on camera. She really is a sex goddess, and as “special” as Charlie Sheen is, I’m sure they’re both benefiting from the unconventional relationship. Bree gets international attention and a fabulous island vacation with a notorious Hollywood star (and a smokin’ hot graphic designer – Bree doesn’t mind munchin’ muff) and Charlie . . . gets a piece of Bree.




Next month the relationship will have exploded because of the media pressure, and Bree will be in even higher demand – expect her to come out of retirement shortly after the chaos of the celebrity break-up recedes – but more importantly, she will have escaped the porn ghetto and entered the much glitzier world of paparazzi and A-list name recognition. Because after this week, everyone in Hollywood will know who Bree Olson is. At least by name.


But if you’re really interested, here’s a selection of Bree’s work. This is the ass that Sheen’s a-tappin’ in some of her greatest hits:

Big Tit Bangers 2: One of Bree’s earlier scenes. Real Girl Next Door look.

Bree & Kayden: Bree enjoying some sapphic girl time with A&E's other contract star at the time, Kayden Kross. Great girl-on-girl, and I'm sure it's a taste of some of what Charlie is enjoying. Unlike some performers, Bree's perfectly comfortable getting intimate with another chick . . .

. . . which brings us to Bree & Sasha, with Euro brunette superstar Sasha Grey. If Charlie's getting some blonde-on-blonde, check out some of this deliciously sensual blonde-on-brunette -- the contrasts of body types is intriguing, and the two performers are very, very good at what they do.

Bree Exposed: Just good ol' fashioned porn, featuring a really choice anal spooning scene with veteran cocksman Tommy Gunn. Nice work.

Bree Olson: The Five: A powerhouse porn-diva collection! Bree headlines and welcomes Alexis Texas, Sasha Grey, Shyla Stylez, and Jenna Haze in a showcase performance! Is it any good? At the time that this was shot in 2009, the ladies had 15 AVN Awards between them. They have more now.

Bree's Anal Invasion: Don't expect a lot of plot, but if you're into ass, this won't disappoint! Bree has always been a passionate up-the-butt girl, and she puts her ass to the test in this one. Charlie's a lucky dude. And from what Bree told me, the back door is always open.
Bree's College Daze: One of the first of Bree's hits. Hot college sorority girl sex. Tell me she wasn't typecast. Every sorority has a girl like Bree in it.

Bree's College Daze 2: Because just one semester of college isn't enough! Bree's back on campus, and back on her back, and on her knees, and . . .

Bree's Slumber Party: Perhaps Charlie Sheen's doing a sequel? Also stars superhotties Penny Flame and Kayden Kross.

Carolina Jones and the Broken Covenant: Back before the parody craze really took off, this oft-overlooked and underrated flick stars Ava Rose as Carolina Jones (Adam & Eve is in North Carolina) was one of Bree's first "big time porn" productions. Bree Olson stars as the spunky blonde sidekick, and yes, you may interpret that any way that you would like. It's hot. It's violent (not the sex, the plot -- sex is great!). Good date night fare, and one of Bree's earlier works.

Down & Dirty With Bree Olson: Bree gets down. Bree gets dirty. Bree takes an awful lot of dick up her ass. Four hours of one Bree scene after another, including some interracial. Girl is nasty, in a good way.

Eden: This was an important film, one of the first Bree did with Adam & Eve Pictures as a contract girl, and the last one that Adam & Eve Pictures' outgoing contract girl, Carmen Luvana, starred in. Bree does a great anal 3-way, and the lush tropical settings, intense sexual performances and a staggering 10 full-length scenes make this a good addition to your collection in its own right.

Everybody Loves Bree: Well, pretty much. Charlie Sheen's a fan, of Bree, of course, and even if Natalie Kenly is a little reluctant to do a girl, you have to admit, even if you were averse to lesbian pursuits, Bree's a pretty hot chick to eat out. This flick will show you why.

Hot Cherry Pies 4: Bree's an open bisexual, and this quick and dirty little lesbo flick shows her "dining at the Y" with gusto! And with 30 girls, I'm sure you can find a couple you like.

Long Dong Black Kong: Bree Olson takes Justin Long's really, really, really big dick in an intense interracial tryst. She's got a soft spot for the brothas, Charlie, watch her around Chris Rock.

Roller Dollz: Bree Olson and a pack of super-hot sex kittens on roller skates at roller derby bouts. A joint production between Adam & Eve Pictures and Zero Tolerance (which usually sticks to straight-up gonzo fare), this adorable flick blew me away. Highly recommended.

Solostravaganza 4: This 2-disc set put Bree on the cover and sales took off. Want to see Bree take a honeymoon in her hand? This is the place.

Sunshine Highway: One of the first pictures Bree did for Adam & Eve, and a worthy effort. She's got wholesome dripping off of her like beads of sweat, even when she's getting screwed in the ass. That's a rare talent.

The 8th Day: Post holocaust sex. Bree has one scene in this movie. It was shot right around the time her grandmother died, so it's not her best work.

The Girls Of Adam & Eve: All of AEP's contract girls from over the years in their best scenes, including one of Bree's best. Great way to put her work in perspective against the larger evolution of porn at the nation's most prestigious adult movie institutions. Plus, if Charlie Sheen had any theoretical higher ground to his fantasy life, this would be it. Imagine being on a tropical island with all of these babes?

The Naughty Co-ed Caper: Bree's in school but she has a tuition problem (gee, maybe in one of these movies the girls could just fill out a financial aid form . . . nahhhh!) so she turns to crime, robbing banks naked. No, really. Hey, it's porn. It's what we do.

The Surrender Of O: It's a big step when a new contract girl takes over a successful franchise. It's twice as big when the franchise is based on a porn classic. The sequel to the hit O: The Power Of Submission, starring veteran contract star Carmen Luvana, Bree handled this important flick with a lot of style. It's BDSM, although aficianaods might find it a little on the light side. Still, Bree does a great job in a difficult medium with the help of Ava Rose and Kayden Kross.

Watch Your Back 2: Straight-up wholesome gonzo anal porn like grandpa used to watch.

Whale Tale: With ass-centric footage shot before she signed with AEP, Bree's cover shot here announced her presence with authority and got her a whole lot of attention. I mean, she's got one of the best asses in the biz, and she loves to use it.

The A Team: A XXX Parody: Bree is the female lead in this surprisingly good parody (see full review here) in which she plays Amy, the only chick in the original series. While her role in the plot is small, her scene doing "Cannibal" (Randy Spears) is delicious!

Bree's Big Screw Review: Bree reviews some porn movies, and gets to screw Tommy Gunn.

NotThe Bionic Woman And The Six Million Dollar Man : Bree plays Lindsy Summers, the Bionic Woman. I'm sure you can guess which parts of her are bionic . . .


That's a good start to Bree Olson 101. Here's the extra credit.

Bree's a fun girl, as Charlie is finding out -- but did you know how many marshmallows she can stuff in her mouth at one time?

(Vs. Kayden Kross)

Bree Olson's Bio:

Name: Bree Olson
Birthdate: 10/11/1987
Hometown: Fort Wayne, IN
Height: 5' 3"
Bust Size: 34D
Studio: Independent
Bio:
IN-DEPTH PROFILE:

Bree Olson erupted on the adult movie scene in 2006, and was an Adam & Eve contract star from 2007 to 2010. Beautiful big boobs, a round and sexy ass, and a smile that lights up a room like fireworks combine to make Bree Olson one of the hottest performers and a true fan favorite! Known for her exuberant performances, there’s no denying one thing about the gorgeous blonde bombshell: she’s always HORNY! With no fake excitement in her scenes in the slightest – Bree is just happy having sex, the raunchier the better!
Bree is openly bisexual, and is equally excited about girl-girl and boy-girl shoots. She also loves anal – loves it! – and enjoys working with a variety of performers. Everybody loves working with Bree – she has a reputation on set for having a warm heart and a sunny disposition. She’s a cat person – Dr. Sniffles – and loves animals, being very involved with animal charities.

A Libra born in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, she’s of Ukrainian descent, and credits her late Ukrainian grandmother as one of her biggest influences.

Bree made the decision early on to work in the adult industry, starting with dancing and photo shoots before moving on into gonzo and feature work. She was Penthouse Pet Of The Month in March, 2008. Her attitude and early performances garnered plenty of attention, and in 2007 she stepped into the role of a full-fledged contract star for one of the biggest adult film production houses, Adam & Eve Pictures. She has starred in almost 150 adult flicks, thus far. She was named Best New Web Starlet by AVN in 2009, Best New Starlet in 2008, and Best Anal Sex Scene in 2008.

And that's the thing: Bree's a fun girl, and she's having a good time with a big celebrity. She's worked hard at her career, and if this is where she's happiest, I'm sincerely happy. I hope she enjoys her mainstream fame, and is able to leverage it into something worthwhile.

But in the meantime, she's given us an impressive body of work.

Of her impressive body at work.


UPDATE: Tigerblood!

I've talked a lot about Bree (who now prefers "Rach" off-screen), but what about Charlie? I've been a hypernerdy fan of his since Red Dawn ("WOLVERINES!") the lurid 80s tale about a post apocalyptic resistance group to a Communist invasion, not to mention Platoon and Wall Street, and while I haven't quite forgiven him for Men At Work, even compared to Bree he's a pretty decent performer in his own right. But that's not what I like about him . . . it's the

TIGERBLOOD!

That's the innate Sheenesque quality of pure manly bravado and masculine chutzpah that decides, hey, I'm a passionate guy and here are not one but two really, really hot blondes who love me and want to sleep with me, so . . . WHY THE HELL NOT? Tigerblood is what makes a man a man. Need to get a couple of six-packs on the way home.

But it's also the reason that Charlie gave for his sexually aggressive lifestyle and occasionally outrageous (or misunderstood) behavior -- and who can blame him? He's the highest paid actor on TV, he's dating a porn star AND a graphic designer, he has two beautiful boys by another beautiful woman . . . I mean, why does Charlie suddenly have to be the role model for America's Youth . . . when he can allow America's Middle Aged the chance to live vicariously through him?

Keep it up, Tigerblood. You're Still Winning!

The AVN Awards: Best Feature Edition

If there’s a pile of dry Christmas trees piling up on the curb, maxed-out credit card bills in the mailbox and the dreary consolation of the Superbowl right around the corner, it can only mean one thing: it’s time for the annual AVN Adult Expo!

The arguably most important Adult Industry event of the year takes place every year in early January in Las Vegas, in conjunction with the Consumer Electronics Show – a double whammy if you’re a Sex Nerd.

I attended for the first time last year, and I have to admit my mind was blown on a number of levels for a number of reasons. Everything from sales booths for local brothels to a plexi-glass trailer with a dance pole inside to a $7,000 translucent alien sex doll (no, I’m not exaggerating) – and that doesn’t mention all the performers and industry insiders I got to meet (including Serious Porn Crush Girl Aurora Snow, among others!). I'm pretty jaded about most things sexual at this point (but no less fascinated), but when you're a bit of a freak and you stand around with your jaw open thinking to yourself "DAMN, that's freaky!", well, you know you've Arrived.

But I digress. The highlight of the show, and therefore the Porn industry year, is definitely the AVN Awards show. It’s similar to the Oscars, only instead of “Best Supporting Actress” you get “Best Anal Scene” . . . and instead of four or five nominees per category, there are scads. The affair is always terribly hyped, plagued with industry shenanigans, and lasts freakin’ forever, but if you had to draw a circle around the Best Porn on Earth, well, this would be one place to start.

The show is particularly important for the big producers, because the awards showcase their best work. Ironically the esteemed Best Feature category, still the most important, financially, to the producers, actually represents only a minority of the Pornoverse these days. The domination of all-sex gonzo strokefodder since the early 1990s has all but killed the idea of a sex movie with a plot and characters, however badly acted and scripted. It’s just a lot simpler to hire five or six girls and a couple of studs and knock out a weekend wonder than it is to actually pay attention to things like context. The expense of producing a feature is so much higher than a gonzo flick that only a dozen or so production houses make the effort anymore. If it hadn’t been for the recent parody craze, it’s possible that the feature porn flick would die a slow and lingering death.

But those features are de facto showcases of a studio’s ability to attract talented performers and directors and turn out something resembling entertainment. They may not break even on their own, necessarily, but a nomination for Best Feature can add a lot of buzz to one and hype sales. Consider the Adam & Eve/Digital Playground visual masterpiece Pirates, one of the most expensive porn flicks ever made, which not only kicked ass in regular retail sales but also made a lot of bucks in the softcore Skinimax version. A winning feature can put a production studio on the map . . . or save one from bankruptcy.

This year’s contenders for Best Feature include no less than fifteen entrants, and while I haven’t seen them all over the course of the last year, there are some noteworthy contenders for the prize you might want to check out:

Awakening To Love, New Sensations. A porn flick about coma patients. No, really.

Body Heat, Digital Playground. Busty blonde firefighters who screw between calls. No, really.

The Condemned, Vivid. Lesbian revenge gang knocking off bad ex boyfriends. Nice.

The Devil In Miss Jones: The Resurrection, Vivid. The latest trip to the well for this franchise is actually pretty good. While there’s bare homage to the original classic, the story line – about the damned Miss Jones reincarnating as a pretty journalist – is interesting, and the sex is hot.

Fatally Obsessed, After Dark/West Coast. One of the few all-black features to be produced – which should make it eligible for Best Feature on that basis alone. However Fatally Obsessed skips the all-black clichés of gang violence, ghetto culture, and making it big in show bidness for a more mainstream plot: Successful black couple move to the suburbs, crazed real estate agent stalks hunky hubby – hilarity ensues. With an all-star all-black cast, this is the (pardon the pun) dark horse competitor in this contest. But even if it doesn’t win, I think it’s outstanding that a) someone is doing all-black features that b) don’t play into every sexual and cultural stereotype. Call it Buppie Porn, if you like, but it’s a good flick no matter how you classify it.

Malice In LaLaland, Miss Lucifer. Starring Sasha Grey, this dark version of the Lewis Carrol classic puts Malice in an insane asylum. Beautifully shot on 35mm film, performances and scenes are artfully hot. Another dark horse, but a shiny one.

An Open Invitation: A Real Swinger’s Party in San Francisco, Private. Traditionally a “Euro” production company, this scalding-hot feature is part fantasy, part documentary. With a cast of hundreds of amateurs and professionals, it got AVN’s highest rating and a special letter of recommendation from the editor. Consider this a strong favorite to win.

Pornstar Superheroes, Elegant Angel. Instead of just parodying a superhero movie – a worthy task in its own right – Elegant Angel put together an original superhero flick starring four lusty super-powered heroines, results of a Cold War era military experiment. Action-packed and entertaining, outstanding performances by Asa Akira, Kristina Rose, Tori Black and Sadie West, consider this an outside favorite to win.

Rawhide 2: Dirty Deeds, Adam & Eve. The long-awaited sequel to one of A&E’s earlier hits, Rawhide 2 is a modern-day western starring contract stars Bree Olson and Kayden Kross in some of their final work for the company. Busty blondes, horses, and thick-thewed country boys with big dicks make this a solid contender, though it lacks the Old West character of the 2005 original, starring A&E’s longtime contract star Carmen Luvana.

Sanatorium, Zero Tolerance. Plot is simple: Girl (Tabitha Stevens) goes into sex work; girl is condemned for sex work by self-righteous prudes; prudes drive girl near to insanity (hence the Sanatorium) where she gains the clarity to plot revenge by exposing the prudes’ secret vices. Solid (if somewhat dated) plot and outstanding sex make this a good contender, but not a likely winner. Hey, it’s an honor just to be nominated, right?

Scorned, Penthouse. “Hell hath no fury yadda yadda yadda.” A flick about pissed-off women who take revenge when they’ve been, you guessed it, scorned. The plot’s pretty thin, but the performances make it noteworthy. Not much chance of winning, however.

Speed, Wicked Pictures. This epic tale of LA Motorcycle clubs (thing sport bikes and shiny helmets, not leather, denim, and Harleys) includes some of the hottest sex to be filmed this year, including an incredible all-Asian three-way including Anglo-Thai stud Keni Styles. Keni’s one of the very, very few Asian men in Western porn, but he’s built like a tall, well-hung Bruce Lee. Even without Keni this flick would be the favorite to win, but between the novelty and the action, not to mention Wicked’s traditionally well-shot, very hot sex, Speed is the most likely winner of the category this year.

Whatever It Takes, Wicked Pictures. The third entrant from Wicked Pictures (with 3 Days in June and Speed), this is the weakest flick of the three, even though it’s well-acted, scripted, and directed. The problem is the plot: the “suburban wife making extra money by being a part-time prostitute plot has been done ad nauseum since the 1970s. But Tori Black is the reason this flick made the cut. Her performance (and to a lesser extent performer/director Stormy Daniels’) is the reason the movie got the nomination, in my opinion. And while it’s technically well-executed, with the bright and shiny competition around it it’s unlikely that Whatever It Takes has what it takes to take the top spot.

So that’s my round-up of this year’s contenders – stay tuned next week for my re-cap of the big awards show winners!

Exclusive Alexis Texas Interview Coming Soon!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Nerd Girlz Rule

Some dudes like the idea of a big boobed, bubble-butt blonde with a low IQ and high gullability factor -- and while I can relate to that a a visceral level, the fact is that what trips my personal trigger (and I know I'm not alone on this) is the idea of a sexy, intelligent woman whose amazing body is a mere complement to her sexy, saucy brain. Yeah, I dig smart chicks. I have a thing for Hermione Granger and I'm not ashamed about it. I'll pass up a dozen blonde bombshells for the chance to cross swords (so to speak) with the brunette with the book and the glasses in the corner.

Brains and beauty, together, beat beauty alone. Brains, beauty and ambition are even hotter, and when you put brains, beauty and ambition on the same plate with a heaping side order of innovation . . . well, it's hard for me not to moan lustfully.

Case in point: one of my new lust-objects isn't on your standard adult site. She runs her own, The Naked Coder (http://thenakedcoder.com/wordpress/). With the motto "Code is Hot/Naked is Hotter", the site is a model of 21st century innovation.

You see, it's hard for a freelance web designer to make it in today's economy. There are so many, and a spiffy-looking homepage just doesn't stand out the way it used to. You need to throw in some flash, and not the computer kind. You need to throw in some sizzle. You need to get people's attention -- and Sarah White, the proprietor of the Naked Coder, has done just that by stripping down and hacking code the way the computer gods intended.

Sarah makes this promise:

If you’re interested in having a website built, I’d love to do it for you. And you can watch me do it…naked! I know you’ll find my work impeccable, my delivery punctual, and my prices reasonable (considering the perks!). No matter your web desires, I can fulfill them.

And of course there are dozens of more-or-less SFW pics peppering her site. Above is one of the tastier ones, but this nerdy chick has got it seriously going on when it comes to the flaunting of her deliciously svelte bod. The stunning combination of glasses, a trim and seductive body, and dark red hair is a boner-builder of epic proportions. Pressing the laptop up against her tits is just gravy.

Some, of course, will blanche at the idea that this lovely young woman would have to stoop to such stunts even in this economy, and condemn her for trading her dignity for filthy lucre. Those people are technically known as idiots.

What I see here isn't a woman "selling her body", but an intelligent and secure young woman providing a value-added service to her coding skills. There's no shame here, there's pride. All too often our society denigrates the beauty of those women who don't fulfill the zaftig blonde sex goddess role, making them feel inferior to the bombshells despite their undeniable beauty. If you don't look like a Cosmo model, in other words, no matter how pretty you are you are made to feel like a wallflower. This is especially true for the Nerd Girlz, who are not only made to feel inferior about their bodies, but also are socially denegrated for the fact that they have a brain and aren't afraid to use it.

Nerd Girls are not encouraged to consider themselves "sexy", and all too often the perception is that their devotion to the cerebral leaves no room for an active sex life. Having known more than a few, I can testify that the contrary is true: there's more to nerd girlz than a few sexual experiments at band camp. Sarah is making a stand here, whether she realizes it or not, a stand for all those nerdy girls in high school who were made to feel like flat-chested torchbearers while cheerleaders and popularity hounds went out of their way to make themselves feel better and the expense of their far more intelligent sisters.

Finding a good web designer who can deliver is hard enough -- finding one that does all that and who will show you her tits . . . that's priceless. I truly hope that Sarah will continue this spectacularly innovative approach to the mundane world of e-commerce, and I plan on interviewing her about her site. In the meantime, I'm establishing her as the first of my Nerd Girl Hall Of Fame, in celebration of her sexy cerebral celebrity. And if she sends me even more scandalous pix of her, I'll count myself as one fortunate nerd dude.

Thanks, Sarah. You make us all proud.

Joss Whedon, Porn, Science Fiction and the Future of Feminism

Someone forwarded me a self-righteous rant about one of my favorite subjects: the late, lamented sci-fi classic TV show Firefly, one of the most brilliant pieces of television ever created (and cancelled by Fox – boo, hiss). I’m sure you can tell I’m a fan. Why? Not just because it’s brilliantly concepted, delightfully rendered, lovingly detailed, incredibly well-acted, and intriguingly plotted – I love it most because it’s the best-written television show I’ve ever watched. Joss Whedon, Tim Minear, and their crew put together one of the highest pieces of art to ever hit the small screen – and then came back with the critically-acclaimed by woefully under-exposed movie Serenity, which extended the franchise brilliantly, before it was snuffed out.

Now Joss And Friends cut their teeth on Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel before they ascended to the level of Firefly, and in Buffy in particular Joss was widely hailed as bringing to the fore some contemporary feminist topics and addressing them in the context of a fantasy series with a strong young woman as the lead character. It often led to Joss being portrayed as a feminist, something he hasn’t done much to discourage. The blog rant called into question Joss’ feminist street cred by hammering out an exegesis of parts of his scripts for Firefly and Buffy. Taken by themselves, and from the most extreme points of view, they do seem misogynist in places.

But what the writer, a self-described “lesbian feminist sister”, had go completely over her single-minded little head (and yes, that condescending phrase was intended to be such, though I assure you my assessment had nothing to do with her gender) is that television is ART. You can slam it as “popular culture”, but all of history’s great art was, at one point or another, just another piece of “popular culture” – and this utter lack of perspective seethes through the rest of her piece. It might not be considered high art, but then Firefly’s main purpose was never to be a fascio-feminist manifesto, it was meant to be an adventure story set in a future dystopia. Remember that point. It’s important.

The writer also shudders at the idea, that

“I find much of Joss Whedon’s work to be heavily influenced by pornography, and pornographic humour.”

Considering that virtually all art outside of its most pure and inaccessable forms is a relation of human emotion, and that all human emotion is affected by sexuality – which includes pornography and pornographic humor – I concede the point.

Pornographic humor, of course, is rooted in the depths of our human subconscious. Recall, for instance, that one of the great Western religious traditions of all time, the Eleusinian Mysteries (which are often siezed upon by feminists as a positive feminist allegory) includes the part of the Myth where Demeter, Goddess of Grain and Motherhood, is brought out of her divinely inconsolable grief about her abducted daughter, Persephone, by a dirty joke. Pornography and pornographic humor are as essential a part of human nature as eating and sleeping, and to consider any cultural construct without accepting that is evidence of flawed reasoning or an inadequate education.

The writer makes the further mistake of intepreting the writing exclusively through a radical feminist filter, without considering the idea that inter-gender relations exist as a part of a greater cultural whole: Zoe calls Mal “Sir” not because she’s a submissive female, as the writer contends, but because she is a spiritually wounded soldier who clings to the trappings of the military life, including treating her superior on the ship (Mal is Captain, and therefore entitled to be referred to as “sir” by his first officer) with military respect – in other words, she’s a complete character, not a caricature, of the strong female warrior. Joss treats her like a real person subject to the real world, and that includes such things as elementary adherence to protocol in line with her official duties. Sorry if real women performing in a heirarchy rocks your feminist boat. I’m sure Katherine Janeway, strong female captain of Star Trek: Voyager, internally winced every time she was treated with respect and addressed as “sir”.

Her next contention is the most astonishing. Inara Serra, a major character on Firefly, is a “space whore”, that is, a high-class Companion who rents her company (including her sexuality) to select clients. In the world of Firefly (“The ‘Verse”), the Companions are a powerful and well-respected institution. Far from being mere prostitutes, they are adept cortesans who use their considerable (and expensive) charms in pursuit of a vocation where their sexuality, like their other characteristics, are used to the benefit of their clients and themselves. In many ways she’s the strongest woman on the ship, but her profession – respected in the sophisticated areas of the ‘Verse – is held in contempt by the low-brow yokels who inhabit the backwater colonies she haunts. To them she’s a whore, nothing more – and that’s the same contention the writer of the rant makes. It’s a type of intellectual slut-shaming of a woman who decides to be powerful by including her sexuality in her life, not excluding it.

But then again the writer also seems to consider any heterosexual coupling “rape”. We’ll get back to this again in a moment.

She seethes at the fact that an intelligent, well-educated woman would EVER want to use her sexuality for anything but (presumably) lesbian hand-holding. Real self-actualized, self-aware, powerful woman in that society, or our society, apparently must check their hearts at the door and use their vaginas only for empowerment unsullied by mere males. Real feminist women cannot be heterosexual without betraying their feminist ideals, in the writer’s narrow universe.

She further castigates Zoe, a very emotionally complex and complicated woman, for having a real, live, functioning heterosexual relationship with a (gasp) White Male. They’re a real couple: they fight, they fuck, they call each other endearing names, they depend on each other for fulfillment and support. But apparently Wash, who is, compared to his warrior wife, a “semi-muscular man”, treats the woman he loves dearly and is hopelessly devoted to like “a piece of meat” according to the rant writer. Despite the fact that Wash is probably the most Beta male in Sci-Fi history, his simpering masculinity is just too strong for the rant writer to handle. The fact that his devotion to his wife is so strong that (in one famous scene) he’s not even tempted when he’s in the middle of a whorehouse should say something about the character – but he’s merely male, and therefore an implicit rapist. The fact that Zoe is equally devoted to Wash, to the point where she is willing to sacrifice her Captain, leader, and war buddy Mal in order to save him is also lost on the writer. Heterosexual relationships are apparently fundamentally flawed no matter how well they work and make people happy.

And then she starts in on the violence, throwing around words like “homoerotic” and “hypermasculinized” and “manliness” and “rivalry” with gay abandon. I won’t get into it, save to remind you that Firefly was an action-adventure sci-fi story. Last time I checked, they did best with a lot of fight scenes. Action adventure stories that center around discussing the characters’ feelings without a couple of good fistfights or gun fights aren’t, by definition, action-adventure. Firefly is set in a lawless frontier, where violence is part and parcel of the characters’ lives, not to mention the way they made their living. You’d think she’d know what she was getting – it was right there on the box, since all the characters are heavily armed in the picture. If she was that opposed to violence, homoerotic or otherwise, you’d think she’d skip it and pick up Personal Best instead.

So that brings us to consider her total perspective, which associates anything male or masculine automatically with rape and oppression. Men, in her opinion, are not allowed to be masculine, they are not allowed to be sexual, they are not allowed to be violent – they just plain aren’t allowed. Feminism, in her view, is the glorious idea of a world untainted by Y chromosomes. Half the human race is expendable and undesirable. Women good, man bad.

And that’s a problem. For feminism.

Because you can look at feminism in one of two ways: as a real, vibrant, creative and correcting force in our society – our whole society, men and women – or you can look at it as a mindless dogma more attached to idealism than to constructing real solutions to the very real problems we face today. And I mean “we” as in “men and women” – because the the transformative power of feminism has touched all of our lives. For the ranter and the radical anti-sex captial-F Feminists she parrots, the feminist ideal is a lot like the Marxist Workers’ Paradise, a mythical lesbotopia utterly unconnected with reality. The problem is the latter attitude is at odds with the former in such fundamental ways that it threatens to discredit all of feminism and the good it has done with crazy misandrany and complete male-bashing.

The promise of feminism is that men and women should ideally be treated as equals in our society, and despite a lot of reactionary misogyny over the years the march toward that goal has been steady and consistant. Many of the original outrages that inspired the movement and philosphy have been defeated and tossed in the trashheap of history – and I say good riddence. But the issues of chattel marriage, female disfranchisement, and economic independence, among others, were the low-hanging fruit. It was easy to see the injustice and take action. Now – in our Western culture, at least – what remains gets far more complicated, because the feminist philosophy in its single-minded pursuit of its goals, is now running up against some of the very basic aspects of masculinity that men, as a gender, are probably unwilling to compromise on.

This might be more important to little-l feminists than you might think.

Let’s start with pornography. Simple issue, no? Well, no, it isn’t. Because men aren’t going to give it up, ever, as individuals or as a society. Porn is an expression of masculine sexuality, and I would no more allow my sexuality to be dictated to me by a “lesbian feminist sister” than I would expect her to let me dictate what her sexuality should be. While the big-F Feminists rail at porn as inherently exploitive, I’ll remind everyone that they also rail at heterosexual sex in any form as inherently exploitive, if not actual rape.

Since a good 80% of the women of the world are primarily heterosexual in orientation, that fallacious idea saps the credibility from any further arguments even among small-f feminists. As a member of the porn industry, of course, you may consider my opinion highly biased and my perspective narrow. I’ll freely admit to that. I cannot consider all porn “exploitive”, and I certainly don’t consider my heterosexuality to be implicitly so. But even if you discount my profession, please don’t discount my perspective: because if feminism is to progress as a socially relevent philosophy and movement, then it must do so in concert with men and it must come to terms with the idea that masculinity isn’t going to dry up and fade away.

I know men. Good, strong, happy, healthy men who love their wives and girlfriends, do their best to avoid being complete dicks, and try to be the best fathers to their children they can manage. Like the characters on Firefly, they are flawed, of course, as we all are (even lesbian feminist sisters). But taking their flaws into consideration, even the ones who get closest to being feminists (I doubt the rant writer would allow that anything with a penis could actually be a feminist, regardless of captialization) balk at the idea that their sexuality is inherently evil, immoral, and oppressive. Nor do they want to give up their porn.

Men like porn. We need porn, as a gender. And men won’t give up their porn even when there’s a state-imposed death penalty for its possession. That’s not a cultural affectation, that’s a human universal, part of the male sexual psyche that’s basic to us. We can’t put it away any more than women can put away maternal instinct. We can mitigate the need, but somehow I think a world full of sexually-repressed men would not lead to the Feminist lesbotopia the rant writer imagines. Men are driven by sex in a way most women are not, and that’s not a flaw – it’s part of who we are. We are who we are, and we will always be so. Feminism needs to accept that fact if it wants to move on to any meaningful change in our society. Some small-f sex-positive feminists are doing just that, and change is happening. The rant writer, on the other hand, has inspired nothing but contempt – not for her gender, but for her misandranous, male-hating perspective on our gender.

Science fiction (often called Speculative Fiction) serves an important role in our culture: it shows us the possibilities of our future, in a variety of ways. One way is the socialist-utopia of Star Trek, where everyone wears gender-neutral spandex and only has sex on vacation. Another way is the Firefly method, where real, honest-to-goodness problems in our own society (like a woman’s turmoil at the necesity of dividing her loyalites between career and family, as Zoe experiences, or a woman’s struggle to define herself as independent and still enjoy a healthy sexuality, as Inara experiences) are dealt with by real, deeply flawed, deeply human characters in bad situations.

That’s the art of the TV show (see, I told you I’d get back to it). Firefly took nine very real characters with baggage and flaws and hopes and fears and it put them through the wringer of a wild and unpredictable life, to see where they would end up. It wasn’t always pretty, and it wasn’t always clean, and it was frequently bloody – but real life is like that, too. And that’s the value of science fiction in general, and Firefly in particular: it is through the flaws and the mistakes and the injustices it portrays that the art of inspiring a depth of feeing shines through. And if the rant writer can’t get a handle on that, then she should find some secluded Lesbotopia Paradise Island of Amazon Women of her own where she need never be bothered by a Y chromosome again.

And I'm not even going to get into Kaylee. Can of worms, there.