Welcome to NSFW Lesbosexy Sunday!!
via elles.tumblr.com
+ Do you want a refresher course on the history of the vibrator? This one includes vibrators powered by bees and coal.
“Did you know that the first vibrator in history may have been invented by Egyptian Queen Cleopatra? Apparently, she had the idea of filling a hollow gourd with angry bees. The violent buzzing caused the gourd to vibrate and then… well, then, the rest is history.”
via model mayhem
+ Or maybe you just want to look at a gallery of 1920s girls posing with typewriters.
+ Eric Berkowitz’s Sex and Punishment: Four Thousand Years of Judging Desire is a history of Western sex law that looks really interesting, which might be because I read an excerpt called “Female Love and Leather Machines in the Early Modern Period.” From the introduction:
“Writer and lawyer Eric Berkowitz uses flesh-and-blood cases — much flesh and even more blood — to evoke the entire sweep of Western sex law, from the savage impalement of an Ancient Mesopotamian adulteress to the imprisonment of Oscar Wilde in 1895 for ‘gross indecency.’ The cast of Judging Desire is as varied as the forms taken by human desire itself: royal mistresses, gay charioteers, medieval transvestites, lonely goat-lovers, prostitutes of all stripes, London rent boys. Each of them had forbidden sex, and each was judged — and justice, as Berkowitz shows, rarely had much to do with it. With the light touch of a natural storyteller, Berkowitz spins these tales and more, going behind closed doors to reveal the essential history of human desire.”
via deviantfemme.tumblr.com
+ Women are most likely to want to have sex at 11 p.m. on a Saturday, a pseudo-scientific study reveals.
+ Rabble.ca has a fantastic discussion of “What I Learned from the Feminist Porn Awards“:
“Few feminist porn films deliver the same understanding of what sex is and what it means as in dominant culture. Directors at the film night were asked to explain whether their movies are really porn, or art. Swedish filmmaker Erika Lust suggested that if porn ‘shows sex,’ then feminist porn ‘eroticizes porn.’ That is, feminist porn ties the display of sex to the bodies and lives of the characters on display. Describing her porn as ‘story-driven,’ Erika said she attempts to answer, ‘who are these people and why are they having sex?’
Feminist porn changes the rules about what can register as erotic, as sexual, and as pornographic. It makes evident the gaps in our cultural capacity to narrativize our sexual experiences and fantasies, as well as in our ability to describe the products of that labour.”
+ Everyone lately is obsessed with g-spot orgasms, but Rachel Rabbit White says the best thing so far:
“Why second guess myself? Well… isn’t that what this science and the media coverage is making me do? As much as I like science about sexuality and our bodies, the whole thing feels like rumination. It also points out how little women are made to feel at ease their bodies, if there were such doubt cast over the clitoral orgasm, would I would wonder if that was real too?
So much of sex is not logical. Sex is whatever you feel and what you make it. It is weird and dreamy and in your head. And when I’ve been able to have them, I have enjoyed the maybe-maybe-not orgasms. Whatever they are, they are real to me. So I guess that is what matters. Probably?”
via ilovelondongirls.com
+ What it’s like to be the partner of someone who writes about exploring non-monogamy on the Internet:
“I like sex too much to limit myself. I love fucking. I LOVE it. It keeps me grounded and helps me fly all at once, and I can’t really imagine fucking one person the rest of my life, as amazing as the person I spend most of my time fucking is. […] The details are complicated, and the growing pains have been difficult, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t choose poly. What it actually means is that we are so steeped in monogamy in this culture, and the cultural walls around monogamy are so rigid, that it took me months (and fucking someone else, if we’re gonna be really honest here) to feel really solid.”
Sinclair Sexsmit & Kristen, photo by Bill Waldman
+ Finally, an excerpt from Lidia Yuknavitch’s “Love Grenade” in Best Sex Writing 2012:
“In the morning we wrapped ourselves in blankets and drank coffee and perched ourselves about. Hannah on the porch railing outside and Chloe in a big overstuffed chair in the main room and me back in bed curled up like a lion who’d just eaten a baby. It would have made a nice photo, three women contented like that, three women waking from their own pleasure without anyone or anything to put them back in their clean and proper place.”
via russfreeman.tumblr.com
Disclaimer: All of the photographs on NSFW Sundays are taken from various tumblrs and do not belong to us. All are linked and credited to the best of our abilities in hopes of attracting more traffic to the tumblrs and photographers who have blessed us with this imagery. The inclusion of a photograph here should not be interpreted as an assertion of the model’s gender identity or sexual orientation. If there is a photo included here that belongs to you and you want it removed, please email our tech director at cee [at] autostraddle dot com and it will be removed promptly, no questions asked.
“Or maybe you just want to look at a gallery of 1920s girls posing with typewriters.”
How did you know
Seriously. I don’t know what it says about me that “1920s typewriter” is the part of this post that got my heart beating the fastest.
Don’t worry, you’re definitely not alone.
I will NEVER be able to wrap my brain around polyamory. I’m sure I will be bashed/criticized for this but if you can’t find everything you need in one person then most likely something is lacking in you.
I guess only as much as you bash and criticize other people because you don’t personally understand/share their motivations. I don’t get people who eat mushrooms, cause I think they’re a fungus and not a food but that doesn’t mean I’m going to tell them there’s something wrong with them. Also, I’m pretty sure that “if you can’t find everything you need in SOMEONE OF THE OPPOSITE SEX then most likely something is lacking in you.” is an argument that’s been used a lot against gay people, so maybe like, don’t be a dick?
Nothing dicky about what I said. I knew someone would somehow parallel homosexuality with polyamory and well I find it amusing because those are some weak parallels. I’m really not going to argue my point so bash away all you want.
“If you can’t find everything you need in one person then most likely something is lacking in you.” <– How is this not dickish on your part? I'm not saying that homosexuality and polyamory are the same thing at all, I'm saying that using an argument like this is reductive, judgmental and discriminatory.
I don’t know if it’s because I now have a face to go with the name..But I’m like “Yeah Disco! You go Disco!” So proud! (wipes away a tear)
Polyamory in theory sounds great! Sadly, I don’t think I could pull it off. But then, even as a wee child, my report cards always stated “Does not share well with others”
You aren’t going to argue your point because you don’t have a point; you just felt like judging some other people today. Which is fine, but own it. The only one ‘bashing’ here is you. You should probably at least be intellectually honest about it.
None of us should be bashing anyone else… we’ve all lived long enough to know how THAT feels!
But much as I hate to admit it, the idea of non-monogamous relationships leaves me confused and slightly repulsed. I wouldn’t want to be with multiple people at once, and I’d resent a partner who was with anybody but me.
Does saying this does not make me a bad person? I think not – I’m just expressing my own feelings (without requiring that anybody else agree or change their own behavior)
See, I don’t think that’s dickish at all. You’re expressing what you personally want and don’t want in a relationship, not calling other people shitty or limited or whatever for wanting what they want. You do you!
It’s definitely not for everyone, but you do you, ya know?
It seems pretty common that people often don’t like what they don’t understand. It’s much easier to put everything in black and white and pick one you like, but most things are many shades of grey.
I’m not sure if I could do it myself, but if every one involved knows what they’re getting into and not being hurt (beyond the normal risks love/relationships bring) I don’t see a problem.
Yep, I totally agree!
To say that polyamory is synonymous with someone who doesn’t know their needs is rather ignorant. It may not be for you and that’s ok, but it doesn’t mean they (those of the polyamory persuasion) lack anything within themselves. I’m of the opinion, that if you look for others to fulfill your needs rather than looking inward, you are going to have a whole lot of other problems to combat with, within your lifetime. No one or thing completes you, YOU complete yourself and it’s only until that is realized at a conscious level, that you begin to understand the very foundation of your relationship with yourself and the world around you. Other people are merely compliments to your already established self and when two people or more come together whether platonic or romantic, as COMPLETE individuals, then that, is a rather beautiful thing.
For me, I began to appreciate and understand polyamory when I thought of a polyamorous group of people as a group of really, really close friends. We all have friend groups; we can all appreciate how fulfilling it is to have a small, tightly knit group of people in which you belong. Pairing up is not considered “natural” when it comes to platonic relationships, so why is it that when sex is thrown into the picture, the model of the friend-group is completely forgotten? In my opinion, though, since it is hard enough to find one other person to be in a romantic relationship with, it seems that finding two or three other people, all of whom are romantically interested in both you and everyone else in the group, would be very difficult.
In general, I think it’s just important to remember that polyamory is not the same as having an open relationship, nor are either of those things the same as simply sleeping around.
Though it isn’t to my style, this is a good point :)
The thing is I don’t agree or disagree, but I don’t get what you mean when you say “lacking in you” I think it’s a pretty vague formula that doesn’t make a lot of sense, it’s a bit overused and cliché in my opinion.
If you don’t understand non-monogamous relationships, then don’t have one. It’s simple! Yaaaayyyy!!
*scissor-bumps Disco*
http://zinelibrary.info/files/infiniterelationships.pdf
If anyone’s interested, this is about non-monogamy in relation to friendships, society, honesty, politics, jealousy, feminism. it’s more about open relationships than polyamory but brings up points that apply broadly. disclaimer: written by a feminist dude, def reads like written by a dude, but still, perspectives!
“I do what I do [as]…a commitment to meeting my own needs and those of others, with no fucking regard to social norms—and to supporting others who do the same thing, whether or not they do it in the same way. Non-monogamy isn’t about sex anyway— it’s a general approach to relationships with people…”
“There are so many landmines hidden in our sexuality, since most of it has been programmed by our enemies…”
“More than anything else, our commitment to supporting monogamy as the only option…keeps us from being honest with each other.”
I am NOT letting angry bees anywhere near my vagina, just not gonna happen
I know right? I read that and immediately thought about what would happen if any of those bees escaped while you were doing your thing with that gourd.
It’s like those ‘broken testtube’ stories you used to hear in school, but with significantly more anaphylatic shock.
harness ? Check
condom ? Check
lube ? Check
epi-pen ? #notworthit
kd15’s not on board.
A+ reference
Bees are very big right now
BEES!?
BEADS?!
We’ll see who brings in more honey!
Old bear! He likes the honey! He never got a chance to see my bee business take off.
Bzz Bzzz
I thought this was called “NSFW Lesbosexy Sunday Is Going Down ON History” and I was very intrigued.
Does it feel good when I touch you on the 1700’s? Yeah, you like that baby. Tell me about that sexy French Revolution of yours
Adds a whole new dimension to historical periodization, right? Terms to rethink: the Age of Discovery, the Romantics, the Dirty Thirties, the Swinging Sixties, etc (though that last one is maybe kind of literal).
P.S. – “Angry Birds”/”Angry Bee’s” just added a whole new meaning in my mind. Imagine an x-rated game called “Angry Bee’s: The Tomb of the Mummy” or some shit akin to Indiana Jones, hahaha.
Are there going to be Angry Birds vibrators now?
You mean there aren’t yet?
Hey that picture on the top is me :P
Haiii girl, haaaaiiii ;)
I’d like to echo this sentiment. Like, really.
Seconded.
Also, on the top but not on the top… get it?
…I am using the theme of this week’s Lesbosexy Sunday as an excuse to re-crown puns as the highest form of humour. You can spank me later.
I really don’t understand how reading this stuff can cause such a disagreement, for goodness sake there’s a gallery of 1920’s women that they’ve given us! lol On another note, IDK how Cleopatra thought of angry bees, I mean geez, is there anything else in ancient times that vibrates without potentially stinging me in the vag?
I suppose angry bees might have been one step up from rattle snakes?
Lmfao if only you could cut off the rattle and it would still shake! Too bad for the ancients, we have good old safe things to do the trick.
I don’t know, I was thinking about ‘mexican jumping beans’ except……
“the robust, yellowish-white larva has the peculiar habit of throwing itself forcibly from one wall to the other, thereby causing the jumping movements of the capsule..”
I saw “larva” and couldn’t help thinking of pinworms.
And Kali is late to the comments as usual…
I think the obvious conclusion here is that Cleopatra was a total badass but also slightly unhinged. Its the sort of reckless and ironically macho thing I could see my girlfriend doing to show how tough she is, “LOL Me so butch I’m putting bees on my genitals!”
Perhaps, but the potential for angry bees busting loose to inject venom via barbed appendages, and tearing out their viscera in the process, is so f-ing METAL.
Mummies, pyramids, a jackal-headed divine lord of the underworld; the culture of Egypt at that time, in general (as presented to non-scholars like myself), was so f-ing METAL.
people will defend serial monogamy, and sexless devotion, until the end of the earth. poly makes its way into minds and bodies that can, want and do handle its transgressions.
we earn those rewards, indeed.
The typewriter pix were a God-send. I was just looking at that old (electric)typewriter collecting dust in my spare room. I knew I kept it for a reason! Now I have some ideas of what I could do with it!
Just throwing it out there.. since all women get turned on by the nighttime according to this post……..(I get off work at 11 pm) and I am not like most women I guess.. . I always want to have sex at high noon!
I’m a 2-3pm girl myself. It’s oddly specific.
I’d like to solve the puzzle Pat, ANAL BEADS!
“_uck _e _n the a_ _ tonight”
I am most likely to want to have sex all of the hours on all of the days.
Is “*going down* in history” a pun or is my cheesy factor just way in tune tonight?
No wonder we keep repeating history, it’s just so much “fun!” LOL!