Many majors are put into classification schemes that limit the options of academic interest. There is often a dichotomy between the average humanities major and the average science major. Yes, clear distinctions tend to help with categorization, but defining majors by either being in the humanities or sciences is fallacious.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines “humanity,” in reference to the academic field, to be “the branch of learning concerned with human culture.” But shouldn’t this definition apply to all majors, then? In chemistry and physics, aren’t we simply studying the effects of humanity and how to better our species and interact with other species? I think that the distinction between humanities and sciences is a bit misleading because it assumes the field of science does not deal with humanity, when in reality science and certain fields of study are all about humanity.

The deciding factor in the debate of whether or not to major in humanities is money. People are generally steered away from majoring in the nonsciences with the justification being that humanities majors do not make as much money as science majors do. But is money really the true matter at hand? I think that worrying about a future salary while still in college is stressful, not to mention extremely petty. Money talk simply fuels the capitalist society in which we live. Before prematurely taking money into account, I find it valuable to reexamine why one pursues an academic career.

Do we go to school to get a better salary or to gain insight as to how we fit into society? Although the former is true, the latter exemplifies the bottom line: Society has normalized higher education. In high school, it feels like the next logical step to reaching adulthood is to enroll in a college of some sort. If we are expected to attain higher education, then we should have the freedom and support to explore different academic fields and focus on whichever pertains to us most. And I also think that it is healthy to leave the postcollege worrying until postcollege, regardless of finances and jobs.

In comparison to a science major, the average humanities major is faced with high unemployment rates and lower average wages. Although this is definitely something to take into account, having motivation will play a stronger role in changing such statistics. Our generation is typically pressured to go into supposedly successful fields such as medicine, law and scientific research — perhaps this will change in five to 10 years, because there might be an abundance of doctors and lawyers vying for the same jobs. Be motivated, and have a passion for what you study and enjoy doing, for young passion and eagerness will help you in the future.

So do all humanities majors go on to become professors in their fields? Definitely not. But many undergraduates in the nonsciences tend to enjoy their field so much that they seek a doctorate in the subject. People have admitted to me their fear of an overpopulation of people with doctorates in the humanities and not enough demand for them. While graduate school is a viable option for students in the humanities, don’t feel limited to a postsecondary education. But if you do find yourself seeking to continue onto a graduate program, the investment can be justified if you have an immense passion for the subject. If you want to go to graduate school for the humanities, do so if the fiery passion is there.

Am I worried about my future? Yes, but who isn’t? Before worrying about post-college, worry about college. I am trying to make the most of my time here at UC Berkeley and enjoy the humanities path. By exploring my academic interests in interdisciplinary fields, I have had the opportunity to further my knowledge of how society functions, and that is something I find invaluable to all “humanities” majors.

We, as college students, have the privilege to explore and choose our futures. Don’t feel obligated to classify yourself in the humanities or sciences binary. Challenge normative and capitalist ideals of the future — your future.

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Off the beat: Confessions of a humanities major appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The video begins with the birth of the main character and travels with her through adolescence. She has two parents of the same gender, but so do all of her friends and family. Nearly everyone is homosexual, with the exception of few people, including the main character. Sexuality “norms” are reversed, and the main character comes to realize that she doesn’t fit in: She is heterosexual and abnormal.

All this too familiar to some queers like myself: The video delves into uncanny scenes depicting bullying, name-calling and pleas for acceptance. But are queer agenda issues really being portrayed?

First of all, it is important to recognize that the video portrays problematic (mis)appropriations of queer identity and unrepresentative portrayals of only white, middle-class folk. Still, it is beneficial because it puts sexuality-based oppression into a different lens — one for the oppressor to relate to. I don’t believe the target audience of the video is the queer crowd fighting for queer agenda and equality, but rather non-queers who are dubious of change.

The video implicitly advocates issues such as marriage equality and calls hatred into question. Personally, it took me a few minutes to realize what was really happening in the video, and it strikingly resembled something familiar to me, being one of those kids coming to realization. Although unfortunately extreme and dramatic, the common themes of bullying and realizing difference play out to highlight the opposers of queer agenda and their unjustified, harmful acts and sayings.

Does a world exist where heterosexuals are similarly oppressed and acting against the “norm”? No, but the video rhetorically employs oppression as such in order to highlight the questionability of sexuality-based oppression. After watching the video, I felt sick to my stomach, but to me this morbid newsflash isn’t anything new. Queer people — and many other marginalized communities — are discriminated against every day. It frustrates me that in order to emotionally portray the frustrations and struggles of the queer community to an outside audience, it is necessary to have so-called heterosexuals play the part. We have to target the oppressors by showing them being oppressed, not the victims.

Watching this video was not an easy thing to do, but something different was definitely brought to the table. I don’t feel auspicious about the video and its political agenda, just because we’ve seen it over and over and over. And not much is changing.

Year after year, I am realizing that although things are getting better, there are countless problems that marginalized communities face every day. Yes, videos such as “Love Is All You Need?” help in promoting awareness and consciousness of the problems communities like the queer ones face, however it is frustrating to me that the way people choose to do so is by relying on heterosexual privilege, those who commonly are the oppressors.

I hope not to come off as “heterophobic” or reversing oppression of any kind, but things aren’t changing fast enough and people are still feeling marginalized and discriminated against. Although “Love Is All You Need?” is a solid attempt to bring queer oppression into a different context, it only highlights the same problems we have been fighting against for years.

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Rhetorical heterophobia appeared first on The Daily Californian.

But not all porn is beneficial, as much of it is falsified and altered to fit a certain commodity framework. However, the porn I’m talking about is porn with a purpose: to excite and educate its viewers, not to replace their personal sex lives.

Porn provides a medium for education, exploration and art. There are so many genres and subgenres of porn out there, ranging from barebacking orgies to softcore to bondage — everyone should be able to find an outlet for sexual creativity in porn. I think that viewers are drawn by intimacy and curiosity of others’ sexual fantasies in order to meld their own.

Recently, I spoke with a friend regarding my sex blog, in particular the implications of being open to discussing sexuaity. The conversation naturally progressed into discussing commitments and pornography — not just theory, but rather social problems. It’s vital to be clear with partners regarding porn usage. If your partner isn’t ok with bringing porn into the relationship, recognize their discomfort and talk it through. Porn is an artistic medium that is immediately shut down when discussed, but there are many pornographic merits that go unspoken. There is awesome radical feminist queer porn, anti-patriarchal sado masochism porn, and porn that interacts with viewers directly (chat rooms, wrestling tournaments, etc.) out there that needs to be spoken about.

Ethical porn can be found at sites like Kink, which so happens to be based in San Francisco in the Mission. I recently toured their studios at the San Francisco Armory and saw magnificent filming sets, learned more about the mechanics and architecture of a pornographic set and discussed the benevolence of a pornography conglomerate such as Kink.

Kink is a BDSM-oriented video business that makes BDSM and bondage more accessible to all. Unlike some other pornographic hubs, Kink makes sure to emphasise “real” porn in that it requires actors to consent and enjoy their work. As long as porn is ethical, which is indeed possible thanks to sites like Kink, porn is an excellent means of communication and exploration.

Although many types of pornography portray exaggerated orgasms and minimal foreplay, remember what type of porn you are referring to. The free stuff is free for a reason: These clips are often excerpts from longer, full-length films. Because some find the orgasms and timeliness of porn to be misleading, their arguments are incoherent in that they usually refer to short segments of a longer, more foreplay- and orgasm-heavy film. It is important to note that much of the commonly used, free pornographic sites purposely cut clips in order to keep providing free material. Just be wary and knowledgeable about what you watch.

Porn-induced erectile dysfunction is a serious problem not to jerk around with. Although there is psychological reasoning behind how one would develop porn-induced erectile dysfunction, I simply believe that the issue lies in an imbalance in the relation between the self and the other. Make sure to make “the self” happy, whether it be by watching porn, masturbating or reading erotica. But also make sure to focus in on the outward relation with “the other” by going out on dates, hitting the bath house or spending time with your partner in bed. I believe that as long as you don’t put too much attention into porn, there should be no worry about developing porn-induced erectile dysfunction.

If you’re an avid porn-watcher and are worrying about your habits unwantedly carrying over into your relationships, I would recommend being clear to your partners as to what exactly you like, consent to and appreciate in the art of pornography.

Image Source: IsabelleTheDreamer via Creative Commons

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Porn with a purpose appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Everyone must masturbate.

And almost everybody does, too, but masturbation is still not typically openly discussed. Instead of embracing it an act of self-exploration, many times people keep it hidden back in the bedroom. But masturbation should be at the forefront of discussion when it comes to sexuality, because it allows people explore their own bodies at their own pace, to whatever feels good.

Masturbation many times is frowned upon more than sex itself is. But how does this make sense? Since masturbation is typically a solo act, why are people more hesitant to discuss masturbation before sex?

Before having sex, you need to masturbate to learn the ropes. Even though many people masturbate before having sex, the act is still hidden. Think back to your pubescent years — was there ever a time that hiding masturbatory habits wasn’t necessary? Maybe it was a family member walking into your room, maybe explaining a cum-stained sock, maybe taking an extra 20 minutes in the bathroom: Masturbation is almost always hidden.

Although I am totally comfortable talking about sex, masturbation time is still not something I declare. I find it interesting that if me or my roommate were to have a partner over, being “sexiled” would be acceptable. But we definitely don’t ask each other to have personal masturbation time. Why is asking for privacy to have sex easier to communicate than asking for privacy to do a little self-exploring?

Think of masturbation as an informative approach to the body, regardless of gender. Masturbation is also commonly viewed as a male-only act, but most women masturbate, too. Because the genital (and anal) regions are so sensitive, it is important to understand their functions, features and feats. And spending a little alone time in the bedroom under the sheets may play itself out to be useful when understanding your body and recognizing when things go wrong.

All of this is not to say that masturbation should be done in public. Private masturbation exists for a reason: in order to permit lengthy quests of self-discovery. But there is a difference between keeping masturbation behind doors and keeping discourse surrounding masturbation behind doors. Maybe it’s time to start sharing what feels good, what techniques or toys one uses, or even what one thinks or watches when masturbating.

I love the topic of masturbation because it is an act that majority of people in the United States engage in. But what is so fascinating about masturbation is that even though I know the person next to me most likely will go home after studying econ to jerk off, it still would be so out of place to openly talk about masturbation preferences and practices.

Being more open to discussing sexual preferences and pleasures would allow people to identify sexual similarities and differences. Sexuality is something that many are not open to talking in public. But think about how great it would be if sexual preference was as common to talk about as food preference. We would be able to understand sex like diet. Talking about masturbation goes hand-in-hand with sexuality and personal identity. The more people communicate about these things, the better they can understand what they like, what their partners like and what others appreciate while having sex.

Be open to discussing masturbation. It’s not bad for you — it’s actually excellent.

Image Source: bjo_ via Creative Commons

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Masturbation talk appeared first on The Daily Californian.

So what exactly are sugar arrangements? Couples are typically put together online on sites like seekingarrangement.com and sugardaddie.com. The “baby” is usually the younger partner and the “parent” the older. Sex is not necessarily put into the equation, but definitely can be. Sugar parents tend to give their baby an allowance, gifts or other goods on a timely basis.

While the possibility of being showered by gifts and money sounds ideal, I have noticed an unfortunate association between sugar couples and prostitution. But this is the hardly the case.

I have a few friends who either were, are or want to be in sugar arrangements. When I first learned about my friends wanting sugar parents, I feared that they would be put in uncomfortable situations. A general misconception of such arrangements is that the babies are forced into doing things they may not willingly choose to do. But my sugar baby friends have only told me of wonderful, consensual experiences. I’m not saying that the opposite never happens, but generally, the nature of a sugar arrangement isn’t a forceful one: Sugar babies and parents both provide a symbiotic exchange, whether based on money or companionship.

I’ve spoken with my sugar baby friends about the distinction between prostitution and sugar babies. Many of them reinforced that even prostitution, under consensual circumstances from all parties, should be a respected and consensual profession. The same goes for sugar arrangements. As long as all parties are in exchange of something during the relationship, a relationship is a relationship.

Prostitution doesn’t refer to only one type of sex work, so it is illogical to make a direct connection between sugar babies and prostitution. The issues are much more complicated than just sex-for-pay. Sugar relationships are continuing exchanges between people; prostitution is typically not continuous nor a mutual exchange.

Now let’s examine the media’s take on sugar couple culture. Website Sfist says that Berkeley students whoring themselves is “haunting” their futures. Interesting. So if a student chooses to engage in such a relationship, it is now considered “whoring.” Problematic whore-calling aside, this article is important in that Sfist calls attention to the changing times of how society defines a relationship. Relationships are no longer strictly the traditional, “true love” style couples, but now sometimes driven by money. But guess what? Marriage can also be driven by money. When critiquing sugar couples, prostitution and marriage, be sure to reexamine what a relationship means, because there are more similarities between the three than one may think.

I wouldn’t shut off your options to looking for sugar parents, as long as you aren’t looking at it for an income. Be sure to make things consensual, and be communicative with your sugar parent(s) to make sure all parties know details of your comfort.

Image Source: bdsmith84 via Creative Commons

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post The marriage of sugar daddies and prostitution appeared first on The Daily Californian.

During my extensive tour, before we delved into the more advanced electronics, we focused on inclusiveness and genderless marketing. Carol Queen made sure to lightly emphasize that cock rings (or rather just rings), for example, can be placed on a phallic body part, not necessarily a penis. I had never thought about anatomy lying on a spectrum like gender identity. Sex toys too are gendered and can be found problematic, but Good Vibes tries to eliminate gender problems when shopping for sex. Good Vibes is definitely the place to be to feel appreciated regardless of gender or sex identity.

Although we may not live in a post-gender society, one of my favorite modern theorists Donna Haraway argues that post-gender implies that humans are cyborgs — technologically-embedded beings. Although it sounds like science fiction, think about it: With all the growing and changing technology today, it is a bit spooky that humans are adapting to code their brains as like computers. While society may not be ready to move into a post-gender realm, we are ready to move into the cyborgian realm of electronic sex.

Foreign, nonhuman objects have been used for sexual pleasure for years. Back in the nineteenth century, vibrators were used to supposedly cure women of hysteria. And thus the vibrator was invented out of yet another patriarchal institution. We are humans, we have pleasure points and erogenous zones, therefore we should be able to please ourselves in whatever way feels best — maybe from body-to-body contact, maybe from object-to-body contact. Is society moving into an cyborgian age where technology cannot escape the bedroom?

I believe that it is fun and healthy to incorporate robotic extensions into one’s sex life. While in conversation with Carol Queen about the worries of using too much technology, I pondered the possibility of a negative consequence to using too much technology for sex. I asked her about her opinions of bodily versus technological contact. Her views: “Having it both ways gives us more knowledge and greater degrees of flexibility in our erotic choices”. So be sure to try it with and without electronics: You never know what you will like best.

It is important not to allow the common association between females and vibrators to deter anyone from using a sex toy, regardless of gential status. At Good Vibes, I was pleased to see that their collection of vibrators and pulsators did not include solely phallic-shaped objects. I found vibrators that looked like penises, mushrooms, dolphins, cylinders, you name it! But it doesn’t stop there; vibrators are not meant only to be placed in an orifice. You can put vibrators in the vagina, on the vulva, on the corona, in the anus, on the perineum – the list is endless. Use sex toys wherever feels good to you.

I’m not too worried about technology overcoming body-to-body experiences. Sex toys provide another form of pleasure for many, so why not use them to our advantages? To quote Carol Queen in an email response: “To the person who finds out their significant other is using a toy: Please don’t make the mistake of thinking that it’s about you. It’s just about their own desire and response. It’s a wonderful extra in a relationship to be able to share someone’s path to orgasm — however they get there — and you can learn a LOT by watching someone with their favorite toy.”

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Do vibrators behold the future of sex? appeared first on The Daily Californian.

So maybe the pope won’t have a direct impact on how I fuck here in the U.S., but he is an international figure, so he must contribute to some influence, right? Media sources in the U.S. went wild on Wednesday to publicize Pope Francis’ history of homophobia and anti-gay marriage campaigns. I mean, is anyone really surprised? Were people honestly expecting the pope to emerge for the first time and say “Hey gurl hey?” I’m more worried about the juxtaposition between a rapidly-changing, progressive world and a conservative pope who is resistant to change.

I’m used to dealing with the conflict sexuality and the church. Being from a religiously-driven hometown, at times I felt as if I was one of the only liberals there. I am the oldest of four kids, so in high school having sex wasn’t the most ideal thing to do in my house. My partners and I would have stereotypical car sex, but with a twist: at a church. Although my farm town had only a mini-mart and gas station, we had churches on nearly every corner, so why not have kinky sex in church parking lots? Thinking back, it now seems coincidental that me, the gay atheist was having hot sex at a hate-filled church. Why does there exist a clash between the disapproving church and queer people?

Such a tension is epitomized by Pope Francis through his clear disapproval of gay marriage, gay adoption and gays in general. My problem with this is not the homophobic remarks, but rather the homonormative remarks. Media sources are only referring to statements regarding “gay” individuals, and not the general queer population, implying that if one isn’t heterosexual, one is homosexual. Media perpetuates the falsified sexuality binary between these two orientations. Sexuality is not a spectrum between heterosexual and homosexual, it is something that cannot be categorized at all by institutional binaries.

Because Pope Francis is Argentinian and Jesuit, many believe that this selection is a step in the positive direction, hoping for inclusion of the Church in the modern world. In addition, his unusual choice of the name Francis caught the public’s eye. If that wasn’t enough to shock the conservative, he began his first official speech with “good evening” and concluded with “good night,” something unheard of. But where is the progression away from conservative sexual repression, pope?

Francis said in response to a bill regarding marriage equality in Argentina: “Let’s not be naive, we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.” How about pedophilic abuse within the Catholic Church? I am so sick of the church shaming queers from misinterpretation of their holy book. Let’s talk about the double-standard churches use when abusing their own youth.

In all faith, it is important to accept people for who they are, regardless of identity, sexuality or piousness. My purpose is not to spread hateful discourse on the religious at all. However, I don’t think that we can look up to the Catholic Church for a progressive answer to religious oppression. Although it is wonderful that the Church is working towards implementing a more diverse enclave of pontiffs by choosing Pope Francis, I wasn’t too thrilled to see the white smoke.

Image Source: Catholic Church (England and Wales) via Creative Commons

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Mr. Pope and my sex life appeared first on The Daily Californian.

But in recent weeks, some small steps have been made to alleviate this situation. The state of Massachusetts now permits school children to choose which restroom or sports team matches their gender preference, not their biological sex. Congress renewed the Violence Against Women Act, which includes protections for trans* people who are victims of domestic abuse.

Trans* (with an intentional asterisk) includes all people who do not conform to a society’s traditional gender/sex alignment. The asterisk signifies the inclusion of all terms similar to transgender, transsexual and genderqueer, among others. Being trans* is larger than just gender but not quite as encompassing as sexuality. Using trans* is appropriate in most situations, because it generally implies a lack of societal alignment between gender and biological sex. The term is used to be as inclusive as possible, regardless of surgery or genitalia status or other factors.

While society is making progress on recognizing a separation between biological sex and gender presentation, not everyone is on the same page.

Fox News host Bill O’Reilly recently mocked the Massachusetts inclusion directive, saying that policies that allow children to express their trans* identity without notifying their parents are “truly madness.” O’Reilly demeans trans* issues, as if being trans* were like choosing to wear pants or a dress. Being trans* is not a choice — it is an identity that struggles for recognition in our gendered society. Trans* individuals deserve the rights of gender expression that Western culture is finally beginning to accept. So Mr. O’Reilly: Fuck off.

Although the UC system and UC Berkeley have taken actions to create an inclusive atmosphere for trans* people, more work can be done to improve our campus. For example, the UC Student Health Insurance Plan covers offers gender confirmation and hormone therapy treatments. That’s good news, but what about restrooms? It seems like we could adopt more gender-neutral or single-person restrooms on the UC Berkeley campus. Many trans* individuals may fear using traditional public restrooms due to humiliation, safety and retaliation from those using the restrooms. But there aren’t any simple solutions to complete inclusion — society is extremely gendered.

Since many trans* people are called something different from what was given at birth, how do names play in politics? My registered name on bSpace posts, classroom rosters and Cal1 Card is Matthew, but what if my desired name were something different? Trans* people risk being “outed” in all of these situations, unless they go through the trouble of warning instructors or ultimately getting legal name changes. Think about the first day of class: Trans* students may have had to contact their professor before coming to class to ensure they will be called by their desired name. The environment at Cal for trans* students is far from perfect.

Regardless of gender presentation, name or identity, we are all humans, all trying to get along with one another. Although I do not identify as trans* and have the privilege of being cisgender, I empathize and hope that one day, Cal will be entirely inclusive of the trans* community.

Image Source: МОЛОКО  via Creative Commons

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post A trans* (national) issue appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Public sex is a turn-on to many, whether in Memorial Stadium, a parking lot or a bathhouse. The risk of being caught while being so naughty is definitely a turn-on, at least for me. It’s hot, fresh and definitely exciting. But there’s a difference between complete publicity in sex, say in a crowded parking lot, and semi-publicity, let’s say in a sex club. Although both are public, both have the allure of anonymity’s power.

A strange quasi-public essence exists in the bathhouse, one might find, and that same quasi-publicity can just as easily be found online.

From the heteronormative drama on UC Berkeley Hook-Ups to its response, the sometimes too politically-correct UC Berkeley Consent, to also what you read on Sex on Blogday, Cal students are obsessed with putting our sex lives on display. Although the pages aren’t necessarily deemed as public sex, how do these kiss and tell pages reflect the collapse of the public/private binary and the creation of its spectrum?

Some bathhouses ban sexual acts in the public (i.e. in the halls or spa facilities), only allowing people to engage in sexual acts within private rooms. Facebook pages such as the aforementioned are like bathhouses: When sex is public and people can be identified, it is not acceptable; when sex is behind doors and partners decide if they want to identify themselves, it then is acceptable.

But I find it problematic to “anonymously” contribute to an online discourse of sexuality when it exposes sexual partners to a perhaps unwilling surprise of identification. I might feel comfortable hooking up, but when do I give my partner permission to anonymously write about it? When people post stories so descriptive that others can identify the supposed “anonymous” hook-up, where do public rights come into play?

I don’t mean to say that one can equate public sex to Facebook exploitations per se, but I do mean that there is a lack of privacy in our day and age when it comes to sexual discourse. One can’t hook up anymore without fearing that their partners will share an embarrassing story to then have friends Facebook tag them in. Think of revenge porn: After breaking-up, we now might fear that our ex will leak photos us to the web. It happened to Scarlett Johansson, and it could happen to you. What if I like sex to be private and non-identifiable? I don’t think we can remove ourselves from technology enough to maintain a dualized distinction between public and private.

Scandalous hookups on Facebook are no longer light-hearted kiss and tells, but rather discursive chalkboards. Many find an innocence to hook-up pages due to their supposed anonymity and resulting explicit nature. While I agree they can be fun, entertaining and quite frankly addicting, how fun is it when someone doesn’t consent to having their name publicly tagged to an embarrassing situation on one of these sites? I don’t mean to be a party-pooper, but the discourse surrounding sex via Facebook is flat-out trashy and exemplary of a lack of consent, whether sexually or identificatory.

Once something is on the Internet, it never leaves. The rising popularity of these confession pages highlights modern dependence on technology and the transition from the bedroom to the message board. I recommend not contributing to these threads, that is unless your partner has expressed consent to their possible identification. If you have something to share, make sure all parties are aware of what you put out on the Internet.

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Public or private? Facebook and bath houses appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Yet anal sex is often seen as only appropriate for homosexual men and adventurous women. Why doesn’t everyone enjoy it more frequently? Why does such a large taboo surround anal sex?

Fewer than 5 percent of people living in the United States had anal sex during their last sexual encounter. Another fact: The anus has about the same number of nerve endings as the clitoris. So I guess females can enjoy anal sex as much as males, if not more, right?

Sigmund Freud categorized the time of infancy from 18 months to three years as the Anal Stage, the time when infants learn to control their anal region. We as humans make daily use of our anuses on the toilet. All in all, the anus plays a large role in our daily lives, whether for necessity or pleasure.

When I talk to my friends about sex, I like to eventually talk about anal sex due to its unexplored nature. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve joked with my queer womyn roommate about how viable anal play is for her, but for some reason I can never seem to persuade her — it just comes off as a joke. Why is it so difficult and weird to think about?

I need to clear the air: Shit shouldn’t play an unintentional role in anal sex. The anal region includes internal and external sphincters (the asshole), the anal canal and eventually the colon. The colon is home to feces — so essentially, it is the last stop you would be making when engaging in anal sex of any sort. Feces only lie in the anal canal (prime penetration area) when taking a dump, so there should be no worry about encountering feces, that is unless one was on the toilet before plunging in. The prostate, while only being present in males, serves a reproductive and pleasure purpose, but doesn’t prevent females to enjoy anal sex as equally.

But anal sex is not something to jump right into. The anal sphincters are not as elastic as the labia in female genitalia, so don’t think you can treat you anus like you would a vulva. If you are emotionally and physically ready to enjoy anal sex, be sure to have plenty of lube on hand. The vagina, unlike the anorectal area, is self-lubricating, so be careful and be prepared before going in. Damage can include anal fissures, hemorrhoids or even damage to the sphincters (trust me, these are not pleasurable). Be sure to take it slow, and be communicative with your partner to make sure they are enjoying every step of it as well.

It makes sense why society has shunned people away from engaging in anal play: Not only does there exist an association to shit, but there also exists an association to gay male culture. While there does lie a deep-seated form of homophobia in the taboo against anal sex, it is crucial to remember that anal sex does not require a penis or phallus-shaped object of any sort. Toys such as anal plugs, dildos and anal beads exist for a reason.

Anal sex is a difficult subject to publicly discuss in part due to the shaming of the anorectal area, whether one laughs at the passing of gas, is ashamed of their shit or even is embarrassed to have their ass seen. Although it is a mighty taboo, if you do overcome it, you may find that anal play can be extremely pleasurable, opening up a new light to your own body.

Image Source: Vectorportal via Creative Commons

Contact Matthew Kirschenbaum at mkirschenbaum@dailycal.org or follow him on Twitter: @mpkirschenbaum.

The post Is anal for the abnormal? appeared first on The Daily Californian.