index


Message-ID: <45569asstr$1069755005@assm.asstr-mirror.org>
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418
From: Carol <cobillard@hotmail.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: {ASSM} A New Paradigm for Childraising?
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 05:10:05 -0500
Path: assm.asstr-mirror.org!not-for-mail
Approved: <assm@asstr-mirror.org>
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.moderated,alt.sex.stories
Followup-To: alt.sex.stories.d

"Many parents are criminally negligent. They neither teach their children
truths pertaining to sex nor do they quarantine against misinformation,
obscenity and stories of sexual perverts....

"Sex desire is aroused by physical and mental influences, of which the
mental is far the greater. The maintenance of passion is impossible without
mental consent and aid. In a high state of passion, desire will instantly
subside if the mind is wholly and suddenly withdrawn from all thought of
sex.

Wm. A. McKeever, T.W. Shannon, and Louise Francis Spaller, "Personal Help
for Men" (1924), quoted at
http://web.morons.org/menagerie/books/helpmen7.jsp

.                          -------------------

I start this essay with an abridgement of the foreword I copied from a book
for parents by a psychologist with an agenda for teen sex issues:

.                          -------------------
 
A New Paradigm for Childraising: Sexual Satisfaction Without Shame or
Hindrance, Puberty to Adulthood


By John Smith, Ph.D.

Tijuana, B.C.
1998


FOREWORD

This book, the fruit of thirty years of experience as psychologist working
with patients afflicted with sexual and relational dysfunction, proposes a
new approach to childrearing: the freeing of children from guilt over their
natural emotions and urges, the return of a regime of pre-Judo-Christian
freedom of expression and the recognition of adolescents rights to personal
autonomy and sexual expression. My findings and my recommendations can be
summed up in a few phrases:

-- proper sex education beginning at birth: parents should both explain and
show their children, from the earliest age, the nature and function of
genitals and their physical expression of love and romance

-- casual nudity within the family: not persistent naturism, but rather
incidental visibility of the naked body of all ages, whether by walking nude
from bathroom to bedroom or by family recreation in sauna, hot tub, Jacuzzi
or swimming pool

-- from puberty, access to similarly-minded teens for safe experimentation,
with parental supervision

-- maximization of female empowerment in matters of sex and of access to
orgasm. This implies that children should know from an early age that oral
sex is right and good, and that females should be able to direct the
progress of sex relations to assure themselves pleasure and satisfaction.

The fact is that over one quarter of teens admit to having had sex before
they reach age 16. Many girls will have been victimized by coercion, and
most of this is out of ignorance. We found that supervision of first coitus
by parent or peers tends to orient control in favor of the female, and that
this empowerment subsists for life. With the knowledge of male physiology
gained from early occasional nudity, and educated as to physiological and
psychological responses to fellatio and cunnilingus, the adolescent partners
we examined and monitored over the years evidenced more satisfactory teen,
college, pre-marital, courtship and marital sexual relationships because of
their early familiarity with the body and with sex. Parents must be aware of
their children: of their bodies and of their minds, and must engage their
children with trust and understanding. The outcome of this is that children
will confide in them and will rely on their parents for guidance. It will be
obvious to both when the child is ready to initiate sex, and invariably she
and he will want the comfort and protection of others -- family or friend --
present. This is nothing if not an end to the hypocrisy of "white weddings"
of couples who have been having sex for years and who may soon divorce
anyway: the real watershed and the real rite of passage is the time of first
coitus and the fresh beauty of new sexual maturity. This does not in the
slightest detract from the "right of privacy" of the child or young adult:
that right is susceptible to wavier, and indeed is superfluous when the
child, raised in an atmosphere and a spirit of total understanding and
confidence, wants to celebrate her or his new adulthood. Virginity itself
may be trivial, but the physical act of its rejection involves a new, and
hopefully ecstatic, event. First coitus invariably involves pre-event
anxiety, but it also opens a window of delight for the adolescent and
vicarious pleasure for the friend and the parent. The parental role in this
event should be celebrated; and neither religion nor the law has a role to
play in the matter of voluntary and happy defloration at any age
post-puberty. 

It is the essence of our childraising principles that children should grow
to and through puberty and adolescence loving people, loving their own
bodies and those of persons of the opposite sex, and being comfortable in so
doing. Confidence, it is submitted, gives rise to self-worth as well as to
sexual satisfaction and general well-being.

Copyright (C) 1998 by John Smith

.                          -------------------

In this series of essays I have been reminiscing, with reference to my
childhood diaries, of growing up with my Mom, child of the 60s, who had been
a member of the Children of God and left the church after I was born. I deal
with the subject of women who became committed to 60s commune- and
sect-based free love principles and tried to recapture that for their own
children. Mom and her friends were (mostly) single moms who were concerned
not only with preserving the right of personal autonomy in matters of sex,
but extending it to all adolescents. This implied not only the right of
every adolescent to engage in safe sex, but the right of every girl to say
yes or no or to condition her consent on her own attainment of pleasure in
the act. This latter option, as readers of previous essays will know,
implicates oral sex, and girls' attitudes towards it. And that returns the
subject, circularly, to mothers and the way they raise their boys and girls,
and, from toddlerhood, familiarize them with penis, vagina, orgasm and
semen: in short, with sex and human delight as they will be relevant to them
beginning at puberty.

The present essay deals with a "between" generation, kids who are in their
teens now and who have grown up in sexually-aware and -liberal households.
It was inspired by a friend and colleague in London (where I spent a few
days recently on business) and who recently couriered me over a DVD recorded
with a TV program from the UK's Channel 4 on November 16, 2003, entitled
"Adult at 14: Sex Before 16: Why the Law is Failing"
http://www.channel4.com/health/microsites/A/adultat14/consent/consent.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/wako

The program mentions that in Chile the age of consent is 12, in Spain it's
13 and in California it's 18. It's 12 in Mexico too, so I don't know why
they made such a fuss over Roman Polanski.
http://ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/02/1046540066443.html
In Alabama, the minimum age for marriage is 14 with parental consent
http://family-law.freeadvice.com/al_parental_consent.htm
However, a boy over 16 who has sex with a girl under 16 is guilty of a
crime, and the Alabama legislature neglected to provide an exception for
married couples:
http://www.ageofconsent.com/alabama.htm

(In Afghanistan, by the way, the legal age for marriage is supposed to be 16
http://www.unwire.org/Features/Columns/522_9104.asp
but I happen to know that lots of girls are married off at 10, and so long
as they have a pubic hair or menses, Islam agrees. After all, wasn't
Mohammed 52 and Aisha 9 when they married and had sex? (From Bukhari's
Hadith, vol. 7, book 62, number 88
http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/mhmd.htm
http://forumhub.com/expr/8629.12.41.13.html
http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/muhammad.html
Well, apologists for Islam deny it, but Bukhari is well respected writer of
hadiths and he's cited often enough by Islamists promoting political Islam
when it suits them:
http://www.submission.org/women/Aisha.html
And I believe it. But then I've seen lots of 9-year-olds capable of sex; I
just don't believe ANY 9-year-old is emotionally ready for it. Plus the age
difference: isn't that, ipso facto, pedophilia? Well, there's a treatise, or
rather an apologia, on that I found, although I haven't read more than a few
paragraphs of it, enough for my purposes, because the "Paedophile
Information Exchange" turns out to be quite a notorious agency for the
promotion of boy-love and child abuse:
http://www.geocities.com/transrescen/radcase/radcase.html

(When you reach the end of this essay you will see why I have dwelt at such
length with Mohammed, his child bride and, by extension, Muslims' abuse of
women.)

Yet average age of first sex is actually lower in California than in either
of the other two jurisdictions mentioned in the program. I agree with the
program's argument that the British bill that will outlaw kids playing "kiss
chase" (not for health reasons, as in the URL below, but as sexual
harassment; but, hey, they once banned "Baa Baa Black Sheep" in Britain as
racist)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/289413.stm
http://www.lankester.force9.co.uk/loony.htm
and could put in jail or in care and on the sex offenders register for life
two 14-year olds who even without having sexual intercourse simply grope and
kiss, is not only stupid, but, well, criminal. Georgia and a few other US
states (or perhaps many other states: do a Google search for the phrase
"third degree criminal sexual conduct") would possibly do that to kids who
dared put penis in vagina (or -- horrors -- penis in mouth), but I should
have thought Europeans above that stupidity. (And, happily, the Georgia
Supreme Court has set some limits on the prosecution of private, consensual
sex, at least where the lovers are 16 and over: In re J.M., 278 Ga. 88, 575
S.E.2d 441 (2003)
http://archive.aclu.org/court/jm.pdf
("the government may not reach into the bedroom of a private residence and
criminalize the private, non-commercial, consensual sexual acts of two
persons legally capable of consenting to those acts". Bravo; but the sad
thing here is that when the mother of the girl walked into the room while he
seemingly had his penis still in the girl's vagina, he should feel the need
to jump out the window and run away.) And see:
http://journalism.medill.northwestern.edu/docket/02-0102sexstats.html
("America's sex statutes -- out of the closet and onto the court's docket").

Remember the case of the Swiss kids whose parents had to rush them back to
Switzerland from Colorado because of the intervention of busybody neighbors
after the boy touched his sister's crotch (the details are sketchy)? The
Swiss Embassy used to have a comment on the case at their web site; it's
gone now, but you can read about the case, and see a photo of the accused,
scared kid, at:
http://www.kenlayne.com/1999/1115_jailingraoul
("In Boulder, Colorado, it's fairly easy to rape and kill your 6-year-old
beauty queen daughter without much hassle from the law, but down the road in
Jefferson County -- home of Adolph Coors, the horrible Rocky Flats nuclear
weapons site, and bland Littleton-esque suburbs for Denver commuters -- the
cops deal swiftly with crime against kiddies.")

But perhaps the British are not, after all, real Europeans. Didn't they
welcome Dubya to Buckingham Palace? Anyway, the UK Government's position is
set out at:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/justice/sentencing/sexualoffencesbill
And the BBC's interpretation of current law is at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onelife/personal/relationships/sexlaw.shtml
I think it's just another attempt to put people generally in a position of
illegality so that the police, the social engineers and your neighbors can
harass you, indeed have you prosecuted, at will. Imagine accusing two
13-year-olds who just had sex that each of them just committed a felony --
statutory rape -- by having sex with the other. Teen pregnancy will become
ipso facto proof of commission of a crime, and we're in the same position as
the crazy Nigerian Muslims (and I suppose Muslims in a lot of other places
too) who would prosecute for adultery the victim of rape.
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/09/25/nigeria.stoning
and see, generally,
http://www.secularislam.org/women/shame.htm
But never mind the uncivilized world, I always thought that Singapore was
kind of neat, and I would dearly love to stay at Raffles. But, Dear Reader,
read section 377 of the Singapore Penal Code:

"Unnatural offences.

"377. Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature
with any man, woman or animals, shall be punished with imprisonment for
life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, and
shall also be liable to fine.

"Explanation.

"Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to
the offence described in this section.

"Outrages on decency.

"377A. Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the
commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male
person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years."
http://tinyurl.com/vjbt

And, see what happens when you get caught: a police sergeant solicited a
girl in an Internet chat room to give him oral sex, and he got two years in
jail for his pleasure. Whether she was of legal age (16) or not seems to be
in dispute, but oral sex is never legal in Singapore. I am not going there.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,220025,00.html
And never mind it's one of the world's most sexually active nations
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/031116/80/ee2a2.html
and that I happen to think that Emily ("Singabloodypore") Lloyd is great.
http://www.singabloodypore.blogspot.com
The subject matter of that movie (a fifteen year old girl discovers
adolescence and sex in Post-War Britain) is, of course, dear to my heart.

My argument has always been that consensual sex, oral or vaginal (I don't
like to think about any other kind, and I'm not Queen Victoria (who, for
those uninformed, couldn't imagine was lesbians did; the Internet wasn't
born yet, and she didn't have access to cool Web sites like
http://www.vaginaverite.com )),
is fine between two kids of the same age, any time after puberty. And I
think that kids and their parents, if they are on the same wavelength, are
best placed to work out together when and how to begin. Mothers especially
are sensitized to these issues. And there is no doubt that mothers directly
influence the sexuality and the sexual activity of their children
http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/parenting/09/04/teen.sex

When parents have been discussing sex, and sexual development, with their
kids from the time they learned to talk, kids find it perfectly normal to
confide in them in that way: to show off an erection or a first pubic hair,
a wet dream, to discuss arousal, urges and ejaculation. That openness
enables those parents who believe in early sex to arrange introductions and,
indeed, liaisons. When the kids are physically able, their prior
conditioning has made them eager, and they enter onto the teen party
circuit, which means frequent opportunity for sex. I have written several
times about those mothers who take pride in watching their boy's penis made
erect and swoon as it enters a girl's vagina. For them, being at a
defloration party is the highlight of their, and the child's, life, boy or
girl. (This is not to say that such parties were very common, because, in
fact, they were not. But what they were was remarkable, memorable, lovely.
The banalization of oral sex, however, made them redundant: at least since
the Monica Lewinsky-Clinton affair, fellatio isn't characterized by kids as
"sex", so for many girls the first experience of putting a boy's penis in
her mouth has ceased to be an "event".
www.agi-usa.org/pubs/journals/3229800.pdf )
For some it may be an intellectual challenge between societal norms and what
she knows is right. But for nearly everyone in our circle there is no
ambiguity: there is nothing but pride and delight to see one's boy or girl
in the throes of sex. Each orgasmic twinge of their progeny makes a mother
shiver sympathetically; the boy's semen dripping out of the girl's vagina is
a reaffirmation of her own giving of life a dozen or more years before.

To me, however, it is the foreplay that is most heartwarming. To see two
teenagers fresh from puberty offer their bodies to each other, entrusting
their bodies, their emotions and their future lives to their parents'
judgment, is fantastic. Far from the outside world that is obsessed with
original sin and the dirtiness of sex, for me, as for my Mom, to see a new
young penis eager to achieve its potential -- a penis perhaps not yet fully
grown -- to see it rise before the girl who has consented to make love to
it, was thrilling. Boy and penis may be apprehensive: perhaps his penis is
wavering, not yet fully erect. The girl takes it in her mouth, kisses,
sucks, massages it with lips and tongue, and makes it as big and as stiff
and beautiful as it can possibly be, exciting the boy terribly. This was, in
those days, the most important, the most exciting adventure of her life.
When she has made the penis hard and perhaps tasted its seminal fluid, she
signals that it is her turn to be kissed, and he finds her clitoris, and
loves her vagina to bits, exploring it with his tongue. Approaching climax,
she knows it is time. And then they, a couple, are joined as one, the boy's
penis inside the girl, her hymen is gone, and the penis rises and falls.
Then, as the boy looks wondrously startled, he ejaculates and the two lovers
fall together in delirious happiness. Even if it's not a planned event but a
spontaneous intimacy, a presentation and acceptance of penis in mouth for
the first time, perhaps at the urging of girlfriends glad to recruit a boy
from their circle, and with their support and love surrounding the couple,
is sensuous, beautiful, heartwarming, unforgettable, exciting. I think of a
group of 13-, 14- and perhaps the odd 15-year old; and maybe on their
friend's birthday they bring in her present: a boy, and they undress him,
and he undresses her, and his penis rises in proportion to her state of
undress, and she has to explore and kiss it, and she is overcome by its
presence and its authority, and suddenly her mouth is filled with the warmth
of his ejaculation. Her friends celebrate her new status, and the celebrate
the penis and the boy.

I have always been outraged by society's relegation of the tumescent penis
to "pornography", beacause even as a little girl I was conditioned to think
of it as special. I knew, and I know, that a girl's first acknowledgement,
and acceptance, of a proffered penis in front of family and friends is the
greatest act of romantic love that we know. For her finally to feel the
semen flowing inside her confirms her femininity and her validity as sexual
partner. Ours may be a minor subculture in the scheme of things, but it is
one that is indescribably beautiful and rewarding for its adherents. I am
afraid that my essays are unable to convey the difference sexual openness
and understanding make to lifelong sexual pleasure. Those who are unable or
unwilling to give orgasm -- and semen -- the place they deserve as public
markers of love and joy have done inestimable damage to individual psyches
and to society and its justice system.

The urge and need for sex is normal, even banal, and the casual satisfaction
of that urge taken for granted: the boys and girls know their parents enjoy
seeing them in embrace, in foreplay and in coitus. I was reminded of this
when, recently, I spent a day and a half with a progressive family whose
name had been given me by Rev. Mary.
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2003/45030

I wanted to see how parents who lacked the institutional support of a church
such as Rev. Mary's (or, for that matter, Moses David's) arranged early
liaisons on behalf of adolescent kids. (It's worth repeating here that all
the kids I have written about, whether from my own past or my current
observations, have been from educated, professional families -- allowing of
course for the anomaly of the Children of God, and what happened to those
who, like my Mom, were taken away from college and gave up their future for
a prophet whom many came to consider a charlatan. I have no doubt that less
among less well-off and less-educated families there is also a current of
sexual liberalism, but at this point I have not had a chance to observe it
because I haven't got the appropriate contacts.)

It goes without saying that most kids in the wider world get started on sex
on their own at whatever age the opportunity first arises, and parents, if
they know anything at all about what their kids are doing until long after
the fact, have little to say about it. Indeed, they would be years too late
if they tried to intervene. (Hey, what are child beauty queens like Jonbenet
Ramsey being raised for, if not for early sex?) The "American public", for
whom the social engineers speak, would not tolerate anything else: it
insists upon abstention and denial by parents. There are 100 million
families in America, and I don't suppose more than a few tens of thousand of
them would agree that parental duties include helping, rather than
restraining, their pubescent and adolescent offspring get a head start on
sex with advance information and observation. And I cite a range that high
only because I happen to know that many thousands of mothers coach their
daughters in matters of seduction, brief them on fellatio techniques, and
debrief them after each date, trying to assure a good match, perhaps one
above their station. These mothers are deemed "mainstream". Thousands of
others have sex in front of the children, out of necessity or out of
conviction. And if you follow the logic of the essay "Christianity and Sex"
published by The Family (successors to the Children of God), having sex in
front of the children will demonstrate parental devotion to each other and
the ecstasy those parents felt at the moment of conception.

"The sexual intimacy of parents is the power base of their children's
identities, including their sexual identities. It grounds their emotional
health and maturity, their overall enjoyment of life, and their faith in
God, Who is Love."
http://www.thefamily.org/dossier/books/book5/main.htm

Even kids who pretend to ignore the intrusion of adult sex in their presence
learn from it and make use of the knowledge at puberty. Kids who have grown
up around sex since infancy take it as normal, just as farm kids take for
granted animal copulation (and, for that matter, animal slaughter). The
little kids at Mom's Friend's House encountered sex all the time. They saw
their parents (or their mother and her partner), and they saw the teens.
They knew that an erect penis meant love, that it belonged in mouth or in
vagina, and they knew that the female who made love to it would give and
receive ecstasy. Just as I grew up taught that mutual oral sex was the
epitome of giving and receiving orgasm, so did all the other kids, because
teens among us -- like Older Girl -- were doing it all the time and she and
other girls wanted to be seen doing it, wanted us to see her vagina high in
the air, dilated and open and a boy's tongue nearby, while she slowly,
sensuously, took that boy's penis into her mouth, ran her tongue around it,
and took it out again. When the semen came she would want to show that off,
too, and want us to remark on the sensuous way she swallowed it.

Teens were always toying with semen, girls showing their tongue coated with
it, licking a penis coated with it, and so on. And beyond that, of course,
were the younger boys who masturbated and were proud of any semen they might
produce, even a drop, and little girls who experimented with their bodies or
showed them off to each other, perhaps demonstrating how they would insert a
tampon, or what they would do someday with some boy's penis. "Shameless sex"
was not a pejorative remark with us, nor should it ever be: shame, if it
exists, is in hypocrisy or deception, never in mutual pleasure and delight.
It is because boys, when younger, had seen the female anatomy in such close
detail and in such lovely a context that they were so ready when their time
came to do whatever was needed with tongue and lips at clitoris and vagina,
to bring us to climax. I argue, then, that mothers who live with their sons
under circumstances where the boys do not get to see oral sex in progress
have an obligation to show those boys, when still very little, their bodies
and their anatomy, inside and out. And, whether they have a permanent
partner or not, to contrive to make love, including having oral sex, within
his view, taking time to smile over at him so that he understands what joy
is being consummated. A mother I met from outside once said that she "knew
it was time to stop walking round naked" when her little boy asked to see
her vagina again. That's ridiculous: I would have complied at once, and
probably contrived to have sex in front of him again as soon as possible so
he could see how it works. I think it worthwhile here to cite advice found
on a Mexican Web site. (The age of consent in Mexico is 12; Mexico is far
more progressive than the USA in these matters. Indeed, a number of
sexually-liberal American families have bought second homes there in order
to practice their principles without fear of the social engineers
intervening.)

"A medida en que el ni�o vea el sexo como algo natural, sin tab�es o
informaci�n distorsionada, su concepci�n sobre el sexo le permitir�
relacionarse de una manera sana." (To the degree to which a child sees sex
as natural, without taboos or distorted information, his or her view of sex
will be such to permit of healthy [future sexual] relations.) How refreshing
that is.
http://www.sexo.com.mx/article/archive/2

How many, like Moses David, Mom's Friend, Mom and I -- and like Rev. Mary
and others I have mentioned in these essays -- promote the concept of sex
without guilt, sex without shame, sex early and often, perhaps sex as divine
intervention? Nobody can say. As Dr. Smith writes, however, young, unguided
and experimental sex is neither safe nor, necessarily, genuinely consensual;
parental supervision is essential. And, especially for girls, the road to
orgasm is not necessarily obvious. The family I visited and write of in this
essay was part of what one might label an underground movement, where
parents arranged visits among young kids until they found a pair that hit it
off. A few weeks or a month later, another visit would be arranged and this
time the kids would have sex. It really wasn't all that different from the
defloration parties I used to see at Mom's Friend's House. The boy's and the
girl's mother might help their kids get undressed, compliment the two
adolescents on their bodies, and would then guide the two to oral and
vaginal sex and, one hoped, a wonderful life thereafter with whichever
partners fate, or God, might decree. Lest one doubt the value of maternal
intervention, I quote an article on Naomi Wolf about how she disposed of her
virginity clinically, without maternal assistance or advice, and without
much delight:

"At age 15, Naomi Wolf tells us, she followed the responsible, 'healthy,'
medically approved approach to getting rid of her virginity. With her
boyfriend, she went to a clinic to be fitted for a diaphragm, a business
'easier than getting a learner's permit to drive a car.' Yet as she prepared
for the procedure, she missed a sense of occasion. 'It was weird to have
these adults just hand you the keys to the kingdom, ask �Any questions?',
wave and return to their paperwork.� The end of our virginity passed
unmarked,' she writes, 'neither mourned or celebrated.'"
http://www.praestantiamagazine.com/culture20034.htm
See also:
http://www.mindspring.com/~slywy/promiscu.html

By the time I called on Rev. Mary's contact, their daughter had been
spending weekends with boys, at her home or theirs, for months. They would
attend dances intended for under-18s, dances where the girls, from 12 on up,
wore scanty clothing and many would be disappointed if their evening didn't
end with sex. The ambiance when the girl and her friends were at home with
boys was very much like that at Mom's Friend's House although the nudity was
far less blatant, which is to say that they wore bikinis and thongs when
they didn't need immediate access to the body parts beneath. Still, there
was the occasional erection peeking out from an elastic waistband and the
sheerness of many bras didn't leave anything to the imagination and was
probably more productive of arousal than nudity. Or so it was described to
me by the parents who obviously were thrilled by the knowledge that their
daughter was having such fun, re-living vicariously their own teen years,
their bodies tingling in response to a vicarious orgasm. Hearing the story
reminded me of why (unlike President Clinton) I prefer briefs to boxers, and
would rather a boy wear nothing at all than for his penis and balls to
jangle about unseen behind a loose curtain of cloth. Anyway, off in a far
corner of the room, ignoring my presence and that of her parents (who, for
all I know, might have been having sex too if I'd not been there; or was it,
on the contrary, that the kids were doing this only because I, amateur
researcher into sociology of sex, was there), the two 13-year-olds (as I
think they were) undressed each other, garment by garment, while sort of
watching TV. After a while they were just sitting there, totally nude, the
girl's hand fondling her boy's penis and keeping it perpetually stiff; he
with his hand now on her breast, now feeling inside her vulva and showing
off her pink parts.

The boy seemed to be posing: he would glance our way from time to time to
see if we were noticing (admiring?) his stiff 13-year-old penis. Why not?
What on earth is wrong with a public display of affection and lovemaking?
How can one possibly be in a state of indecency with only friends and family
and why would not friends and family be anything but delighted to see a boy
or a girl in the throes of ecstasy? I remembered how boys, when we were
naked, used to push out their hips, trying subtly (as they thought) to
attract my attention to their penis. Once in a while I might respond,
especially in the backyard where I also felt free and uninhibited. Mom would
take satisfaction that I was having fun and claiming what she saw as my
birthright. I might tease the boys first, perhaps kissing and sucking the
penis just enough to drive the boy to delirium, then making him lick and
suck my clitoris in return until I was satisfied before letting him proceed
to orgasm. Or maybe I would let him put his penis in my vagina, and then
insist that he remain perfectly still until he couldn't stand it anymore.
Or, in nude dancing, I might let him dance close to me forever with an
erection, and just laugh when he tried to make my lie down to make love.
(Actually I still embark on teasing today, but in a more sophisticated sort
of way; I like to start getting a boy excited almost as soon as we meet for
the evening; and if I know we're going to make love, well I want to build up
his excitement, his erection, and his quantity of semen over the course of
our visit to the show, the concert or the party. Since it's wildly
improbable these days, in the Capital City, that we'll be at a sex party
(with one or two exceptions, one of which I wrote about, the kind they have
here are not of a sort I would ever attend), he'll just have to wait until
we get back to my place, or his. And there are lots of ways for me to check
the state of his penis over the course of an evening.)

Well eventually this boy said something to the girl, and she leaned over and
kissed his penis, licked it all around its head, then slid down on the floor
to her knees, grasped the penis with one hand and his scrotum with the
other, and put her mouth around the penis. Her head moved up and down with
slow deliberation, her tongue licking it all around as she did so. She
proceeded with maddening slowness (as we could see, and as he later told us,
breathless with the memory) so that he was, until the moment he ejaculated
into her mouth stuck in a state of combined frustration and excitement,
straining to push his penis in and out faster but unable to do it. We knew
when he reached orgasm because he actually cried out. She continued,
swallowing as she did so, until, either it became painful or stressful for
him and his penis went limp. She took it out of her mouth and looked over at
us to see if we had been watching. Then she licked drops of semen from her
lips and smiled an odd, teasing smile. I had thought at first she wasn't
making theater out of sex, but indeed she did. Her slow pace amused me
because I've done such things too, but it seemed to make her dad very
uncomfortable, and he had clutched his crotch at one point. His erection
showed through his pants. He saw me looking and was mildly embarrassed.

Sex at its best is, I think, drama, and the girl had performed it well. Now
that she had taken his semen she pulled her boy from the sofa, sat down in
his place, spread her legs wide, and waited for him to please her. I heard
her instructing him and as he proceeded, his mouth at her vagina, she
stirred from time to time, moved his head with her hands and gave him
instructions. Her parents, father and mother, had taught her assertiveness.
Any boy to whom she gave her body was going to bring her to climax on her
terms. She'd learned a lot for her age because she spent many weekends at
her boyfriend's home, and he had a 15-year-old sister whose boyfriend was
perhaps two years older than that, and they often made love alongside each
other, or they played sex games. If her weeks were for study, her weekends,
it seems, were for sport and for sex.

(It is absolutely true that two or more couples making love within sight of
each other multiplies the sexy atmosphere and the quality of the lovemaking.
I know that some men are afraid of the competition; one may be afraid that
his erection will be smaller, softer, somehow less effective, or that he
won't be able to bring his girl to climax; that she will be somehow
dissatisfied. But, as I've said, within a broad range of size it isn't the
dimension of the penis that matters but the attention given to the clitoris,
the enjoyment shown by the man as his tongue explores the vagina, and his
general responsiveness to the girl's needs, as well as the happiness and the
appreciation he shows when he ejaculates. Furthermore, experienced girls do
not expect either constant perfection or 100% orgasms. And as the 2,000 Year
Old Man says in the 1978 cartoon video, "there will always be another" (OK,
he's talking about running after a bus, but you get my drift).
http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=1800283877&cf=info&intl=us
The more stable the relationship, of course, the less significant the
quality of any single act of lovemaking. And, the older we get, the more
complex the equation because the sex act will probably be only part of the
day's entertainment: one does expect a day or a night out.)

The next morning, I was only slightly surprised when I arrived at a
breakfast in progress to find that there was a frank and animated
conversation going on, that early in the morning, about sex. Mother and
daughter chatted about being careful that semen doesn't go down your
windpipe. And right in front of her boyfriend, the girl discussed how the
penis of the 17-year old boyfriend of her boyfriend's sister "was so much
bigger" and she wondered how it would fit inside any girl. "Nature knows
best" was all I could offer as I sat down, adding that if a baby could pass
through that passage, so could any penis, however large, although the larger
the penis the more important would be prior oral stimulation and
lubrication. I thought it too complicated to discuss details of postpartum
shrinkage and medical dilation.) Instead I asked her the circumstances of
her first sex, and it turned out that a few months earlier her friends had
set her up with a boy and goaded her to open they boy's pants, play with his
penis and put it in her mouth. After a while vaginal sex didn't seem much of
a step beyond that. She'd told her parents right after, and was so proud of
what she'd accomplished that she'd been doing it front of them ever since.
It all seemed so natural to her, and to all her circle: casual oral sex.
But, again, her circle was limited to a small group that had known each
other for years.

I'm not used to discussing penises, semen and orgasms in roundtable fashion
so early in the morning. I guess kids can, though: these two effused over
their morning reprise: they had stuffed his penis in her vagina first thing
in the morning, even before brushing their teeth. I suppose, though, that it
is the one of best arguments in favor of teen sex: adults are too busy, too
tired and insufficiently energetic to enjoy sex to that degree, that often.
For us, on the other hand, just to think of those carefree days of multiple
pleasures is enough to put us in a sexy mood anytime. Our philosophy makes
it impossible to resent young people having more fun, or having it in our
presence. And, I suppose, for those of us who think of physical sex as the
most beautiful of acts and experiences, sex is no less an eligible object of
debate and discussion at breakfast among family and friends than anything
else. 

Later in the day, after all, such a discussion wouldn't have struck me as
odd. Thus, I have been in an otherwise staid gathering talking about this
and that when, upon the subject of nipples coming up all the females removed
their tops for purposes of comparison and to solicit the men's opinions; or
in connection with a discussion about bikini waxing, displayed their pubic
hair for similar critical comment. (If you want to know about that, here's a
link:
http://tinyurl.com/ibzj )

And once in a discussion of circumcision and scarring, all the males had to
unzip their pants and be caressed by their partners so they could show off
their erect penises and we could understand the arguments being made, all
about V-shape scars, frenula ("connecting folds of membrane") and tightness
of circumcision -- things that can't be understood, at least by a woman,
without a close look. I learned stuff on that occasion that, with all the
circumcised penises I had fondled, kissed and sucked I had never
appreciated. The Circlist.com web site tries to provide the sort of
information that I got by studying a half-dozen real-live penises that
evening, illustrating and discussing circumcision techniques and results. I
shouldn't have thought there was so much art and technology to it. I have
some reservations about the site, so I haven't linked to it. But it does
have photos (mostly gay, I think) and a bunch of testimonials from men and
boys who were circumcised after puberty and whose sex life was improved by
it. Also see the more professional educational circumcision site for women,
which addresses the medical issues:
http://www.circinfo.com/questions/qga.html

Perhaps more the point are the aesthetic and sensory issues of circumcision.
I guess I take the health issues for granted, and I discount the hysteria of
those (including Jews for Foreskins and a Palestinian Arab somewhere in
Switzerland who's written a whole book on the subject) who seem to equate
infantile circumcision with baby killing. Interestingly, The Wall Street
Journal, of all newspapers, had two seminal articles on the subject:

-- "Cancer study shows benefits of circumcision", Apr. 11, 2002, p. D8.

-- "Restoration campaign finds converts; they often find ridicule;
'intactivists' seek to undo a long-practiced ritual; the going is very
slow", Dec. 28, 2000, p. A1 (and how did I know there would be a Yahoo group
on that:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ForeskinRestoration )

I As I have said before, like most women polled on the subject I love the
shape, feel, texture and taste of the circumcised penis.
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2754/womenpref.html
(survey, archived in "Circumcision online news")
When I have one in my mouth I feel that I am fully in control of it and that
I can reach every nook and cranny with my tongue effortlessly. When I have
brought it to ejaculation, I know that I can retrieve every drop of semen,
smoothly spreading it, if I like, over the glans for my boy and others to
see, then sucking it back into my mouth to swallow. There is a discussion
group just for women who feel that way:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sexytobecircumcised
That site also promotes the surgical removal of clitoral hoods. I suspect
that such removal is less important for girls who easily achieve climax just
as they are, and especially those who are fond of oral sex and who get
constant pleasure that way.

One recent message relates the story of a mother in England, where
relatively few males are circumcised, who raised her daughters to be aware
of the advantages and pleasures of the circumcised penis. Even as young
girls they knew that "the circumcised penis was better for sex, offering
improved stimulation during intercourse and of course improved cleanliness
and looks for oral sex". Another message said, "I vastly prefer the clean,
stream-lined, 'made for sex' look of the circumcised penis. The circumcised
penis looks sexier, and like it is ready to go." Indeed; the forum's welcome
page has a lovely photo of a happy couple, with the boy's really gorgeous
circumcised penis erect and ready. Very welcoming. The site also contains
advice regarding adult circumcision, and personal histories of men and
couples who have had it done.

Getting back to the subject at hand (no pun intended), openness goes even
further in my circle when it comes to the sex education of children. The
13-year-old girl brought up at one point how she had learned about
ejaculation. When as a little girl she had asked some question relating to
semen her mother had made her father undress and had fellated him almost to
the point of ejaculation, then masturbated him so that his semen spurted out
in a geyser for the daughter to see and touch. Personally, I think it
important that every boy and girl get to see that, either in real life, in a
photograph or drawing, on perhaps on the Internet: it answers a lot of
secret questions that kids have. As for that particular kid, I imagine that
she, like me at an even younger age, would have become fascinated with the
little slit at the top of the penis that hides, and then gives up, all that
lovely semen. Whatever our social engineers may make of my opinion, let the
record show that unwanted pregnancy, STDs and emotional problems linked to
sex are almost nonexistent among my "peer group" (i.e., those raised in my
environment), whereas teens in with "ignorance-only" backgrounds are fair
game for every disease and pervert out there:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/usa0902/USA0902.pdf

Random relationships outside a limited universe of self-monitored families,
bear real risk; this is why the Washington's demand for "abstinence only"
programs and the criminalization of parents who advise and assist their
teens with their relationships is hypocrisy and inherently lethal:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1090555,00.html
It seems kids from our environment well know that they are enjoying an
adolescence with minimal risk and responsibility on their part, and that
their free love is part of that. The risk and responsibility lies at the
feet of their parents, of course. When those kids grow older,
responsibilities will mount, and sex will become more closely related to
stability and functionality of relationships. And they will have less free
time, plus their new wants will bring new financial needs. Also, the mating
dance leading up to sex becomes more complicated; we want to be entertained,
wined and dined: in effect the foreplay consists of much more than (and is
far more expensive than) groping, caressing, licking and sucking. But there
and then the lovers were too young to concern themselves with such details
of changes in needs and wants based on gender and age. The connection
between sex and having children of their own, aside from knowledge of birth
control, was also an irrelevancy at that age.

For the 13-Year-Olds, the semen I could see going from boy's penis into
girl's mouth and vagina meant fun and games and not fecundity. The girl was
just like me, years ago: smiling sheepishly with her mouth full of semen.
Later, she would go off to bed with him, waking up in the morning and making
love some more. Like me, she had a supportive mother who loved her enough
and respected her autonomy enough to be glad for her romance and her
orgasms. Well, aren't we all entranced to see an excited penis hovering over
our friend's vagina? Don't we all feel good as it enters? Aren't we all
hypnotized by the rising and falling penis, looking for a trace of semen as
proof of love? Don't we rush up to our friend afterwards and hug and kiss
and compliment her? And even if we don't see it, don't we imagine it in the
case of  young lovers, and wish them well?

In truth. even those kids had to know about impediments to sex: headaches
cystitis, infections of all sorts, depression... The reader can take for
granted that the lives of sexually active teens encompass medical ills just
like the lives of everyone else. Not to mention childhood and teen
disorders, the inventory of which has been evolving since Mom's time.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/21/1069027330792.html
Not every kid was happy with liberal access to sex; those who weren't went
away, sometimes disappointing a 60s-type parent. And there are other obvious
issues that belong in a medical or technical essay about our sex, but not
here: particular issues relating to overweight kids and adults, impotence,
lack of interest in sex, grievances of all sorts, arguments, grudges, scorn,
spite and cliques. Not to mention all the time some boy or boys wanted sex
and couldn't have it. Nor do I talk a great deal about older people making
love, first because it isn't part of my story and second because our social
and sex lives were grouped by age and I have written about what I have
experienced. There has been no need to address such issues in these essays
which, as I have repeatedly said, are stylized for publication and limited
to what I think relevant to make my points and to make people want to read
it. Finally, I don't write much about my present-day sex life because it's,
well, boring: it's just like everybody else's because the nation seems to
have caught up with me on that score. The essays have been true in spirit to
my childhood diaries and to my current date book. I try, too, to keep them
free of typos and inconsistencies, but those inevitably do slip in. And a
lot of this stuff is written in airport lounges while I wait flight
connections. That seems to be the only free time I have these days.

For those who wonder at the propensity to engage in oral sex of the people I
write about, let me note that I wouldn't otherwise be writing about them
because they'd be uninteresting; and I come from and mingle in a universe of
people who insist that oral sex is an essential part of foreplay. The boy
who does not take the initiative to kiss my vulva, to press his tongue
against my clitoris and push it into my vagina is inadequate. Furthermore, I
write mainly about the kids I liked and care to remember. I'm saving the
ones I didn't like for future biting satire and caricature.

Girls talk about their sex experiences in detail to their close friends. To
that extent, early sex is a shared experience. Either 11-13 year-olds will
have enough contact with slightly older girls to learn from them, or, if
they are lucky, they will find others their own age who are sexually active
and who will share experiences and boys. Despite teen jealousies, there are
usually enough boys around to share; indeed enough rejected suitors to give
away. And it isn't only in Rev. Mary's church that girlfriends are happy to
organize an initiation, a defloration. The involvement of parents doesn't
change anything, rather it makes it safer and puts the emphasis on the
girl's welfare rather than her friends' amusement. There is a whole
early-sex subculture of parents who (following Dr. Smith's, Rev. Mary's and
similar theories) think that sex as soon as possible after puberty is
important for a child's holistic development. Biologically, girls were
intended to have sex at around 12; suppression and repression, through
religious superstition and parental ignorance, gives rise I think to many of
today's social ills. See, for example, the contortions the Catholic Church
to define, illogically, oral sex as contrary to divine law:
http://www.presentationministries.com/brochures/OralSex.asp

The obligation of a parent, and especially of a mother, it seems to me, is
to recognize the physical and emotional sexual development of her child as
soon as it begins, and to be aware that this sexual awakening needs an
outlet. The girl wants her breasts to be seen, and she wants to see boys'
penises: it is society- and parent-induced fears and inhibitions that form
an obstacle to showing them off unclothed. The artificiality of society's
rule explains the popularity of nude dancing, or even naturism.
http://www25.brinkster.com/nudist/discussion/itemview.asp?item=176
One only needs to be discreet with the venue:
http://vered.rose.utoronto.ca/tnt/news/e96.html
At Mom's Friend's House, young girls would usually gather in groups to peek
quite openly at lovers, giggling among themselves, occasionally comparing
their own vaginas to the one the boy was using. Urges and curiosity
suppressed without reason lead to frustration and aggression, or else guilt
and self-victimization. Children with happy sex lives among their
contemporaries are unlikely to be bait for pedophiles and other predators.
Why, when at age 12, I had access to all those beautiful young growing
penises attached to boys who shared many of my own outside interests, would
I give a second glance to some dirty old man who didn't share any of my
interests? More than once I would undress a boy in front of my girlfriends,
and embarrassed or not he would wind up with his stiff penis a center of
attraction for the girls as I placed it in my mouth and slowly massaged it
with my tongue and lips. If the girls watching were younger, this would be a
lesson for them, helping them to decide about how and when to stop being a
virgin. If the girls were dressed, and if they were into puberty, I might
invite them to unclothe, so we could all enjoy their presence that much
more. (Remember Terrific Girl, with her new breastlets, watching me fellate
the sleeping boy, as she stood next to Older Girl and smiled into the
moonlight? That night was the beginning of her sensuousness; within months
she would be breaking hearts as she made love to boy after boy, recording in
her diary notes about his semen. As it turns out, there's something to that:
http://www.couplescompany.com/Advice/Joan/Semen.htm )

Girls' curiosity over the mechanics of ejaculation was insatiable,
http://www.tiscali.co.uk/lifestyle/healthfitness/menshealth/part1_3-2.html
and I wouldn't be surprised if my own flamboyance or exhibitionism wasn't a
factor in some younger girl visitors wanting to see what orgasm was all
about and either coming to one of our dances, or more directly having a
defloration party. Making love in front of others is obviously something
people from backgrounds different from ours find repugnant, scary or both,
but to us it contributes to the excitement and to the climax. It is clearly
just a matter of conditioning, and something basic to Mom's Friend's, and
for at least some of the time, Moses David's philosophy, although the
latter's motives are unclear.
http://countercog.excult.org/judgment/judgment-14.htm

In our environment boys and girls saw nothing wrong with impromptu sex, with
satisfying curiosity, and with experimenting. It was what kids did; probably
they do that elsewhere, although perhaps not in nice company. It was easy,
at our place for a girl -- whether living or visiting with us or not -- to
act on her decision to have first sex. A "defloration" meant lending her a
boy and, as I have previously written, there are no end to parents eager to
push their boys forward, apparently because they worry that otherwise they
may turn out gay. That makes no particular sense, but then it's a sensitive,
emotional subject without much logic attached. It does perhaps explain why
virtually all our boys were circumcised, though: if girls are going to
choose their boys at least in part based on the qualities of his penis,
circumcision is a positive attribute and mothers would probably think about
that while their boy's penis was still small and circumcision an easy
option. As for defloration, I've written often enough about how delightful
it is to see the gorgeous, stiff circumcised penis of a loving young boy
hover over, then approach and enter your friend's vagina, although I don't
expect people from outside our circle, people conditioned to privacy and
false modesty, to understand. The story of the Big Breasted Girl at our
party is particularly touching, though. The sight of her boy's beautiful
penis trying to find its way in, and then actually entering her vagina and
piercing her hymen has stayed with me over the years. I remember her dreamy
look as she took his finger, fresh from caressing her vagina, and tasted the
semen that coated it before pressing it to his lips, too. I never saw the
couple again, but I like to dream that they are still together, that she
loves him still as she did that night, and that he is still as solicitous to
her, and she as sensuous with his semen as she was that day.
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2002/38098

For a girl, after her defloration, to marvel at the penis, play with it and
its residue of sticky semen, to watch it deflate and, for her to take the
boy's balls in her hand to caress -- this would remind me about the cycle of
life. New babies were being born, adolescents were starting their sex lives,
and the old were passing away. And every generation has to learn the same
sex skills, over and over, generation after generation. The penis hasn't
changed in hundreds of thousands of years (well, for nearly 6,000 years it
has been circumcised) and yet it continues to mystify and delight.

For her first few times at sex a girl will be awed by her boy's penis. Later
she will take it for granted, treat it casually and as her personal
property, tease it, hold it and kiss it familiarly. This suggests that "loss
of virginity" and "defloration" are not quite a single event, but a process.
My hope for kids -- and myself for that matter -- is that we can always
retain some of that awe, because it makes playing with a lover's penis that
much more fun. I suppose the spurting out of semen can never again be the
surprise it was for me that day when, at age 11, I saw the pubescent boy
sitting in a chair playing with himself, and I went and got some lubricant
and I put it on his penis and rubbed it up and down. Then, while I had
brought my face closer to see why nothing was happening and to examine the
little slit at the top, the boy suddenly ejaculated in a fountain of semen,
some of it landing on my face. My decision, months later, to try oral sex
was more informed and I certainly knew that the boy's semen would flow into
my mouth. But then, too, there was a learning and a decision process, and
tasting and swallowing, especially with my friends watching, was something
of a rite of passage. I had thought his penis was really cute and this was
really my first opportunity to fondle a penis at my own pace, to feel his
testicles, to appreciate its sculptural beauty. I liked his pubic hair; I
loved the roundness of his penis as it filled out and became stiff and as it
reddened at the end; and I took it in my mouth keeping my eyes wide open,
indeed looking him in the eyes while I felt all around his penis with my
tongue. The liaison had been arranged by my girlfriends; I think I acquitted
myself well, although it took a brief moment of swilling his semen around my
mouth before I decided I really wanted to swallow it all. My friends smiled.
One doesn't, or rather one oughtn't, compare penises, which while all
different are all alike too, and are very much instruments of communication.
But I think every girl remembers the first one she examined closely, the
first one she took in her mouth lovingly. I stress the word "lovingly",
because it underlines the consensual nature of the act. I think it's
important that oral sex not be done in the dark, because the best part of it
is being able to see the boy's penis move and swell as it responds to your
kisses, and tense as it is about to explode with semen. If other girls are
watching, it's fun to leave the head of the penis thickly coated with semen
when you take it out of your mouth, and then let everybody watch while you
suck the semen back into your mouth and swallow it. I did that a few times
when I was in high school, in front of girls who'd never seen a penis up
close before. I don't think any of them remained a virgin for very long
afterwards, although I may have had nothing to do with that; they were of an
age when most girls were starting to be sexually active.

Ours were, of course, adolescent pranks, not necessarily something I would
do today, for quite naturally sex has found its proper place and perspective
in my life. Indeed, one of the very reasons that adolescents must not have
their sex lives stolen from them is that it is so uninhibited at that age,
such carefree fun -- with the medical and safety issues managed by our
elders. Once one enters the mainstream years, STDs, aspirations for family,
career and other adult issues get in the way. Relationships cease to be free
or almost free; independence brings monetary and other pressures, and more
complex health issues. The health issues were always of concern to us and to
our carers; but I was told then and believe now that we were well cared for.
http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~eking/books/sin3d.htm

"Sex and the City" (which by the way was illegal and still is not shown in
Singapore; but then chewing gum is illegal there also) life is fine and
good, but that environment, too, has its hard side, and its chase for
security and a potential "good match". And of course not everybody lives and
works in the "City". And, one must never forget, there is a difference of
approach to sex by males and females: as to frequency, method, sources of
pleasure and what they hope to get out of it. I think all of us like to see
naked bodies, and to see non-threatening erections, to see lovers teasing
each other and then making. Mostly women like to see romance. And once one
rids oneself of the notion of concupiscence as sin and accepts sex, and
specifically erection and ejaculation and clitoral orgasm, as the essence of
the human body and spirit, one is halfway to discovering the meaning of
life.

This is why I think it's so important that parents acclimatize their
toddlers to the parents' and adolescent siblings having oral and vaginal sex
and why I think Dr. Smith is right that families should see each other in
the nude early and often: not necessarily constantly, as we did, but often
and casually. I have written earlier that 60s and 70s-type communal homes
probably won't work anymore because of the child protection brigades. (Not
to mention the treasure hunters: is Michael Jackson being pursued because he
actually did something, or because he has money? I would have advised him to
hire a non-English-speaking Greek granny (Greek so he couldn't ever be
accused of having suborned perjury because he couldn't talk to her) as
chaperone and nanny for his house guest kids. But what do I know?)) On the
other hand, discreet family nudity and peer-directed sex education and
introduction should remain below the radar screen. Dr. Smith mentions
walking from the bath to bedroom casually nude, and one family I spent a
weekend with specifically invited me to do that, wanting their kids of
various ages to see me with nothing but a towel around my neck. It was a
family that, like many in the movement, had no use for privacy or closed
doors. The parents had taken photographs of their kids naked every couple of
months from birth onwards. It was, in effect, time-lapse photography, and
you could see in the pictures the older kids as they approached and passed
through puberty, their penises and breasts developing nicely -- recorded,
just like kids' heights marked progressively on the wall as they grow up. On
each picture, a child's pubic patch would be just a little bigger, a little
darker. And, I thought to myself, a little more experienced and happy. The
pictures were very tasteful in a naturist sort of way; certainly non-sexual
and not clinical either; just family art and record, and something I'd like
to do for my own future family some day. I thought of how girls are always
fascinated by the growing penises of brothers and other boys, and wish they
could see them naked, from a distance, more often. (How many girls have
described to me how they clandestinely watched their brothers masturbating
and have kept the fact secret for years; and they would mostly be aghast if
I told them about that 11-year old boy I saw masturbating, and how I
finished the job for him. More social hypocrisy: why should they have to
hide what they have seen, and suppress their urges and needs, just so
society can pretend they are ignorant and "innocent"? These girls already
knew all there was to know, all they needed to know, about a penis and about
ejaculation. As to them, the genie could not be put back in the box.)

Others have told me of videos kids take of themselves cavorting and having
sex, but that's more problematic. Those adults could get arrested for what
they did as kids. But didn't the Supreme Court say that nude pictures were
OK as pure art so long as there was no tumescence and no spreading apart of
labia? I have written, I think of that Georgia prosecution where two teens
were charged with underage sex (they were 13 or 14 I think; I know I read
about the case in the newspaper but have been unable to find it online) with
the video as evidence. The jury, happily, acquitted them and the prosecutor
was livid at their "jury nullification". That was not a case where the kids
had the support of their families -- such situations rarely come to public
knowledge, which explains why I couldn't find appropriate citations on the
Web, and my lawyer friend couldn't find cases on Westlaw when I asked her. I
have found other, somewhat similar cases, in Florida and in Georgia:
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/10/29/Hernando/Students_arrested_on_.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/vviw
and Idaho (charging pregnant teens with fornication)
http://archive.aclu.org/news/w102896a.html
and Wisconsin (prosecuting a mother for giving condoms to her sexually
active 13-year-old son)
http://www.allaboutsex.org/MomProsecutedForCondoms.html

While seeing two mothers preening their adolescents moments before sending
them off to have sex together may be statistically rare, it is certainly not
uncommon. (And, interestingly, I have found grandmothers even more
interested and eager in matters of their grandson's penis.) There is no
doubt in my mind that pride in her boy's penis is innate in the status of
motherhood and I thought it touching that a mother would feel close enough
to her son at the threshold of his deflowering a girl that she would be the
one to take down his underpants, just as she had when he was a toddler with
a tiny penis who had just wet his pants. One moment his stiff penis was
compressed and constrained by tight white bikini briefs, the next his mother
was pulling them down for him. But his penis got stuck in the band, so she
had to free it with her hand, and then it sprang free and swayed from side
to side as he moved closer to his partner. His mother strutted along behind
him as if that boy's penis were her very own. I wonder, on reflection,
whether that mother wasn't engaging in a quasi-incestuous relationship with
her son; but no, incest (and all cross-generational sex) is as much a taboo
within the families I have described as it is in society generally.
http://snurl.com/32qo
(Amazon's review of a book on mother-son incest.)
As he sat on the bed and pulled his girl close for an embrace, a kiss, and
caresses to her breasts, his mother faded into the background. All eyes were
on the girl, her nice breasts, her vulva, with the boys fingers now inside.
Then the boy moved over, gently spread her legs apart, and put his tongue to
her vagina.

I think on that occasion the mom was just trying to give her son confidence:
he was only 12 after all, probably self-conscious of his growing penis,
perhaps unsure if it would function properly, and needed encouragement even
though his girl was already there on the bed, smiling sweetly at him. The
other girls were looking at him as they would have looked at the groom
standing at the altar, and now that his tight briefs were lowered and we
were seeing him naked and really cute, we could only anticipate how he was
going to put that lovely erection to use. It's funny, because an erection is
only lovely in the context of romance; I can think of nothing more
disgusting than the penis of a rapist, or of a coercive fiend. Furthermore,
a home movie of this lovely event would simply be pornography; one had to
live the event to appreciate it as the love and romance it was. This boy was
one of us, and his penis was gorgeous; entering the girl's vagina it would
be heavenly. His semen gushing into her would be holy communion.

I don't think the others had paid any attention to the mother, or to the
little drama I just described; but it seemed to me that this mother had gone
too far in managing her son, in pushing him, though. He had his erection and
his penis was clinically suitable for sex, but was he emotionally ready to
make love? Could he be romantic? I had a hunch that this boy's mom would
have taught him to masturbate at a young age; not quite the situation of
those mothers of handicapped boys I've written about who masturbate directly
and compassionately; only that she might have given him instructions and
then watched him do it. Unlike some boys about to claim their girl's
virginity, this boy didn't show a lot of self-confidence. Indeed, he looked
a bit nervous and quite probably his mom had him masturbate to achieve that
nice erection he was sporting. Wasn't she going too far in asserting
herself, her quasi-masculinity through him? Was she going to swoon with a
vicarious orgasm at the first sign of her boy's semen? Nobody else seemed to
notice or to have this vision of her that I did; most everybody was focused
on the girl waiting for him on the bed. My own date had his hands on my
breasts and obviously had on his mind his own erect penis and his own
imminent pleasure. Sitting on his lap facing away from him, I could look
down on it, monitor his state of mind and plan ahead. If I thought his
attention was flagging, I could gently stroke his penis and it would inflate
again, its tip vibrating or pulsating rather sensuously and expectantly. I
wanted to kiss it.

Before I could finish my thoughts the main boy had brought his girl to
climax, or nearly so, and she was signaling her readiness for penetration.
Now we could see his brilliant erect penis aimed at her, and her hand on it
to guide it; and with one thrust he had disposed of her virginity and she
was one of us and happy. (For just a brief moment I wondered about those
Arab women who have their hymens surgically restored for their wedding
nights: why would anyone do that?)
http://beta.yellowbrix.com/pages/beta/Story.nsp?story_id=43786855
The boy came quickly, and a good thing too because by now we were
desperately aroused ourselves. My own boy and I could begin our own fun. The
mothers were gone and forgotten. Sexually excited as we were, it didn't take
us long to finish. I had planned on oral sex and extended foreplay, but in
fact his penis was in my vagina in no time, and then he ejaculated. He did
this with me sitting in the chair, on the edge of the seat, with him angled
just so that his penis could reach my vagina. Had anybody wanted to watch,
his penis entering and leaving my vagina was in full view -- of him, of me,
and of any spectator. I felt good, but I didn't feel the all-over shivers
that I should have felt. I started to ask the boy to kiss my clitoris, but I
could see his had lost interest. I decided I would not be seeing him again.

There had only been two quasi-maids (-matrons?) of honor and their dates.
These deflorations were private events with only best friends, or maybe a
brother or sister present. They had developed as an institution on their own
and at the instance of the girls; they certainly weren't Mom's Friend's
invention. I don't know how it had come about that friends brought a date
and had sex too; I guess it was just the discomfort for a teen of seeing
such happy sex and feeling the need to do the same.

When we left for the main room, the adults were all hugging and kissing the
naked boy and girl, celebrating his semen-coated penis, her drippy vagina.
We joined them. Then the boy was forgotten and all eyes were just on the
girl, her pretty face and pretty young breasts. The boys, the men, just
wanted to look at her. Even my date had left me and was staring at her
breasts and her shy smile. It was like a wedding, only the celebration was
the consummation. Except that having freed herself from virginity she was
now in play; boys would want to know her, and she had her choice of them.
Today, or at a dance, she could see their penises and if that was her
criterion, make a mental note which boys to date. Hopefully she would have
loftier standards for picking her mates, but who knows; there's no telling.
Once upon a time lots of girls told me that the 16-Year-Old Boy was
unsuitable, but he had a lovely penis (meaning, actually, that he was a good
lover with both tongue and penis) and I stuck with him for nearly a year,
until I outgrew him and he moved away. After a few minutes of
congratulations and a sip of champagne, we three couples went to shower and
dress. The party was over. Maybe we would meet again, nude, at a dance.

To digress a bit, I will raise the case of the young boy of 10 or 11 or 12
who is troubled by his persistent erections and, having seen his parents at
sex, wants a partner for himself. One mother I spoke to said she actually
did show her son what to do by masturbating her husband, and promised to
arrange a girl for him within a year. This reminded me of the boys who would
hang around in the basement or in the backyard, with their little penises
very erect, watching older kids cavorting. Sometimes they'd find a girl
their own age to horse around with, or the boys and girls would tease each
other. Girls at that age will make fun of a boy's immature erection,
although at the same time their curiosity may lead them to get as close as
possible, and to stare at it. I have heard that sometimes a girl, out of
curiosity or because she is goaded to do it or because she has seen teens to
it to each other, takes an immature penis in her mouth. That violated Mom's
Friend's rules, but I know it happened at the Children of God, at least in
its most decadent years after Mom left. Mom's Friend's "peer" rule, which
meant that couples should be about the same age, limited the circumstances
for contact between pre-pubescent and post-pubescent kids; but I think they
would have avoided each other anyway because their sexual interests and
thoughts are so different. There is quite a bit of information on this and
indeed on everything related to sexuality and sexology at
http://www2.rz.hu-berlin.de/sexology/Entrance_Page/entrance_page.html
especially in the "Books" library, and specifically "Human Sexuality: An
Encyclopedia".

Little kids are certainly sexual beings, but participatory physical sex is
not part of that and I do not see how any mature person can be aroused by a
child, however cute. Admittedly the line of sexual maturity is indistinct.
Then there is the Muslim rule I've cited once or twice which declares a
child sexually mature so long as he or she has any pubic hair (or started
her periods; on the other hand, Muslims shave their public hair, so how
would they know?)
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/glossary/term.SINALBULUGH.html
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/archives/oldarchives/hajamat.html
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Silas/childbrides.htm )

A year later the mother I spoke about had to keep her promise, although she
had misgivings. There was, and no doubt still is, a network of committed
mothers, and mothers have different criteria for the boy they want to
deflower their daughter, or so it seems. A circumcised young penis in an
advanced state of development but not too big so as not to cause pain. A
gentle demeanor. From a good family. Good looking. Preferably close in age
to the girl. Besides that, as was apparently the case with the mother I
wrote about in a previous essay, the one whose 14-year-old son and
16-year-old daughter had their first sex on the same day at Rev. Mary's,
there may well have been a trade-off within the community. Anyway,
presumably the boy I am speaking of was well into puberty by then: many boys
have quite nice penises at age 12, certainly before age 13: I know this and
I've been closer to many of them than most girls, as you will know if you
read my earliest essays. The fact is while I like boys to have lots of hair
on their heads, and I very much like pubic hair; but I'm not too fond of
all-over hair. Even today I reminisce about those boys whom I seduced on the
houseboat. It didn't take much more than a wet T-shirt to make them
delirious and to give me good title to their penis. 12-year-old boys are
very malleable, at least the first time you get at them. I've often wondered
whether the next girl, who may not have been so fond of oral sex as I was,
didn't shatter those boys' illusions. She might not have been so skilled as
I think I was in making erect a reluctant penis, kissing and licking its
head, teasing the bottom of its corona with the end of my tongue, massaging
it with my lips if it remained soft then waiting a minute for the blood to
flow; then repeating the cycle. I awakened dozens of boys to their potential
in that way and, as I said, I'm afraid it's like letting the young bull
among the heifers: there's no going back for a boy once he has had a girl
take off her top and his bottom, had his penis taken into her mouth and been
made to ejaculate for her.

Well, to return to the subject of pushy mothers, all mothers take at least
subconscious credit for the growth of their sons' penises, I think, and they
are right to claim a right to see their boys nude from time to time for the
purpose of quietly admiring their genitals and dreaming of their fecundity.
How they contrive his nudity depends on the family situation and practice,
whether there is much family nakedness, whether they have a swimming pool or
a hot tub or some facility shielded from outside view, and so on. I've seen
lots of mothers find some reason to inspect, and admire, their kids nude,
and, why not: boys and girls together. Our bathrooms had no locks on the
door and we didn't have enough bathrooms for all the lodgers to have the
luxury of any privacy. If a boy would not get out of the shower in time, I
might get in there with him. We showered or bathed together indiscriminately
of sex until it got annoying because we'd reached an age where we had girly
toilet things to do, and boys wouldn't understand.

For a mother to comment favorably on her boy's penis and her girl's breasts
or vagina within hearing of other family members is touching, I think. I
didn't have any brothers or sisters, but it wouldn't have bothered me if my
Mom had discussed my periods, or my bra, or anything else in front of
others. I know that a couple of times I asked her questions about one or
another boy's penis and I didn't care that the boy heard. I did try to put
the penis in a favorable light, however: I know that this is a sensitive
issue. I remember one question -- it had to do with different rates of
growth of testicles and penis. Another time I wanted to know if swallowing
semen could make you gain wait. All the questions I ever had are answered,
today, on the Internet.

Dr. Smith argues that free discussion and regular nudity between parents and
children is one of the most important steps for parents to take to avoid
shyness, false modesty and shame, which otherwise most children start to
exhibit just before puberty. An erection at the smallest age should be
noticed and the object of favorable comment; it's also an excuse to discuss
erections with the boy and any girls about, and to bring up the subject of
how, when larger, it will fit nicely in a girl's mouth and vagina. Although
the girls' nudity may not offer the same opportunity for didactic comment,
Dr. Smith argues that mothers should use whatever opportunity arises to
point out that "someday soon, when she gets just a little bigger" boys will
kiss her there and make her feel very good, as well as very proud of her
body. Pride and knowledge, he says, makes children immune to the ills of
shame and shyness, and once they get over the awkward stage at the very
start of puberty they will begin admiring each other's body and that, of
course, will lead to desire. Because such children share confidences so
easily with their mothers, she will be able to guide them towards healthy
sexual relationships, he says. Probably most families that follow Dr.
Smith's advice will be in touch with others that share their views, and the
children will grow up knowing of available potential partners for early sex,
whether or not that is something openly talked of. One of the points Dr.
Smith makes is that regular, even daily, sex is important to male health and
well-being from early teens, and he cites a number of medical studies about
its implications for longevity and geriatric sexual capacity and pleasure.

I hope I'm not off base in thinking that penises and breasts are public
property, to be enjoyed by all, not just by their owner. Isn't the military
rule that you are allowed to stare, or at least gaze, for three seconds
maximum before it is considered sexual harassment? As I have written before,
when I detect that a boy is looking at my breasts I always try to look at
his crotch and be seen to do that, to be imagining the state of his penis.
Once, only once, I got a date out of that tactic and that was at a poolside
party. Mostly I would, if confronted, deny, plausibly, any such thing. On
that occasion it happened that the guy was wearing some kind of elasticated
shorts, and as he looked down my top at my breasts, I tugged at his shorts
and his penis popped up. We were sort of committed to each other for the
rest of the day by that exchange, and the day after that, too.

Whether and how a boy -- when the initiative to appear nude comes from him
-- should contrive to allow his mother to see his erection, his penis at its
most grand, is a matter of tact, I suppose. I did see this happen in a walk
from the bath at a home I visited: a big erection and a smirk go together
when that's all the kid is wearing. And it is, of course, an opportunity for
relating to her son that a mother can't let pass. Or a sister, who is
probably well able to smirk back. On the other hand, it's important to bear
in mind the Oedipus relationship and for her to remind her son of her
partner's dominant position and for the mother to be seen soon after showing
off her partner's erection and having sex. With families that are nude at
home a lot, that's easy: it's not a far step from parents talking about
their son's penis to the mother taking her husband's in her mouth. On the
other hand, at a defloration probably anything goes -- for that one occasion
-- in terms of the mother making a fuss over her boy and his penis, I
suppose even touching it, encouraging him the way the mother of the
12-year-old did. His penis is not directed at his mother; rather, she is
directing it, or setting him up to direct it, at the girl. Whether it's the
boy's first time or not, to give a girl your penis, for it to be the first
one ever to enter her, carries the responsibility of making the event so
pleasurable that it will carry forward for the rest of her life and underpin
every act of making love thereafter.

(I suspect that the reader who has not come from our sort of background will
not understand. Some will say that parents have no right to make their
children extensions of themselves in matters of sex, although that is not
how we see it: our parents are seeking to promote their children's lifelong
interests through sexual knowledge and the opportunity for informed
adolescent peer sex. As adults who lived in and had the benefit of 60s and
70s sexual liberation they know that their quality of life has been the
better for it. I do agree that under present legal constraints it is better
to leave the task to the kids' peer group and for the mothers to stay away,
or to watch quietly from a distance ("plausible denial"), as at Rev. Mary's.
Ultimately, a responsible adult needs to make decisions though (although
perhaps not bee seen to do so), and that has to be the parents and, if they
are lucky, sympathetic religious and medical advisors. With discretion and
tact, this should be possible. Our way of life always seemed so natural to
me, and the conventional social constraints (and the shame, inhibitions and
all the rest) so contrived, and our kids have always been so happy for their
physical contact (and so willingly discreet) that we have never encountered
legal trouble. Still, in the current climate one must be doubly careful --
not to forget the health issues, which require enforcement by somebody of
the rule that the universe from which sex partners is selected is a closed,
medically supervised one.)

It seems to me that a boy from outside our circle would be greatly
embarrassed by his mother making a fuss over his penis, especially with
girls around. Not so with us, however. A boy who has never thought twice
about the his mother seeing, commenting on or even touching his growing
penis will not have a problem with his mother getting excited to see him put
it to use. This is true whether it is the boy's first experience of
intercourse or not. I know, indeed, that once the inhibition is dispensed
with, boys like to be seen, like to show off, their penis and their sex. The
definitive proof of their manliness is, after all, semen inside a girl put
there by his penis. Meanwhile, the girl's mother would have been preparing
her daughter just before, making sure of her posture to show off her breasts
to best advantage, to spread her legs just a bit, counseling her on this and
that and dispelling any worries. Seeing this, it would be normal for the boy
to be apprehensive, normal for his mother to worry, silently I hope, that
her son's erection not fail him, that he not get lost looking for his girl's
clitoris, that he find her vagina sweet and delightful in scent, taste and
texture. Having dispensed, indeed ridiculed, the notion of "saving it for
her beloved", the girl and her parents will want to prove her femininity and
her attractiveness: by getting the best possible penis into her vagina and
proving that she can share in orgasm and delight.

Mothers have been known to give their daughters a sip of brandy just before.
For all I know, there could be mothers out there who have proffered Valium
instead. From the standpoint of the kids, even where mothers stayed off to
the side or in another room while the kids had their first sex, the kids
were likely to rush to them for approval, penis and vagina, respectively,
all wet and sticky, faces plastered with smiles, the two of them showing off
their fun and their orgasm. I wish I knew more about how fathers think of
these things, but I didn't have a father about and didn't see many at Mom's
Friend's House, so I don't know. There were a few fathers who visited, and
there was Mom's Friend's partner, Terrific Girl's Dad, but he was on the
road most of the time. When he was in town, he and Mom's Friend were
inseparable, literally as well as figuratively, and I don't know where he
got all his libido, and all his semen, from.

I remember one or two fathers who had brought their kids to the dances, and
who stayed behind long enough to see nude dancing and some sex, and I think
it made them aroused and perhaps embarrassed by that fact. Well, inasmuch as
nude dances are practically mainstream now, they needn't have worried.
http://www.spectator.net/1156/pages/1156_exerball_main.html
(I apologize for linking to a Freakers Ball, but I couldn't resist, and
there was nude dancing there.) And the fact is that two or more couples --
especially teens -- having sex in the same room is so common, and so
unremarkable, that our nude dances, and the ones at Rev. Mary's, are hardly
scandalous. 

Here's what the press has to say about couples having sex in public places
("dogging", outdoor exhibitionism and "car fun" in the UK, but dogging
involves sex between strangers or swinging, so it's not quite the same thing
as two lovers heading to a rendezvous site to see and be seen although
perhaps that goes on there too):
http://society.guardian.co.uk/publichealth/story/0,11098,1044529,00.html
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/dogging/uk-dogging-locations.html
Some would still class public sex as paraphilia (deviant behavior)
http://www.theinternetcollege.org/28.htm
but, I think, only when performed in front of strangers or in public places
-- not, as in the 1975 New York sex club, "Plato's Retreat", in the presence
of others doing the same or a similar thing.
http://www.chezlouis.com/eng/history.htm
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,6903,758960,00.html

These are not, I hasten to say, subcultures I know anything about or have
any particular interest in. Those who have followed these essays from the
start will know that neither Mom's Friend nor I see lifelong commitment as
anything but the ultimate goal for adult relationships. What we argue for is
the right of adolescents to pursue informed, temporary sexual liaisons as a
means of working towards that goal, of acquiring the experience to be
competently critical in matters of sex. Without practical lovemaking skills
and knowledge and the open mind that comes from early awareness and early
(but post-puberty) oral and vaginal sex I think that stable (or, anyway,
happy and fulfilling) relationships are impossible for many or most people.
Virginity is, I think, the enemy of love; a man should want a lover, not a
fake trophy. Which reminds me to remind you that, never mind what the
Catholic Church claims, Mary could not have been a virgin when she died:
Jesus had a brother, born of sex:
http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/s/swank/02/swank102202.htm

Enough of that digression. No wonder Rev. Mary and her daughter excluded men
other than the boy in question from the initiations. Her peer-managed
events, with just girls and mothers there, are, I think, really the best way
to provide support and love while two kids shed inhibitions and bring their
bodies together. Mothers, or grandmothers, or an older sister or friend, is
there to provide moral support but not to intervene, or even say anything.
How different is that from the time when Older Girl and Terrific Girl
watched quietly while I fellated a sleeping boy to orgasm all those years
ago?
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2002/37631

I've seen enough deflorations to know how the event transforms kids,
especially girls, for the better and makes them better able to manage
relationships and their own bodies. I've known girls who muddled through sex
on their own and were left muttering, "Is that all there is?" If, instead,
the boy has to assure her climax with oral sex and only thereafter gets to
put his penis in her vagina a girl is less likely to be disappointed with
the whole experience. I don't think there was a single occasion of first-sex
that I saw or heard about that did not involve oral sex as foreplay. But how
ever could one teach this in a sex ed class in school? Besides, if a boy
knows he is being watched by the girl's friends, and even more so by the
girl's mother, he will make sure she is satisfied, and is at least on the
verge of climax, before he even penetrates her. He certainly won't want her
to feel excess pain and if she has approached or reached orgasm because he
kissed and sucked her clitoris and vagina, she will be dilated and
lubricated, ready and eager. That's why for me the image of the boy's
pulsating penis approaching and entering her, at the last minute being
guided home by her hand, and the eventual mingling of her mucus, his semen
and her blood is so touching and beautiful and wonderful, so much more even
than just romantic and sexy. The final commitment is when, occasionally, the
girl will kiss the boy's penis afterwards and taste their mutual love. I
wrote earlier about how a girl might wipe her boy's big wet penis with her
finger and have him share the taste with her.
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2003/45030
Lovely; and a sign of dedication, I think. It's a constant image in my mind
for any son or daughter I might have one day, as I have said before, to see
him or her post-coitus in a state of delight and sticky wetness.
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2003/42392
Compare that with wives who know so little about their husband's penises
that they attend home party seminars where fellatio is taught to them using
plastic model penises! (The company's Web site has disappeared from Google,
so it may be defunct now.)

Clearly many of these mothers don't want their daughters to go into life as
ignorant of matters of sex and intimacy as they may have been during their
first sex, and don't think they should have to wait for Prom Night to lose
their virginity. It's always nice to have a mom there when penis finally
exits vagina and both kids are exhausted to answer the question, "what's
next, what now?" Indeed: for an encore there is life itself. Isn't semen the
elixir and avatar of life, in more ways than one?

Lest you, Dear Reader, think that the orchestration of a daughter or a son's
first sex never happened, history, the law and newspaper archives all
provide proof. A quick Google search turns up one such story: parents who,
on a visit to Turkey, paired their daughter off with a local waiter:
http://listweb.bilkent.edu.tr/kadin/1996/Feb/0019.html
But most instances of this are non-contentious and subtle: girls and boys
are raised in an atmosphere of liberality and with knowledge of sex from
discussions and observation. When they reach puberty it is arranged for them
to interact provocatively with girls and boys from similar backgrounds,
including of course kids their own age or a bit older who are sexually
experienced. Perhaps, as Dr. Smith suggests, a nude encounter can be
contrived, as in a sauna, hot tub or pool. The rest is obvious, and it is
highly unlikely that the oral and vaginal sex that results will come to the
attention of the authorities. (As the Christian Right takes over this
country, the idea of a second home in Mexico does look better and better,
however.)

Another cause for complaint among a couple of my local friends who have read
my essays is that everybody seems to have an orgasm each and every time.
Actually, our girls did have orgasms more often than, I think, in the
general public, if only because of their reliance on oral sex and their
advanced knowledge and expectations. Plus, of course, the fact that much of
the time, at parties for example, they were backed up by other couples
making love, too. This always changes the equation. Even so, I do not mean
to downplay the fact that girls do not invariably expect mutuality in sex.
Many times I have been happy to bring a boy to ejaculation in my mouth, or
in my vagina, and my possession of his semen waas quite enough for me. I was
happy to make him happy. My wants and motivations vary from day to day and
from boy to boy. Girls may even have political motives:
http://www.rightgrrl.com/sexforacause.html

A girl needs to know how to formulate and to achieve her aims; and for most
girls this does not come about automatically but rather from mother or
sister or friend. Or observation. When I was living on the houseboat, of
course, my motivation was just to study the psychology of pubescent boys. To
take a boy my own age but with zero self-confidence, hypnotize him as a deer
before headlights or a snake before its prey, to take off his clothes and
see his ignorant, half-grown penis and make it wise, to take it in my mouth
and see how much semen the boy had to offer me, was fun for us both, I
thought. It still gives me pleasure to think about that year, and the one
after when I repeated my missionary activity at Mom's Friend's House. I only
wish that I had known, then, more about circumcision. Mom had told me only
in passing, and I knew that I loved the sight of an erect, circumcised
penis. But I didn't know the details of tightness and how the operation was
performed on babies. I had to figure out for myself such things as timing
and the most sensitive parts of the penis. Mutual oral sex -- 69 -- isn't
easy at any age, and I spent a lot of time and effort, I and my partners,
striving to arrive at orgasm at the exact same moment, something even many
adults find difficult or impossible to do.
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2002/38098

Mom did talk to me about positions and orgasms, and about the differences
between adults and children, even when I was very little, telling me about
what Moses David's had to say (not that she anymore counted on his views as
holy writ, but just because he'd been, let us say, her authority on such
subjects). Later, when I was a bit older but still much too young to imagine
doing it myself, I would wonder how the boy and the girl worked out their
timing. As a matter of fact I still wonder about that, although I think I'm
better at it than most. On the other hand, I don't want the boy, especially
a boy I don't know very well, to come in my mouth before I have climaxed
because some boys, perhaps most, lose interest once they have ejaculated, as
happened at the defloration party I described. From then on some of them
only want to know if I've swallowed it yet. I, on the other hand, want to
figure out where our relationship is going from there. (And, if it's going
to end, I want to be the one to end it; I strongly agree with Mom's Friend's
point that women should never allow their sexual relations and relationships
to get out of their control.)

But what is the meaning of sex? The older one gets, the greater the concern
with "where it's going from here" exists even where it must be obvious to
both that "it's not going anywhere". I recall the dance parties where most
of us had come with no date and didn't know each other but were left to a
sort of random self-selection. The decision was made to do that in the nude,
which had the advantage, I suppose, of equalizing us all. I found it
interesting to note which girls looked at faces when sizing up a boy, and
which looked at penises. The same might be said for boys, with respect to
faces and breasts. Those dances where kids had to find partners on the floor
tended to be asexual in a naturist sort of way for at least an hour, until
at least one couple would give way to lust. I was amazed that boys seemed
able to restrain erections in a naturist environment. But once one of the
boys lost control and had an erection, sex would be out in the open. Boys
and girls would find ways to fondle and caress while dancing, all the boys
would be erect and they would hold their erect, tight penises against their
partners. It would not be long before every penis would be in a girl's
mouth. I think most girls followed my practice of not letting the boy reach
orgasm but rather guided his head to my vagina. It occurs to me that I may
be wrong in assuming that girls are more honest than boys in being happy to
take their boy's penis back in their mouth and bring his to ejaculation
after their own climax. Perhaps I have been unduly influenced by Mom's
comments over the years, but that's how I act.

But if I think a boy will work with me, then 69 is the most fun of all, and
it gets me noticed by others, too, which I like. Before long he was on the
bottom and soon his tongue was in my vagina and his penis in my mouth. I
kept changing pace, because I know that slows down the boy, and I meanwhile
told him to remain a steady cadence with his tongue around my clitoris. Boys
seem to know -- our boys anyway -- what they have to do in such
circumstances and the attention that must be paid to a clitoris. Is one
orgasm better than the next, or is the most recent one, or indeed the
present one actually under way, always the best? Hard to say. I prefer not
to try to measure orgasms. Or penises for that matter, despite constant spam
that tells me I should: but as I have written, there is a conflict between
optimum size and shape for oral sex, and optimum for vaginal sex, and
"average" is best all-around. (Could that be Darwinian selection?) All I can
do is recognize that people are different and love what I have at hand.
There is, needless to say, a whole web site devoted to the subject, so I
won't belabor it here:
http://www.measurection.com

As for "small but growing", clinically "mature" genitals, I marvel at the
young couple who still live with Mom's Friend and who have been inseparable
since toddlerhood and lovers since they were scarcely 12: the two who
learned from me and the 16-Year-Old Boy, and who love each other body and
soul and have been having sex constantly and, I suppose, will know only each
other. I doubt they've gone a day without sex since that time they showed
their sex off to me and to Mom, when they were about 11. The reader may
remember: they had oral and vaginal sex in a very dramatic way, having
practiced mutual oral sex before, and they rushed over to Mom and me for
approval afterwards, the boy's penis all wet and sticky and still stiff and
high in the air, a drop of semen at its tip, and I loved them to bits. These
growing, pubescent kids were such treasures and I was so glad for them to
delight in each others bodies.
http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/Year2002/38098
Most people aren't so lucky, or so inclined, with constancy to a childhood
sweetheart, are they? Well, we do the best we can with what we've got, and
we make our choices as best we can.

There are many issues which I have passed over in this and in prior essays
that I would like to address in greater detail. For some, I simply lack the
professional skills and knowledge, and experience isn't enough: the
perspective of boys and girls, respectively, as they approach their first
sex; and then subsequently as they perform their decade-long (more or less)
mating dance. I'd like to understand better the different perspective of
boys and girls in relation to erections, as that perspective changes over
the years from pre-puberty to Viagra/Levitra/Cialis
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20031025/VIAGRA2
5/TPHealth
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4698-2003Nov21.html
and post-menopause years. While I think the motivation for Mom's Friend and
for Rev. Mary, to name two adults I've written about, is straightforward,
how does the political doctrine that they, and I, advance relate to the more
self-centered agendas of swingers, apologists for pedophiles and, indeed
Moses David himself? These issues demand attention, but as it happens this
is not the forum for their further discussion, and I am not the researcher
qualified to do it. I have put forward the arguments I have, and described
in graphic detail the relationships I have experienced and seen, mainly to
counter the hypocrisy I see among those in America -- and now in Britain --
who would criminalize children for doing what comes naturally, and their
parents for taking a liberal view of personal autonomy and practical sex
education. It would seem, from the law cases I that have been shown to me,
only a few of which I have discussed, that parents are free to allow their
children free rein so long a they remain in a position of plausible denial.
If they give advice and consent, then they can be prosecuted for child sex
abuse. Yet, it is clear that the psychological and the real (in terms of
illness and pregnancy) damage to children is far greater when the law is
obeyed. And that's not even addressing the issue of criminalizing oral sex,
which is dumber than dumb and reminds me of all the gays who persecuted and
prosecuted other gays: J. Edgar Hoover, to start with. Roy Cohn (of "Citizen
Cohn"), too.
http://tinyurl.com/waub (Hoover)
http://tinyurl.com/waue (Cohn)

Let the reader, of whatever political persuasion, admit that a male and
female of nubile age have an inherent right to pursue sexual pleasure, and
that they also have the right to be protected. (Note that the word
"protected" mandates the inclusion of the word "pursue": individuals find,
or should find, partners for sex based on their own merits as people, and
not as of right, which means nobody should be coerced or harassed to satisfy
somebody else's lust.) But more than that, they have the right not to have
their whole life's well-being and their future sexual happiness destroyed by
retrograde politicians and hypocritical, false religions. (This is not to
denigrate all religion; there are, indeed, revisionist religions that, like
the Children of God, see sex as an integral part of humanity and divinity
both:
http://inkaboutit.homestead.com/single.html )

Children have the right to have revealed to them at the youngest age at
which they can understand it those "secrets" of sex that maximize enjoyment.
Like language, sexual knowledge is most effectively instilled pre-puberty
and I cannot see what is possibly gained by keeping hidden from any child
the beauty of a penis brought to ejaculation by a loving girl in mouth or
vagina. That children should feel shame over asking about, or accidentally
seeing, people at sex is an aberration brought about by adults shamed by
their own inadequacies, themselves induced by centuries of religious
oppression. For that, they relegate subsequent generations to submission,
ignorance and, frequently enough, sexual inadequacy. (Not to mention marital
breakdown: ever since "The Sensuous Woman", by "J"
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/extra/gilstrap/sex/adult6.html
it has been common currency that many marriages would survive if only the
couples (the wife, specifically) engaged in oral sex. If, as I argue, a
mother should feel perfect freedom very occasionally to take her partner's
penis in her mouth in front of the children, that tradition, and that
stability, would be preserved for the next generation.) Yet, today, kids are
learning everything on prime-time TV but the specific methodology of what a
girl should do with a boy's penis, and, indeed, what she should do with the
semen that comes out of it. (I wonder if things are different in households
where the kids have ready access to X-rated films. Quite possibly, although
by the time they are likely to watch them their social conditioning probably
blocks any constructive impact, and girls are likely to be turned off by
pornography anyway. Pornography's hold is almost exclusively on men, and
it's an addiction, it is said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1079016,00.html )

This is where, I believe, mothers should assert their role: boys and girls
should see their parents loving and making love. They should see them at
foreplay, at oral sex, and should see their mothers delighting in semen.
Indeed, if pregnancy results, they should see that, too: there is nothing
more natural, more touching than total honesty and openness with them. One
of the things kids have the hardest time with, in sex as in everything, is
patience. But adolescents not only have more urgent needs for sex but more
frequent urges, and as far as I know there is nothing wrong with that and
all the more reason to tolerate their doing it in front of the parents, in
front of each other, whatever. Good taste is highly relative, very
subjective. I see only a difference in degree between simulated fellatio on
TV and the genuine act by two teens on the next sofa. Another point to make
is that, for most, pornography is substitute for relationships. In sexually
open communities, relationships are far less frustrating than in the wider
world as teasing invariably winds up with physical sex and real pleasure in
a supportive environment, rather than two adolescents going home with
frustrated sexual energy to a cold shower.

I keep thinking I have run out of things to say, and then something will
come up that makes me want to write a few pages more. For those who have
asked: Mom is stable, but more and more dependent upon Mom's Friend for
support. I travel more and more for my work and this, of course, has given
me the opportunity to pursue my questions on the origins and the future of
philosophy and the theology of sexual liberality in America (and, lately, in
Britain too). I am a bit more confident now that there is a future for my
way of thought, albeit a modest future among a small subculture. As the laws
get more draconian notwithstanding that culture is getting more blatant,
parental involvement in the sex education and the sex experience of their
kids will have to be more subtle, whatever that means. Perhaps it means that
when two kids, naked and dripping with semen, run to a mother for approval
for having done exactly what mother has been doing for years -- ever since
she was 11 -- with a string of partners, the mother will scold them silently
and all the while sporting a big smile of congratulations. I was invited not
long ago to the country cabin of one family where architectural design
resolved, I think, this conundrum. The cabin was a single room, divided into
"private spaces", ostensibly curtained but in fact quite open and visible
from anywhere. We were all able to have "private sex" while fully visible to
everyone: my date could show off his penis in my mouth if he liked; and my
hostess's lovely breasts and vagina, and the penis that entered that vagina,
were equally on display. (Did I catch my date looking? Did I mind? Did I
smack his penis by way of chastisement?) A lovely mutual build-up of
sensuality, sexual electricity and orgasm. Ideal, too, for raising kids.
"Ideal" because any who would see or be seen making love would be those who
love and respect each other and each other's personal autonomy and bodily
integrity, without any interest except the maximum well-being and the
maximum present and lifetime pleasure of the children. Something that cannot
be said for our social engineers, our religious despots and our hypocrites.
And our politicians.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4748575-103691,00.html

Since writing most of the above, a dreadful incident has occurred that is
relevant enough to my essays to be mentioned. An Afghan refugee who works
with me (she speaks Dari, Pushtun, German and English, and some Arabic) was
attacked by her father, who tried to kill her for having consorted with a
boy from outside her ethnic group. As it happens, he is an Iranian Assyrian,
a non-believing Assyrian Christian, a Farsi speaker (a language essentially
the same as Dari) and her father accused her of apostasy, prostitution and
blasphemy (all punishable by death in Islam), and ran at her with a knife. I
have taken her in, to stay in my apartment (my roommate is leaving anyway).
I just wonder how this will turn out. Muslims are quite happy to inflict
"the night of defloration" on their daughters (not voluntarily, but coerced,
in connection with a forced, arranged marriage whereby the groom's mother,
and perhaps other women from the family, watch the groom's penis enter his
bride's vagina and bear witness to the resulting blood, showing the bloody
bedclothes to the rest of the waiting family).
http://www.dhushara.com/book/zulu/islamp/nakface/naked.htm
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewten73.htm

Muslims, of course, are also quite happy with polygyny, indeed are promoting
it in Muslim countries where it has not heretofore been widespread:
http://tinyurl.com/wakl
And as for Christians:
http://www.christianpoly.org
and Jews:
http://emeslyaakov.freeyellow.com

It seems that Afghans want to kill Vida Samadzai, an Afghan student,
candidate in the Miss Earth competition, for displaying her curves in a
two-piece bathing suit in Manila (she didn't make the semi-finals, but she
did win a "beauty for a cause" award). These two stories say something, I
guess, about Afghan culture.
http://never2funky.com/apps/news/displaystory.php?idnum=86

As for my colleague, her Assyrian friend has run off, afraid for his life.
We'll see how she adapts to the kind of life that is led in my apartment;
perhaps I shall be more discreet with her around. But she certainly could
fit in with my occasional visitors from Our Town: naked, she is gorgeous.
And, remember, Islam doesn't forbid oral sex as such, it only bans the
taking of semen in the mouth.
http://www.zawaj.com/straight_talk.html
I don't think you're allowed to have sex in the daytime during Ramadan
either. Perhaps my Afghan colleague doesn't take fatwas seriously: it is
forbidden for a Muslim girl to marry a non-Muslim man (the reverse is
permitted if the woman is Christian, Jewish or Zoroastrian).
http://islam.about.com/blinterfaith.htm
http://tinyurl.com/wauo (a somewhat different view)
http://www.vohuman.org/Articles/Conflict%20and%20Cooperation.htm

For what it is worth, sex is never permitted during a girl's period. And the
penalty for fornication is, indeed, stoning or else100 lashes, probably
equivalent to torture and death
http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=387
although the act of sex, if both parties are eligible to marry, might be
considered a contract of marriage or temporary marriage
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~azma/WhatisMuta.htm
http://www.guidinghelper.com/qna/war_law.html
If you don't know about Zoroastrians:
http://tenets.zoroastrianism.com/nomixmarr33.html
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/humanrelations/womeninislam/marriage.html

I suspect there is no turning back for my Afghan friend, and she is destined
either to accept modern American culture or the wrath of her family. I don't
think it will be easy, and as much as I would like to suppose that romance
and sex would solve her problems, her problems are too complex for that.
Yet, for the moment, and perhaps for good, her only "family" is me. I can't
simply schedule (much as I would like to) a defloration party for her! One
has to have grown up in my way of life to be fully at home with uninhibited
total-pleasure lovemaking. Still, there must be a compromise: can Islam be
so pervasive that conversion is impossible? Palestinian and Lebanese
Christians I have known are just like me; why are Palestinian and Muslim
Christians so unreachable? That, I am afraid, is beyond the scope of these
essays. I can (indeed I did) tell her that the solution was to have an
affair, but her response was uncomprehending, inscrutable.

We live in different worlds, I think, and the simplistic answers given to us
in Washington to deal with those differences are dangerous because they give
us hope for a direct solution when no such thing exists. Indeed, what I am
beginning to conclude (my employers' official point of view notwithstanding)
is that Washington has been co-opted by a great kleptocracy that is trying
to assure itself the permanence of a Thousand Year Reich. Well, I guess
greed, like sex, is an understandable motivation (although once you've got
$100 million stashed away, I can't see the point in seeking to impoverish
the general public so you and your cronies can amass $1 billion apiece). The
thing is, we can all understand the Profumo Affair and other sex-linked
scandals
http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/caseclosed/profumo.shtml
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16993
whereas the mutual fund money-grab, the Enron tax- and subsidy-fraud, the
WorldCom accounting lies are too complex for us, and perhaps for juries, to
figure out. Kozlowski's Tyco
http://www.securitiesfraudfyi.com/tyco.html
and Waksal's ImClone were somewhere in between. (And, hey, I never liked
Martha Stewart anyway: I can't imagine her ever having an orgasm that wasn't
fake. Did she really say "I can will an orgasm whenever I want"?)
http://hallbiography.com/arts_literature/734.shtml.
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/mstewart/secmspb60403cmp.html


Love,
Carol


[To save people writing for permission to reproduce these essays: they
remain copyrighted but may indeed be copied to the extent appropriate for
critical review or for academic and scholarly non-commercial purposes ("fair
use"). I don't suppose Hollywood will ever discover me and buy the rights to
my story, but in case they do: all rights are reserved. Hollywood would have
to pay me enough to buy out my career prospects, since if my identity is
revealed I won't be able to show myself at work ever again. Catherine Millet
didn't lose her job, but then she's different: she's a respected member of
the French intelligentsia and I am not. I'd like to meet her
http://www.erotic-awards.co.uk/2003/catherinemillet.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/waul

[I also would like to anticipate a question that has been asked before:
these essays are based on incidents that really happened, taken (mostly)
from my childhood diaries. The facts may be altered (1) where correct
details would impinge upon privacy or (2) out of literary license. My
statements of opinion rise or fall on their own merits, so to speak, and of
course the incidents are selected to accord with them. As I've said before,
this is a political manifesto dressed up with anecdotes and supported with
links to scientific facts and news reports. I am happy to receive comments,
but cannot answer them directly, except that as you may have seen they often
do get answered in a subsequent essay. Every time I think I have said all
there to say on the subject of my past, someone does raise a question, or
something happens to me, that makes further writing worthwhile.]

-- 
Pursuant to the Berne Convention, this work is copyright with all rights
reserved by its author unless explicitly indicated.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| alt.sex.stories.moderated ------ send stories to: <ckought69@hotmail.com>|
| FAQ: <http://assm.asstr-mirror.org/faq.html> Moderators: <story-ckought69@hotmail.com> |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|ASSM Archive at <http://assm.asstr-mirror.org>   Hosted by <http://www.asstr-mirror.org> |
|Discuss this story and others in alt.sex.stories.d; look for subject {ASSD}|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+