Monthly Archives: June 2011

We have a problem

Current and future swingers, fellow deviants, assorted perverts, we have a problem. Frankly, it’s embarrassing. You have an internet connection, you know what I’m talking about. If we ever want to be restored before the eyes of respectable society, we are going to need to move beyond web 1.17.

My eyes, my eyes

Here in 2011 there are dozens of easy ways to create a free or low cost website that doesn’t make visitors want to stick forks in their eyes. There are templates, created by designers. There is free advice to be had, reams of it, on the basics of good web design.

Despite this, Melbourne swingers’ party websites are almost uniformly hideous, and about the best that can be said for them is that none uses comic sans. I can’t quite decide which site is the worst, but it’s probably between these two.

EJ’s even tells us that they *know* their website causes suffering:

With a bit of luck and hopefully figuring out how to drive our site navigation, you might even find out something about our swingers parties!

Stilettos probably comes a close third with this mashup of late nineties photography on fuschia and black:


These two also offend me deeply:

Copy

I’m not usually one to make fun of or moan about poor writing, and I’m not expecting anybody to completely master hyphenation or overcome cheesy language and run-on sentences. But I do think that when you’re trying to get people to give you money in exchange for services, it makes sense to run spellcheck.

Looking like you care is particularly important, I think, with swingers parties. Every swingers’ party holds within itself the potential to be either the pinnacle of pleasure or a horrifying trauma, and which of these eventuates depends a lot on the efforts of the organiser. When an organiser has such low standards in writing about and advertising their parties, it’s harder to be confident that you won’t be assaulted, saddled with a new skin condition or forced to eat kabana sausage.

Hence my concern at rampant misplaced or missing apostrophes;

GANG   BANG   SUZIE and her freinds (we will know which one or one’s as the date gets closer) …

5. If its your first time at one of our parties and had booked earlier on in the week we then will phone you back on either the Thursday or Friday before the party to re confirm your attendance,if you cannot be contacted eg phone goes to voice mail a message will be left, you then need to phone us back to confirm attendance.

misspellings;

When you way it all up, it makes good sense to become a member and experiment in a safe sexy well run club.

Memberships get you cheeper party Tickets and you can send messages to other members

and random capitalisation (my favourite!):

All parties, Fun & mutual respect is what we demand.

Regard less of your sexuallity Safe sex practices are always  advisable.

In addition to simple bad writing, some copy suggests outright hostililty:

Compulsory Dress code; underwear or nothing, upon entry.

For those that need this explained this means;- clothes worn under the outer garments and next to the skin, underclothing*.
* If you needed this explained this party is not for you.

My favourite thing on any of the sites are Attunga’s hilariously irrelevant testimonials:

I did have a good time on Thursday night, even though I left maybe a bit earlier.
But I do have a bit too travel home. Next time will be longer.
As I was leaving, you mentioned something about a password to me as I was going out the door.If this is what you was talking about I have not received one from you, if this all makes sense to you.
Look forward to the next one with the guys or even a bi night.
Regards, Jeff

So…

It seems to me that there’s a business opportunity here for someone to run sex parties that are, and that look, like, good. I hope that somebody in Melbourne decides to do that sometime soon.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Man Candy Mondays: Go doggies!

When I moved to Melbourne three and a half years ago, one of the first tasks I had to attend to was choosing an AFL team. Unfortunately, I was led badly astray by a very dear friend, and for a brief period followed Collingwood.

Soon after that mis-step, I settled on the Western Bulldogs. They were a bit of a funny looking bunch at the time, save the dreamy Daniel Giansiracusa.

via Gay Footy ‘s  Player Pix

But watching a game the other night (my first this season), I was struck by how beautiful my team was all of a sudden.

Now to Giansiracusa I will add 18-year old (!!) Luke Dahlhaus, he of the beautiful shoulder-length dreadlocks.

Via the Herald Sun

I am quite partial to Will Minson and his beautiful arms:

Via Zimbio

And this Justin Sherman chap is making me (and apparently a whole bunch of gay men) rather dizzy.

Via The Sports Fag

That is all!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Man Candy

The news in numbers 1: Female gazing

Released, this week, from my usual 9 to 5 toil, I’ve had time to devote myself to something far less consequential: an investigation into the abundance or otherwise of hawt men in the Australian online media landscape! Today, I am excited to unveil the results of my miniature study.

I’m going to give my geek free reign on this one, so your three options are to:

  1. get your geek on too;
  2. forgive me and endure; or
  3. skip straight to ‘Results’

Here we go!

Aim

To assess the extent to which major Australian news websites show attractive men on their homepages.

Rationale

While images of hot women are hard to avoid modern Australia, images of hot men appear to be a scarcer commodity. This makes people who are attracted to hot men sad. By determining which online news site tends to feature the most hot men, my project will empower hot-men-attracted persons to navigate the media landscape in the most pleasurable way.

Research question

How many photographs of attractive men are displayed on the homepages of major Australian news sources?

(entirely skippable section on) Methodology

Daily, over the period 6 June to 11 June, I visited the homepages of four major Australian online news sources: The Age, The Australian, the Herald Sun and ABC News. Each visit took place in the early afternoon.

On each visit I classified each photograph on the main site as either:

  • attractive woman
  • not-so-attractive woman
  • attractive man
  • not-so-attractive man
  • other.

I counted totals for each and entered them into a spreadsheet. At the end of the week I calculated some daily averages and made some pretty stacked column graphs – my favourite!

So what is a physically attractive man and how is he different from a not-so-attractive man? How do we operationalise this concept? Obviously, hotness is subjective, and, recognising this, I didn’t go through measuring the moistness in my panties or anything. Instead, I made most classifications based on the way the person was presented, their occupation and their reason for being in the news. For example, a photograph of a politician, columnist or similar public figure was classified as not-so-attractive, unless the related article actually focused on their attractiveness, or if their attractiveness was really played up in the photo, or if they just happened to be undeniably super-hot. For example, Andrew Bolt = not-so-attractive, Fairfax blogger Katherine Feeney giving you a seductive sideways glance = attractive.

A photograph of a young celebrity or entertainer was classified as attractive by virtue of profession and presentation, rather than my own view of their hotttt level. The exception to this is was the celebrity is generally considered unattractive, but somehow still managed to get famous. For example, in a group photograph of tv show hosts Dannii Minogue, Kyle Sandilands and Brian McFadden, Dannii and Brian were counted as ‘attractive’ but Kyle was not. Come now, this is entirely fair.

Athletes and sporting figures with their tight, glistening bodies were classified as attractive unless they are most definitely not so. This was pretty generous of me, I thought, and really upped the count of attractive men, perhaps unfairly.

Where a photograph featured more than one person and each was clearly visible and an equal focus of the photo, I counted each of the people separately.

Photographs of groups of ordinary or hard-to-see people and of children, along with non-photographic images (cartoons, graphs, etc.) were classified as “other”. I counted large, medium and small photographs, including those in automatic slide rotators, but not teeny-tiny thumbnails or photographs in advertisements. Where the exact same photo appeared more than once on the homepage, I counted it only once.

Results!

On all of the websites, there were more photographs of men than women (Table 1). Perhaps this is a good sign for hetrosexual ladies eager for visual stimulation! Then again, perhaps not! We shall not jump to conclusions.

Table 1: Average photographs of men and women

The ABC led the pack in display of the male form, with a daily average of 13.75 photos of men on its homepage (74% of people-pictures). With 73% men, the Australian also did well on this measure, while delivering a higher total number of pictures of men (average of 17). The Age was disturbingly egalitarian, with nearly half of all people in photographs being of the female variety. Boo!

Now let’s dig a little deeper. Figure 1 below shows the average proportions of hot and not-so-hot men and women on each of the homepages.

Figure 1: Average proportion of hot and not-so-hot men and women

Figure 1 shows that The Australian got our hopes up only to dash them cruelly. Despite their admirable focus on men, a paltry 1.4 of them were hunky – a ratio of not-so-hot to hot of around 11 to 1! The ABC, on the other hand, put in a decent effort with hot men representing a respectable 19% of all people photographed.

The clear winner, though, is the Herald Sun. The Herald Sun averaged 7.6 hot men per day, which was, incredibly, exactly equal to the average number of hot women displayed. Even though The Age had more hot men in total (9.4), one is forced to wade through many, many pictures of unbearably cute women to find them. One caveat, however: many of the Herald Sun’s physically attractive men are footballers or similar, which might not be your thing.

Discussion

Like all the best studies, this one did not add to human knowledge but simply confirmed what everyone knew already. Pictures of pretty women are everywhere, and pictures of pretty men are not. For those of us who like to look at hot men, though, there is a surprising oasis in the media desert: the Herald Sun. The very worst thing you can do as a lover of male beauty is to peruse The Australian or the ABC.

As well as providing a basis for newsmedia decision-making, the study sheds some light which types of people are likely to become famous, in the news. If you are woman who is neither super hot nor Our Nation’s Leader, you are not very likely to get your face in the paper. Sorry! Best focus on baking or something like that, rather than fame. If you are a not-so-attractive man, but you can write above a fifth-grade level and enjoy kicking poor people in the teeth, you should probably get in touch with The Australian as they may have an opening for an opinion columnist.

Limitations

Like all research, this project had its limitations. Most importantly, alone, the results of this study may not provide sufficient information for media consumption decision-making. You might wish to take other factors into account when deciding what news source to rely on, such as journalistic quality, ease of navigation, and whether Andrew Bolt is likely to make you lose your breakfast.

While I tried to judge general attractiveness, I am human, and I’m sorry, I just don’t think Rafael Nadal is anywhere near so hot as Bear Grylls. You may disagree.

Also, I was not all that careful in my counting. Slide rotators, in particular, are really annoying to look at, so I probably fucked up a bit with those. Whoops.

3 Comments

Filed under In the news, Man Candy, Research

TBSASS 2: Won’t somebody think of the children?

Hello! Welcome to the second instalment of The Best Studies are Sex Studies, wherein I read an entire journal article or report on sex stuff, and pass on the interesting bits to you…

Right at this  moment, I’m at a career crossroads. I know I want to quit my office job. What I’m trying to decide is whether to do a Dip Ed and become a bitter, misanthropic high school teacher, or do a PhD and become a poor nobody entirely disconnected from reality.

So anyhow, one of the things is, I really want to teach sex ed. I don’t know if you can even do this. I mean, I don’t quite know how the job gets allocated: perhaps wanting to be the sex ed teacher disqualifies you.  But so! Sexuality education. It is an interest of mine. Let’s do some learning on it!

The study

The good people at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society have just released a new study on this very topic: Sexuality Education in Australian Secondary Schools: Results of the 1st National Survey of Australian Secondary Teachers of Sexuality Education 2010.

As the title helpfully suggests, the report describes the findings of a national survey of high school sex ed teachers. Prior to this survey, nobody really knew very much about who taught sex ed, what they taught or how they did it. The idea behind the survey was to get a representative picture of Australian sex ed so as to provide a basis for improvement.

Not because I am dedicated, but because of being a nerd, I read the report’s ‘methodology’ section. Twice, actually! Despite a low response rate, it looks pretty good, and the findings are probably more or less representative of the actual situation. The survey included teachers from government, independent and Catholic schools in cities and in the regions. One anomaly I did notice is that 28 respondents were from single-sex girls’ schools, but only 6 were from boys’ schools. I will keep my wild conspiratorial speculations on the reasons for that to myself.

Sex ed teachers

Think back, if you will, five years, ten, fifteen, thirty, to your own schoolyard days. Call up, in your mind, the image of your PE teacher…

Apparently, fully 4 out of 5 Australian sex ed teachers are PE teachers. I don’t know about you, but I find this a bit disconcerting. Times have probably changed since I was in school, and ten years of public, humiliating physical defeat may be unfairly colouring my perception of PE teachers, but they never struck me as the most enlightened of the faculty.

The next biggest contributors were SOSE/humanities teachers (5.4%), science teachers (5.1%) and, eek!, religious education teachers (3.2%). Support staff like nurses, consellors and – eek! again – chaplains, together made up 4 per cent.

Most had some training in sex ed, either as post- or undergraduates, or in-service, but 16 per cent had no training whatsoever, and one third didn’t assess their teaching against any curriculum standards. This is kind of a big deal, when you compare it to teaching generally.

A small but scary group of sex ed teachers harbours some pretty fucked-up views. (Unavoidable double-negatives in this paragraph, read carefully!) For example, 1 in 5 didn’t ‘strongly disagree’ with the statement ‘homosexuality is always wrong’, and 27% weren’t sure whether sex before marriage was okay or not. Only 62% disagreed that sexual orientation/same sex attraction should be excluded from the sex ed curriculum.

What’s being put into impressionable young minds??

It seems reasonable to assume that the framework in which sex ed is taught will influence its content and messages, so it’s interesting that:

 … most sexuality education was taught as part of the health education program (91%)… When sexuality education was taught in another subject (12% of teachers), it was most likely to be in Religious Education, Personal Development or Biology/Science.

Hold this in your mind as we move onto the next point.

So, the survey listed a bunch of sexuality topics, asking the teachers to identify those that they covered in their teaching. Factual sexual health topics were most widely taught, including STIs, birth control, reproduction, etc. Social topics such as ‘managing peer influence, relationships and feelings, alcohol and decision-making, sexual activity and decision making and dealing with emotions when sexually active’ were also taught by the vast majority of teachers. Ninety-four per cent of teachers covered ‘abstinence from intercourse until being ready’. Surprisingly, to me, 68 per cent also covered the ridiculously unrealistic and thoroughly antiquated topic of “abstinence until marriage”.

When it comes to social topics detail seems to me to be all-important, and what a survey can tell us is pretty limited. It’s good for teenagers to hear that they can wait until they’re ready, and to know how to deal with pressure from peers or a partner. The thing is that these good-in-and-of-themselves messages can so easily be taught as part of an overall narrative in which everybody is hetrosexual, girls’ sexual desire is totally missing, sexual activity is equated with a lack of self-respect, and so on.

What gets left out?

Guess! Guess!

………………………………………………..

…………………………………………………..

Fascinatingly, the only listed topic covered by less than half of the teachers was ‘the pleasure of sexual behaviour/activity’. The report is pretty sanguine about this, but they do have a little jab, with some help from those kinky Scandinavians:

However, practical examples such as the Long Live Love Program in the Netherlands demonstrate that comprehensive programs that accept young peoples’ sexual desire as being normal and teaching about mutuality and pleasure in sexual relationships can be very effective. Within Europe the Netherlands has the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy, abortion and STIs among young people.

Long Live Love? Sounds cooler than Australia’s most-used program, Talking Sexual Health. Check out this video on the program (ten tips on good kissing at 3:10! Rude Dutch words at 4:30!).

Also, around 16 per cent of teachers said they do not cover ‘sexual orientation/same sex attraction’, which is a complete fucking travesty, in my opinion.  ‘Gender roles and stereotyping’ was covered by nearly 9 of 10 teachers, but it’s difficult to know what this means, and ‘gender identity’ wasn’t even an item on the list. Around a third didn’t cover ‘sex and ethics’.

How and when

The study also looked at how and when sex ed is taught. Unless you have an unusual interest in pedagogy the ‘how’ isn’t particularly interesting (live demonstrations don’t get a mention). In terms of timing, the basic reproductive facts are usually taught in years 7 and 8. Sex ed is most concentrated in year nine, followed by year ten, and only a small proportion of teaching time is in years 11 and 12. In a way this makes sense; there’s a lot of other stuff to focus on in years 11 and 12, and some kids have already left school. On the other  hand, this is around the time that a lot of teenagers start actually having sex, so it’s odd that education about it drops off.

My random view, in case anyone cares

Ultimately, sex ed, like anything that is taught in schools, is unlikely to stray far from prevailing community attitudes, or travel more quickly towards sexual utopia than society as a whole. Nearly half of the teachers in this survey said that they were careful about what they taught because of possible community reactions.

On top of that, schools are the focus of a million competing interests and agendas, each salivating at the thought of all those developing brains held captive, nearly every day, by law! Sixty-five per cent of sex ed teachers said that there was already not enough time to cover sexuality education adequately, so nobody’s going to be clamouring for more content.

Still, here’s my idea. In addition to the vital sexual health information, the social skills for negotiating sex, and the Pleasure Stuff, I think that sexuality should be taught in its cultural and political context. That is – and excuse me for this wanky academic terminology – it should be taught as a contested thing. So many controversial political and cultural debates centre on sexual matters: abortion, gay marriage, sexual assault & rape, porn, and so on. Because sex is also a part of our personal lives and relationships (whether we’re getting it, wanting it, avoiding it, loving it, watching it, fighting over it, or something else), these debates are extra-emotionally-charged.

So I reckon that a useful message for teenagers, maybe in those last couple of years of school, is that a lot of people have strong views about sex: what it means, how and when it should be done, and who it can be done with. The task for them is to work out, or decide, what sex means to them and the place it will have in their lives.

1 Comment

Filed under Research

Man Candy Mondays: Aural edition!

When I was 18 or so, I was really, really into Jeff Buckley. OK, I know that most everyone likes Jeff Buckley, but I was obsessed. I owned every album, even the illegally produced bootleg ones and the ones that just comprised 17 slightly different renditions of Dream Brother.

Anyhow, this is by no means the best Jeff Buckley song, not by a long shot. Plus, it’s a home-recorded work in progress so the sound quality is crap. But it is fucking horny, and perhaps even a little bit genderqueer:

Your Flesh is So Nice, from Sketches for my Sweetheart the Drunk

Enjoy!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Man Candy

Dilemmas 1: Coming out as sex positive

On the Monday after you’ve fucked four guys at a sex party, how do your answer a co-worker’s polite question about your weekend? I’m in an industry that’s not even remotely sexy, so I’ll tell him I went to a party. If I’m feeling cheeky I might add that I “met a bunch of new people” and “had a really great time”. Being discreet about gang bangs is one thing, but should we hide our sex-positivity, our alternative relationships or our interest in sexuality when we’re at work?

For me, my interest in sex, my being non-monogamous and my sex positivity form a big chunk of my identity. In some way I feel entitled to be open about this, just like my foodie colleague is open about her fascination with food and wine. On top of that, I think perhaps there’s a political and moral obligation to contribute to a more sex positive culture by being open about my interests and lifestyle, even with co-workers.

Generally, my approach in the workplace has been to be honest if asked and somewhat open with ‘work friends’. I don’t go around telling people I’m nonmonogamous, but if it comes up in conversation I do tell colleagues that I am in an open relationship, just like that, without elaborating or explaining, as though it’s normal.

With ‘work friends’, I’m more myself. I joke around with one of my colleagues, a guy my age, about various men in our sector/office block/most frequented cafes that I think are “hot” or on whom I  have “crushes”. We’ve chatted about sex education and AFL scandals in amongst all our other discussions of politics and current affairs, and I’ve told him that I have an intellectual interest in sexual issues.

Recently, though, there was an incident that made me wonder whether I’d perhaps been a bit too much myself. The aforementioned work friend noticed that I was leaving a comment on something online, and mentioned it loudly, and somehow drew the entire (very small) office into discussion of what I was reading and commenting on – an article about Filament magazine. Suddenly I was exposed.

What’s the article about?

Um, this magazine, um.

What magazine?

Um. It’s a magazine with pictures of men.

Are they naked?

Ah, yeah, mostly.

So you’ve read this magazine?

Yes, yeah.

One day I’m semi-comfortable with one colleague, and the next I’m admitting to a conservative Christian, my boss and a brand new colleague that I consume porn. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course. Normally I don’t care about being judged, but I don’t want to be judged by my co-workers. And I don’t want my interest in sex to damage my career. But I’m not sure that I could maintain a sexless work persona, even if I wanted to.

5 Comments

Filed under Introspection