The New Joy of Sex: Part 2

The New Joy of Sex: Part 2. A private performance of fine arts.

2008, based on the works of Alex Comfort and Susan Quilliam. Listen to the podcast at How To Sex.

The antique idea of the woman as passive and the man as performer used to ensure that he would show off playing solos on her, and early marriage manuals perpetuated this idea. Today, she is herself the soloist par excellence, whether in getting him excited to start with, or in controlling him and showing off all her skills. Solo recitals are not, of course, necessarily separate from intercourse. Apart from leading into it, there are many coital solos; for the woman astride, for example; while mutual masturbation or genital kisses can be fully fledged duets. Solo response can be electrifyingly extreme in the quietest people. Skillfully handled by someone who doesn’t stop for yells of murder but does know when to stop, a woman can get orgasm after orgasm, and a man can be kept hanging just short of climax to the limit of human endurance. The solo-given orgasm, whether from her or from him, is unique; neither bigger nor smaller in either sex than a full duet but different; sharper but not so round. And most people who have experienced both like to alternate them. Trying to say how they differ is a little like describing wine. Differ they do, however, and much depends on cultivating and alternating them.

Top-level enjoyment doesn’t have to be varied, it just often is. In fact, being stuck rigidly with one sex technique usually means anxiety. In this book we have not, for example, focused on coital postures to the exclusion of all else.

The common positions are now familiar to most people from writing and pictures if not from trial; the more extreme ones, as a rule, should be spontaneous, but few of them have marked advantages. This explains the apparent emphasis in this book on extras; the “sauces and pickles.” That said, individuals who, through a knot in their psyche, are obliged to live on sauce and pickle only are unfortunate in missing the most sustaining part of the meal; exclusive obsessions in sex are very like living exclusively on horseradish sauce through allergy to beef; fear of horseradish sauce, however, as indigestible, unnecessary, and immature is another hang-up, namely puritanism.

One of the things still missing from the essence of sexual freedom is the unashamed ability to use sex as play. In the past, ideas of maturity were nearly as much to blame as old-style moralisms about what is normal or perverse. We are all immature, and have anxieties and aggressions. Coital play, like dreaming, may be a programmed way of dealing acceptably with these, just as children express their fears and aggressions in games. Adults are unfortunately afraid of playing games, dressing up, and acting scenes. It makes them self-conscious: something horrid might get out. In this regard, bed is the place to play all the games you have ever wanted to play; if adults could become less self-conscious about such “immature” needs, we should have fewer deeply anxious people. If we were able to transmit the sense of play that is essential to a full, enterprising, and healthily immature view of sex between committed people, we would be performing a mitzvah: playfulness is a part of love that could be a major contribution to human happiness.

But still the main dish is loving, un-self-conscious sexual pleasure of all kinds; long, frequent, varied, ending with both parties satisfied, but not so full they can’t face another light course, and another meal in a few hours. The piece de resistance is good old face-to-face matrimonial, the finishing-off position, with mutual orgasm, and starting with a full day or night of ordinary tenderness. Other ways of making love are special in various ways, and the changes of timbre are infinitely varied; complicated ones are for special occasions, or special uses like holding off an over-quick male orgasm, or are things that, like pepper steak, are stunning once a year, but not dietary staples.

There are, after all, only two “rules” in good sex, apart from the obvious one of not doing things that are silly, antisocial, or dangerous. One is: “Don’t do anything you don’t really enjoy,” and the other is: “Find out your partner’s needs and don’t balk at them if you can help it.” In other words, a good giving and taking relationship depends on a compromise (so does going to a show; if you both want the same thing, fine; if not, take turns and don’t let one partner always dictate.) This can be easier than it sounds, because unless their partner wants something they find actively off-putting, real lovers get a reward not only from their own satisfaction but also from seeing the other respond and become satisfied. Most wives who don’t like Chinese food, will eat it occasionally for the pleasure of seeing an Asian food loving husband enjoy it, and vice versa.

Partners who won’t do this over specific sex needs are usually balking not because they have tried it and it’s a turnoff (many experimental dishes are nicer than you expected), but through ignorance of the range of human needs, plus being scared if these include things like forcefulness, cultivating extragenital sensation, o r role-playing, which previous social mythology pretended weren’t there. Reading a full list of the unscheduled accessory sex behaviors that some normal people find helpful might be thought a necessary preliminary to any extended sexual relationship.

Repolishing.

Couples should match up their needs and preferences (though people don’t find these out at once); you won’t get to some of our suggestions or understand them until you have learned to respond. It’s a mistake to run so long as walking is such an enchanting and new experience, and you may be happy pedestrians who match automatically. Where a rethink really helps is at the point where you have gotten used to each other socially (sex needs aren’t the only ones that need matching up between people who live together), and feel that the surface needs repolishing. If you think that sexual relations are overrated, the surface does need repolishing, and you haven’t paid enough attention to the wider use of your sexual equipment as a way of communicating totally. The traditional expedient at the point where the surface gets dull is to trade in the relationship and start all over in an equally uninstructed attempt with someone else, on the off chance of getting a better match-up by random choice. This is emotionally wasteful, and you usually repeat the same mistakes; better by far to repolish.

As to practicalities, we suggest couples either read the book together or (perhaps even better) read it separately, marking passages for the other partner’s attention. This works wonders if; as is often the case; you don’t really talk easily about sexual needs, or are afraid of sounding tactless.

Finally, if you don’t like the repertoire or if it doesn’t square with yours, never mind; the aim of The Joy of Sex is to stimulate your creative imagination. Sex books can only suggest techniques in order to encourage you to experiment. You can preface your own ideas with “this is how we play it,” and play it your own way. But by that time, when you will have tried all your own creative sexual fantasies, you won’t need books.

Ingredients. Tenderness.

a constant awareness of what your partner is feeling, plus the knowledge ol how to heighten that feeling, gently, toughly, slowly, or last.

This, in fact, is what the whole book is about. It doesn’t exclude extremely forceful games (though many people neither need nor want these), but it does exclude clumsiness, heavy-handedness, lack of feedback, spitefulness, and non rapport generally. Tenderness is shown fully in the way you touch each other. What it implies at root is a constant awareness of what your partner is feeling, plus the knowledge of how to heighten that feeling, gently, toughly, slowly, or fast, and this can only come from an inner state of mind between the two of you. No really tender person can simply turn over and go to sleep afterwards.

Many if not most inexperienced men, and some women, are just naturally clumsy; either through haste, anxiety, or lack of sensing how the other sex feels; so don’t grab breasts, stick fingers into the vagina, bend the penis, or (and this goes for both sexes) misplace bony parts of your anatomy. More women respond to very light than to very heavy stimulation; just brushing pubic or skin hairs will usually do far more than a whole-hand grab. At the same time, don’t be frightened; neither of you is made of glass. Women, by contrast, often fail to use enough pressure, especially in hand work, though the light, light variety is a sensation on its own.

Start very gently, making full use of the skin surface, and work up. Stimulus toleration in any case increases with sexual excitement and even hard blows can become excitants (though not for everyone.) This loss of pain sense disappears almost instantly with orgasm, so don’t go on too long, and be extra gentle as soon as he or she has come.

If we could teach tenderness, most of this book would be superseded. If you are really heavy-handed, a little practice with inanimate surfaces, dress fastenings, and so on will help. Strength is a turn-on in sex, but it isn’t expressed in clumsy hand work, bear hugs, and brute force; at least not as starters. If there is a problem here, remember you both can talk.

Few people want to be in bed on any terms with a person who isn’t basically tender, and most people are delighted to be in bed with the right person who is. The ultimate test is whether you can bear to find the person there when you wake up. If you are actually pleased, then you can be sure that you are onto the right thing.

Nakedness.

The normal state for lovers who take their work at all seriously, at least as a basic requisite. They don’t so much start clothed, and shed what they must, as start naked, and add any extras they need.

Nakedness doesn’t mean lack of ornament. A woman may take off all her clothes, but put on all her jewels; the only practical need, as with wristwatches, is to see they don’t catch or scratch. This is for daylight; it is difficult to sleep in them. For night, an increase in the value put on lovemaking is probably the main reason that many people now sleep naked. The only exception may be after; warm bodies tend to stick, and a blotter worn by one or other can add to comfort.

Nudists used to be associated with health fanatics enjoying a strict regime of cold showers and vigorous sports. Now, thank goodness, a more relaxed attitude prevails. Today, nudity is natural, not a ritual.

Organized “nudism” in most countries is a family affair. This is probably a good idea; the nudity of one’s own parents can be worrying to some children, and shouldn’t be overdone. There is, however, a lot to be said for the opportunity to look at men and women in general under unforced conditions; it is the discharge of residual anxiety of this sort about our body acceptability that probably makes group nudity so relaxing, rather than the opportunity to get an all-over tan. There is also evidence that children brought up in a naturist environment may be more responsible when faced with sexual opportunities and asked to make sexual choices. You should be able to pick a naturist club to taste; they offer facilities for open-air nakedness, which are hard to organize at home, and are universally tough on sexual advances, which makes for an almost uniquely relaxed atmosphere.

Women (by her for him.)

Women, like men, have direct physical responses, sure; science proves that we get turned on just as much as you and as quickly; it’s simply that traditionally we have been discouraged. But our triggers are different (breasts and skin first, please, not a direct grab at the clitoris), and can’t be short-circuited. It matters to us who is doing what, far more than it does to most men. The fact that, unlike you, we can’t be visibly turned off and lose erection often confuses men into hurrying things or missing major resources. It isn’t true that nudity, erotica, and so on; don’t excite us. Probably the difference is that they aren’t overriding things and that we don’t separate them from emotions as easily as you do. Is it fair, I wonder, to give a simple instance? You, sir, can make orgiastically satisfactory love with a near stranger in half an hour flat. But please don’t think for that reason that you can do the same for a woman who loves you personally if, at the end of the half-hour, you turn over and go straight to sleep. Granted this however, there are common reactions. Granted this difference, however, there are common reactions.

We seem to be less heavily programmed than you for specific turn-ons, but once we see one of these working on a man we care about, we soon program it into our own response, and can be less rigid and more experimental because of this ability.

Often, if women seem under-active, it’s because we are wary of doing the wrong thing with that particular man, like touching up his penis when, in fact, he is trying not to ejaculate; tell us if you see us at a loss. The penis isn’t a “weapon” for us so much as a shared possession; it’s less the size than its personality, unpredictable movements, and moods that make up the turn-on. We like penetration because it makes us feel close to you; but don’t feel put down if we don’t then necessarily climax through it alone (see her orgasm); work with that rather than being discouraged by it.

Another important thing is the tough-tender mixture: obviously strength is a turn-on, but clumsiness (elbows in eyes, twisted fingers, for instance) is the dead opposite. You never get anywhere by clumsy brutality; however brutal good lovemaking sometimes looks, the turn-on is strength-skill-control, not large bruises, and the ability to be tender with it. Some people ask “tough or tender?” but the mood shifts so fast that you have got to be able to sense it. Surely it’s possible; because some lovers do it; to read this balance from the feel of the woman. No obsessive views about reciprocity; who comes on top and so on evens out during the passing of time: there can be long spells when we are happy to let you do the work, and others when we need to control everything ourselves and get an extra kick from seeing how we make you respond.

Women aren’t “submissive” any more than men; if we have knuckled under in the past, it’s only through social pressures. If we are dominant, we don’t always act it out in bed by wearing spurs and cracking a whip. Men have a real advantage here in the constructive use of play (and can help women to act it out too.) Since we all have some aggressions, good sex can be wildly forceful, but still never cruel.

As for sexual equality, nobody can possibly be a good lover without regarding their partner as a person and an equal. That is really all there is to be said on the matter.

Our sense of smell is the keener. Don’t over-saturate early on with masculine odors; just before orgasm is probably the time for full odor contact. Our own smell excites us as well as yours.

We learn, over a period of time, that the sort of hand and mouth work that men like varies enormously. Some like it very rough, some hate it anything but extremely gentle, others in between. There is no way for us to tell except by asking and being told; therefore it’s up to you to say what you like or you may get the opposite; remember that we love to know how to be good for you.

Some men are extraordinarily passive, or unimaginative, or inhibited, and; oddly; when they are any of these things, we don’t become correspondingly forceful. We may long to do things and feel thoroughly frustrated, but we won’t show it in most cases. So a woman’s lovemaking will only be as good as her partner’s and, more important, she will resent any man who is unexciting, not only because he is unexciting, but also because she will know she has been unexciting too.

Finally, you should never presume that what excites one woman sexually will work just as well on another woman. Women probably do differ sexually rather more than men, because of the greater complexity of our sexual apparatus (breasts, skin, and so on as well as pussy.) Never assume that you don’t need to relearn for each person. This is also true for a woman with a new man, but perhaps a little less so.

Men (by him for her.)

The most valued thing in lovemaking is "the divine gift of lechery.”

We often wish that women’s sexuality was like ours, even though we know it isn’t. Our sexual response is far brisker and more automatic: it’s triggered easily by things, like putting a coin in a vending machine. Consequently, women and parts of women provide automatic sexual stimulus for us; your clothes, breasts, odor, and so on aren’t what we love instead of you; simply the things we need in order to set sex in motion and express love. You seem to find this hard to understand.

Secondly, most though not all male feeling is ultimately centered in the last inch of the penis (though you can, if you start intelligently, teach us female-type sensitivity all over the surface of our skin.) And unlike yours, our sexuality depends on a positive performance; we have to be turned on to achieve an erection, and not turned off, in order to function; we can’t be passively “taken.” This matters intensely to men at both a biological and a personal level; sexual success is what makes us feel worthwhile. It explains why we are emphatically penis-centered and tend to open the proceedings with genital play, probably before you are ready and when you would much rather wait to get in the mood. Genital approach is how we get into the mood.

You need to understand these reactions, as we need to understand yours. A woman’s concern about being a sex object misses the point; sure, the woman and the various parts of her are sex objects, but most men ideally would wish to be treated piecemeal in the same way. Thus, the most valued thing, from you, in actual lovemaking, is intuition of these object reactions, and direct initiative; starting the play, taking hold of the penis, giving genital kisses ahead of being asked; being an initiator, a user of your stimulatory equipment. This is hard to put in simple terms; it is what is meant by “the divine gift of lechery”; the art of sensing turn ons and going along with them for the partner’s response. It isn’t the same for the two sexes because male turn-ons are concrete, while many female turn-ons are situational and atmospheric. Remember too that we may simply be tired of having to deliver, in life as well as in bed, and your taking over doesn’t just offer us the ultimate compliment, it also gives us the opportunity to relax and enjoy. Sex may be about the only place in our lives where we get to be held and nurtured.

Personal folklore apart, what the male turn-on equipment requires is the exact reverse of a virgin or a passively recipient instrument; not a demand situation, because that in itself can threaten a turnoff due to feelings of inadequacy, but a skill situation; I can turn you on, and turn myself on in doing so, and from that point we play it both ways and together. You can’t, of course, control your turn-ons any more than we can, but it helps if you have some male-type object reactions, like being excited by the sight of a penis, or hairy skin, or by the man stripping, or by physical kinds of play (just as it helps if we have some sense of atmosphere.) It’s the active woman who understands our reactions, plays on them, and leads them out while keeping her own who is the ideal lover.

To be continued. based on the works of Alex Comfort and Susan Quilliam, for The New Joy of Sex.