So, submitted for the approval of the Midnight Society, I call this story...
The Om
Ok, I challenged myself a little more this time around. This one doesn't look like something a horny 12-year-old boy imagined sex could be like. This is the product of the minds of horny 20-something-year-old girls: imagining that all their sex will be intimate tantric love making on silk fuscia sheets in the middle of a vaguely pastel blue ether. The Om is the single romantic's wet dream (and anyone in a relationship who has progressed to the "get in, get off, get out, get napping" phase). I do realize that I am going to come across as a bitter, disillusioned single girl whose only chance at sexual intimacy comes in the form of grinding during the vocal stylings of Ja Rule, but this really just doesn't strike me at the hot new sex position you have to try in order to attain better, longer, deeper orgasms, or whatever the hell GlamourCosmoWomen's Health is shilling this as. It seems like the sex you have to try to attain longer, deeper hip flexor cramps. But before I further illustrate why my serious long-term live in relationship is with a 4-year-old feline, let's look at how you get into this pose:
He sits cross-legged (yoga-style), you sit in his lap facing him. Wrap your legs around him and hug each other for support.
Ok, so obviously I take issue with using yoga as inspiration for sex. It creeps me out, and it kinda perverts the entire purpose and spirituality behind yoga, and this position doesn't even make an attempt to veil that. Why? The logic seems to be "Yoga. From India. Also from India, the Karma Sutra. Yoga = Exotic Orientalist sex!" I only skimmed Edward Said, but this explanation seems to be derived from the same condensed, over simplified, kinda-colonialist and fairly-racist thought that led 17th century explorers to believe that Asian women had sideways vaginas (I know there exist illustrations of this, but 30 seconds of google searching has made me feel far too perverted and racist to endure, so take my word for it, people thought that).Another objection I have is over the idea of getting off in a man's lap. The word specifically, not the geography. Laps are innocent. Laps are for little ridiculous dogs, kids asking Santa for stuff their parents can't afford, and little girls having their dad's explain to them the rules of football, and I really resent its use in a sex guide. Like, lets call a spade a spade; sit in his crotch. If your going to throw around specific anatomical terminology, we don't need to sugarcoat what's going on with phrasing most often associated with children and animals, ok? [note: "crotch" is specific anatomical terminology, right?]
Though, to be fair, why, Women's Health, do I want to do this?
Best for tantric sex. Rocking, not thrusting, is the key when it comes to this very intimate position.
I'll keep this brief, since my inner po-mo feminist theorist exploded all over the place up there. First: I strongly maintain that Sting and only Sting has tantric sense. With Sting. And second: rocking?
Oh oh, what are the bonuses, since you've already ruined the child-associated terminology of laps and rocking?
Lock into each other’s deep gaze to put some extra “oh” into the big O.
No. Again, I have been single for a while, I cannot stress this enough, but I refuse to believe that eye contact will have any impact different than the impact headlights have on road deer. I want to be either close enough that I can only see small blurry portions of your face, or facing away from you so I can pretend you're Kunal Nayyar
...by the way, that is entirely a teaser for next time...
Until then, enjoy your missionary and/or doggy style and/or woman on top sex that I know you're all really having. I'm going to go eat some applesauce.
No comments:
Post a Comment