Underage sex and bestiality? Enjoy it!

This is a long piece but it does have underage sex
and bestiality in it. So enjoy! — Mark Steyn

The other day I had an e-mail from M J Murphy, who blogs as Big City Lib,
saying only this:

I think you owe Dr. Miller an apology.

There followed a link to a post called Steyn Gets Punked By 28-Year Old Literary Hoax:

Remember the kerfuffle between Mark Steyn and journalism professor Dr. John Miller
from a few weeks back? Dr. Miller accused Steyn of taking material for “America Alone”
from illegitimate sources like the infamous Little Green Book:
Sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini.*
[*UPDATE: M J Murphy has quietly revised this paragraph,
and so the airbrushing begins] 

Actually, I don’t think Dr Miller has accused me of any such thing, though
I admit, given his shifting accusations, that I’m no longer quite sure what
he’s accusing me of. Just to recap, said “kerfuffle” arises from this passage
in a review I wrote for Maclean’s of Oriana Fallaci’s final book The Force Of Reason:

Signora Fallaci then moves on to the livelier examples of contemporary Islam –
for example, Ayatollah Khomeini’s “Blue Book” and its helpful advice on
romantic matters: “If a man marries a minor who has reached the age of nine
and if during the defloration he immediately breaks the hymen, he cannot enjoy
her any longer.” I’ll say. I know it always ruins my evening. Also: “A man who has
had sexual relations with an animal, such as a sheep, may not eat its meat.
He would commit sin.” Indeed. A quiet cigarette afterwards as you listen to your
favourite Johnny Mathis LP and then a promise to call her next week and swing
by the pasture is by far the best way. It may also be a sin to roast your nine-year-old
wife, but the Ayatollah’s not clear on that.

A cheap joke en passant. Indeed, insofar as I dwelt on the ovine fornication,
it was to suggest to La Fallaci that, even for us flagrant Islamophobes, it was
not perhaps the most useful avenue of attack:

I enjoy the don’t-eat-your-sexual-partner stuff as much as the next infidel,
but the challenge presented by Islam is not that the cities of the Western
world will be filling up with sheep-shaggers. If I had to choose, I’d rather
Mohammed Atta was downriver in Egypt hitting on the livestock than flying
through the windows of Manhattan skyscrapers. But he’s not.

And that’s it. That’s all I said. And no one would remember had not El Mo’s
sock puppets included the sheep-shagging line in thedossier they submitted
to the Canadian “Human Rights” Commission. Whereupon Dr Miller …actually,
I’m not sure he is a doctor: He calls himself “The Journalism Doctor”, but the
title seems to be entirely self-conferred. Anyway, at this point, Doc Miller, Prof Miller,
Herr Baron von Miller or whatever he is got interested in the case and asked the British
Columbia “Human Rights” Tribunal if he could intervene. Silly ol’ me assumed that he
wished to intervene to argue the cause of free speech. But no: he wanted to intervene
to argue that I was not a “responsible journalist”, and so it was entirely appropriate for
the state to censor me.
As Rory Leishman notes, since this thought-police racket got going, “Most journalists have
either condoned censorship or cowered in silence.” Canadians who still value liberty should
know that, if they rely on anemic PC flunkeys like Professor Miller, they’ll lose their country.
At any rate, the BCHRT gave him the bum’s rush, so Prof Miller surfaced a few weeks ago and
kept returning to the subject of the sheep-shaggers line. His complaint is in an apparently endless
process of evolution. But let’s go through the story so far:

1) First, insofar as I understand his initial argument, he advanced the curious line
that the ruling from the Ayatollah was not widely cited, and therefore it was improper of me to use it.

After it was pointed out that in fact Khomeini’s views on the post-bestiality buffet,
child sex and other arcane points of Islamic law are known to many (especially those
on the receiving end), a couple of weeks later he revised his line of attack:

2) Now his argument was that I’d concocted it out of whole cloth. The J-Doc declared
boldly that Steyn “gave no citation for the quote, and I suspect it was made up.”

In fact, as anyone who reads the passage above can see, I attributed it to Oriana
Fallaci’s book. The disinterested observer might conclude that Professor Ethics-Bore
had never so much as glanced at the offending article but had simply taken the Sock
Puppets’ word for it. So the E-Bore was obliged to revise his argument yet again – and
decided to accuse me of what he appeared to have done himself:

3) Now my sin was that I “clearly accepted someone else’s word for it”.
Evidently, it wasn’t all that “clear” when he was accusing me of making it up,
but a drowning ethics prof can be forgiven for clutching at straw men.

At any rate, that makes three different complaints. As Iwrote:

That’s the great thing about the self-appointed “Journalism Doctor”:
When he diagnoses you, he provides his own second opinion.

Now, on Prof Miller’s behalf, M J Murphy has revised my crime yet again:

Dr. Miller accused Steyn of taking material for “America Alone” from illegitimate
sources like the infamous Little Green Book: Sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini.

As I said, the sheep-shagging passage is from a review of La Fallaci’s book in Maclean’s.
It’s nothing to do with America Alone. There is no mention of sheep shagging in
America Alone. There is no mention of any Little Green Book in America Alone.
There is, indeed, no mention of Ayatollah Khomeini inAmerica Alone. Prof Miller
and Mr Murphy and their enthusiastic chorus boys at Law Is Cool are welcome tocheck for themselves.

But, leaving that aside and forgiving M J Murphy for confusing America Alone with a
book review in Maclean’s, if you return to the passage up above, you’ll see that neither
Oriana nor I refer to any Little Green Book.
We cite a “Blue Book” – or “Libro Azzurro”, in La Fallaci’s original Italian. That’s the
color we’re nailing to our mast. We’re singing the blues, and it’s you fellers who are
smelling the green. Indeed, the guy who brought up theLittle Green Book is Prof Miller
in his response to me. I never mentioned any green book. Like I said, I’d rather be blue.
So, if M J Murphy and the excitable schoolgirls at Law R Cool have proved The Little Green Bookis a “hoax”, the person who’s been “punked” is Professor Miller.

Incidentally, I wouldn’t describe The Little Green Book as a “hoax”. It would be truer
to say that it is a somewhat lurid and condensed version of the Ayatollah Khomeini’s work.
Nevertheless, if you read M J Murphy’s post, you’ll find that Marvin Zonis
of the University of Chicago declined to provide an introduction for it. Professor Zonis
is evidently regarded by M J Murphy as a greater authority in these matters than I am,
so please keep his name in mind.

However, as it happens, I didn’t take “someone else’s word” for anything,
whether it was the word of Oriana Fallaci or the compiler of The Little Green Book.
When it comes to the Ayatollah Khomeini’s views on sheep shagging, my gu
ide for many years has been a book called Resaleh Towzih al-Masael. The author is
a chap called …Ayatollah Khomeini. Let’s go back to the original offending quotation
from my Maclean’s book review:

Signora Fallaci then moves on to the livelier examples of contemporary Islam –
for example, Ayatollah Khomeini’s “Blue Book” and its helpful advice on romantic matters.

Well, here’s a clue:

Hmm. Here’s another clue:

But how can that be? We all know: “There is no Blue Book.”
The Lord High Checker of Facts has pronounced.
As it happens, Resaleh Towzih al-Masael has been published in Iran in several editions.
But the most popular was the paperback edition published by Nashr I Sharia’t of Tehran.
It sold for 120 rials. It had some 350 pages, approx 5×7 inches, with a blue cover,
featuring a picture of its ever more famous author. A souvenir hardback edition marketed
as the perfect New Year gift was subsequently published by Rashidi with a plain blue cover…
almost every year this book is published in a different color. But many versions of the ”Blue Book”
are still out there:

 

In the relevant passage in her book, Oriana recalls first seeing excerpts from the
“Blue Book” in 1979. That’s what it was back then: A blue book. The blue book
in revolutionary Iran. It certainly wasn’t a “little green book” as that wasn’t published till 1980.
So when she and I refer to the Ayatollah’s “Blue Book” we’re referring to that Nashr I Sharia’t
edition of the Resaleh. It was translated into English, unabridged, by J Borujerdi and published
in 1984 by Westview in London and Boulder, Colorado under the title A Clarification Of Questions.

I was given it a couple of decades ago by the Iranian gal I was then dating.
She had a copy of the pocket paperback with the Ayatollah on the cover, and once,
when she read out a bit to me, I expressed skepticism that it could really be that wacky.
So a few weeks later she presented me with the English edition. As she explained, these
were not just some personal musings from the Ayatollah but a kind of moral compass for
the Islamic state. So I didn’t need to “accept someone else’s word for it” on having sex with
nine-year-old girls, because, like anyone else who’s taken even a cursory interest in the
subject, I’ve known for a long time that, in the Islamic Republic of Iran, girls could be legally
married at the age of nine. Article 1041 of the Civil Code states:

Marriage before puberty by the permission of the Guardian and on condition of taking
into interest the ward’s interest is proper.

“Puberty” is defined as “nine full lunar years” – although, in practice, girls as young
as seven can be married on the say-so of a doctor. The justification for all this is in the
highly elaborate rules of Islamic life. They may sound unlikely to M J Murphy or Prof Miller
but the Ayatollah’s “clarification of questions” doesn’t strike most devout Iranian Shi’ites
that way. Mr Borujerdi, the English translator, was an Iranian émigré living in Cleveland,
and he gave an interview about the book to David Remnick (now the editor of The New Yorker)
in The Washington Post in 1985. It’s not available online but M J Murphy and Prof Miller
and the Law R Cool nellies are welcome to go to their local reference library and check it out.
It’s the Aug 21 issue, page B1:

“I did the translation because it gives a very close understanding of the Shiite
view of the world,” he said. “The Bantam Press published a very slight version five
years ago called The Little Green Book’-just 6 percent of the original-but that was really
a joke book, to poke fun at Khomeini and debunk Islam at the beginning of the hostage
crisis. In Iran, this book is mandatory for every literate person, a kind of guide to living.”

So this is the real deal, not the sensationalist précis but a serious, scholarly
“unabridged translation” designed to provide “a unique picture of the belief structure of Shi’ism“.
Mr Borujerdi had no difficulty finding eminent academics to provide an introduction – namely,
Professors Mehdi Abedi and Michael Fischer of Rice University in Houston. But he also consulted
on the translation and interpretation with many other scholars, among them Professor
Wilfred Madelung of the Oriental Institute at Oxford University, Professor Wheeler
Thackston of Harvard’s Near Eastern Languages department, Professor William
Darrow of Williams College, Professor Vincent McHale of Case Western,
Professor Merlin Swartz of Boston University …oh, and Professor Marvin
Zonis of the University of Chicago. That would be the same Prof Zonis
who was unhappy with The Little Green Book, and thus made M J Murphy
unhappy, too. But Prof Zonis is cool with A Clarification Of Questions, so
presumably M J Murphy will also be satisfied?

Resaleh Towzih al-Masael/A Clarification Of Questionsconsists of almost 3,000
“problems” for which Ayatollah Khomeini provides answers, plus a few follow-ups
he dealt with in subsequent editions.

So, just to bring the deplorably unicultural Prof Miller up to speed,
the easiest way to get a flavor of the Ayatollah’s book is simply to
sample the contents pages:

THE UNCLEANS
1&2. Urine and stool
3. Semen
4. Corpse
5. Blood
6 and 7. Dog and pig
8. Infidel
9. Wine
10. Beer
11. Sweat of an unlawful ejaculation
12. The sweat of a camel that eats uncleans

Hey, Multiculti Man, that would be you at big hit sound number 8: “Infidel” –
right behind “Dog and pig” but, if it’s any consolation, ahead of “Sweat of an
unlawful ejaculation”. But hang on: ejaculate-wise, the Ayatollah’s just getting
cranked up:

PRECEPTS OF EJACULATION
Things that are unlawful for an ejaculator
Things that are loathesome for an ejaculator
The bath of ejaculation…

So just to reprise:

Did I cite Oriana Fallaci accurately? Yes.

Did she cite Ayatollah Khomeini accurately? Yes.

Is there a volume by the Ayatollah commonly known as the “Blue Book”? Yes 

Does it include rulings on sex with nine-year olds and what to do with a shagged sheep? Yes.

Did either of us mention a Little Green Book? No. In fact, the translation Oriana cites
pre-dates The Little Green Book by a year.

I think Professor Waggy-Finger is doing what they call “projecting”. He’s accusing me of
everything he’s been doing himself. I took “somebody else’s word for it”. Er, no. That
would be you, taking the Sock Puppets’ word for it on my book review. I didn’t check the
“primary source”. Er, no. That would be you, cavalierly announcing there’s no such thing as a
“Blue Book”. To be more charitable to you than you deserve, you assume that Oriana Fallaci
and I so want to think the worst of Islam that we’ll fall for any old hooey. Actually not. On the
other hand, you so want to think the worst of us blowhard provocateurs that you assume we’re
as ignorant of Islam as you evidently are. 

Please follow this on SteynOnline.com

2GirlsTeachSex

2GirlsTeachSex Even the best lovers are often guilty of mistakes in the bedroom... often WITHOUT ever knowing it. It's just a fact of life. But that doesn't mean that YOU have to! In this revealing report you'll discover the most common mistakes men make in bed... and... what to do INSTEAD to drive your woman WILD with pleasure. Avoid these 9 mistakes and you'll have better sex the very NEXT time you make love... guaranteed... Mistake 1. Thinking She is Climaxing When She Isn't You may think that your lover is having multiple orgasms (or even AN orgasm) when she is not. She may make a bunch of noises, get really wet, and even TELL YOU she is cumming. But is she really? Grab a Cosmopolitan sometime and look at how many articles and comments on faking orgasms. I'm not saying that YOUR GIRL is faking orgasms EVERY TIME but... chances are there have been a few episodes of love making where she was CRAVING something other than what you were doing. When this happens women just want it to be over and encourage you to cum. It doesn't mean you are awful in bed; just that being a mindblowing lover EVERY TIME takes some specialized knowledge. If you are giving your girl orgasms (and absolutely 100% sure of it) then congratulations! You're one of the few guys who is ACTUALLY pleasing a woman REALLY WELL. But if you're not, it is crucial that you learn how... Mistake #2) Not Giving Her a Variety of Sexual Experiences A lot of guys who are new to sex - or are used to having sex with the same woman - tend to forget that women want different KINDS of sexual EXPERIENCES. You might think that changing positions a few times and varying the speed of your thrusting is a different type of sex. But it is not. Women thrive on emotions. Sometimes they want to be taken, sometimes they want it hard, and sometimes they want to make love. If you are NOT talking during sex and creating a strong emotional experience for her she CAN'T be totally fulfilled. Women want strong emotional experiences in bed. Let's look at an example. Women love bad boys because of the emotions that a bad boy inspires in them. It is why when women cheat it is often with a "bad boy." However, you don't need to be bad boy to create bad boy emotions within her in the bedroom. Just be a bad boy yourself by spanking her, talking dirty, and giving it to her good! Women also love very suave, romantic types. Think of the cheesy paperback romance novels or current tv shows (Nip Tuck) they read with that long-haired douchebag on a horse (aka Fabio) on the cover. Now, I'm not saying you should grow long hair, huge man boobs, and start riding a horse... but what you can do is mix up your lovemaking with some romantic sessions in which you are telling your girl how beautiful she is to you and how much you love her. Get it? The skinny is this: You NEED to give your lover a variety of sexual experiences... and you can give them all to her YOURSELF... but you have to mix it up! Mistake #3) Forgetting To Be A MAN Ask any 100 women off of the street and 99 of them will tell you that they want a man that TAKES CONTROL. That said, she wants YOU to call the shots! Yes you read that right. Your girl DOES want you to take control in the bedroom, to flip her around and do her doggystyle without asking, and to do what YOU want! Women are programmed to respond to strong, authoritative, confident men. It signifies that you are a protector, a leader, and a suitable mate. Sure, it's ok to ask her if she is enjoying something... but this is mostly reserved to specific technique when you are "going down". Save the talk about actual positions she liked for AFTER you are done. Now don't get me wrong - you are not making her a slave here but rather leading with authority and masculine strength. Once you start doing this you will be able to do many things with her in the bedroom that she earlier would not do. Many guys often think she is just uptight and her not being sexual if she doesn't want to do something... when in reality she just needs you to be a man and guide her with your strength. You'll be amazed at just how powerfully she responds! Mistake #4) Thinking Sex Isn't That Important To Her If you want to know how much women LOVE sex... just think about how loudly they scream in the bedroom when they are getting it good! You won't ever hear a guy screaming like that! You might THINK that your sex drive is much higher than your girls because YOU are usually the one initiating sex with her. But... As hard as it is to swallow, recognize that if your girl doesn't want to have sex it is NOT because she doesn't want to. Unfortunately, it's probably because you just aren't getting her off. Fortunately this is an easy fix, and in a moment we'll talk about how to do it... Mistake #5) Being Silent/Emotionless in Bed You may think that it is "cheesy" or "creepy" to talk romantically or dirty in bed. (you may think its weird to talk at all in bed) However, women HATE silent, mechanical sex. Why? Let's hit this again my friend: Women THRIVE one emotion. Dirty talk or romantic talk are EXCELLENT at giving your girl STRONG EMOTIONS in bed. And strong emotions = STRONG ORGASMS. Never think that it is solely your physical parts or motions you are making that get your girl off. The most POWERFUL FEMALE ORGASMS are triggered by her mind, not by her physical body. Unlock her mind through dirty talk, romantic talk, and emotional talk WHILE having sex and your girl will experience the strongest orgasms of her life. Mistake #6) Trading Dinners/Flowers/etc To Get Sex From Her Many men mistakenly think that women aren't interested in sex (we already discussed how this is incorrect thinking) and that they have to "trade something" with their girl for sex. This is why you see so many guys trying to have sex with their girl by first taking her out to a nice dinner or buying her gifts. While doing nice things for your girl is awesome, it should NEVER be with the intention of GETTING SEX. When you have to trade something to get sex from your girl realize that this is PROOF that you are not good enough in bed. It is proof that she does not like sex with you since in order to DO IT you have to give her something in exchange. When you are sexually satisfying your girl you will not have to trade ANYTHING for sex but your girl will often sponateously text you sexy messages, buy YOU a small gift, or begin initiating sex constantly. Just wait and see! Mistake #7) Not Giving Her Enough "Foreplay" If you still think of "foreplay" as the activity before sex you need a quick mindset adjustment to change how much time you spend on foreplay. Here's a hint: Women consider foreplay as PART of the sex. NOT as a separate thing! Here's why: While a man is not capable of having a foreplay orgasm AND another orgasm right away when he penetrates his girl, WOMEN CAN! Imagine if you could have orgasms during foreplay AND never lose your erection even the slightest and keep having orgasms as you penetrated your girl. You'd want to spend A LOT of time in foreplay too, right? Well your girl CAN have foreplay orgasms AND penetration orgasms so she DOES want to spend a lot of time in foreplay. As she should! As a rule of thumb, spend at least the same amount of time on foreplay as penetration and you can always spend EVEN MORE time in foreplay. You can never get her too turned on and it will only make the penetration better when you are finally inside of her. Mistake #8) Not Lasting Long Enough This mistake is well known and very simple, but no list of mistakes in the bedroom would be complete without it. But while all guys know they need to last long... they don't necessarily know HOW LONG that is! Well, after talking to hundreds of women about the subject, I've discovered that if you can last at least 10 minutes, most women will be plenty happy with that. Sure, they might be even happier if you are up for a "round 2" after a break in the action... but if you can last for 10 minutes in the first round, then trust me, you are fine! Mistake #9) Mistaking Her Moody-ness For NORMAL Behavior It's no secret that women are a LOT moodier than us men. But if you're in a relationship with a woman and she seems to keep getting more and more moody over time... this is often because she isn't getting what she needs in the bedroom. FACT. As we talked about before... while women aren't usually as sexually aggressive as men, they do love and NEED sex just as much! But here's the thing... if you're not giving her orgasms... then sex does her no good! Can you imagine jerking off but you could NEVER orgasm? You'd begin to enjoy it less and less each time. Eventually you'd get so frustrated by the inabiliity to "finish" that it was just easier to avoid it COMPLETELY! Sooo... If you can't give her orgasms why WOULD she want to have sex with you? The answer: She won't. If your girl is not wanting to have sex with you as much as you want then this is EXACTLY what has happened for her. In the beggining, she may have tolerated sex because she was really into you. Now that you have been together for a long time and sex isn't satisfying for her it is more fulfilling to get herself off when you're not around. This leads to only having sex with you on special occasions... or when she feels obligated (like if a guy bought her a fancy dinner or some sort of gift.) If you recognize any of these signs it's time to step up your sex game NOW before the sex drought gets even worse. And when you do, you'll discover that when you are completely rocking her world in bed, not only is she in a better mood on a day-to-day basis... but SHE'LL start initiating sex with YOU! A close friend of mine who is some what of a love-making expert himself told me something that I didnt' believe at the time... but I now KNOW to be 100% true: IF YOU ARE GIVING HER THE BEST OF HER LIFE SHE WON'T CARE IF YOU ARE HOMELESS LIVING IN A CARDBOARD BOX... AS LONG AS YOU CAN HAVE SEX IN IT! When I heard this I thought he was totally full of it... but as my own lovemaking skills improved and then I heard about the success other guys were having, I realized this is completely true. Women are biologically "made" to be child bearers and select the highest value man to have a child with. Don't you think that the ability to give amazing sex is one of the highest values a man can have? Especially since so few men actually are REALLY GOOD. If your girlfriend or wife is often starting arguments, not wanting sex, or acting "distant" in some way it is time to stop blaming her. Re-examine your sexual ability because the real culprit is inadequate sexual pleasure.

Belle de jour (primera entrada)

Belle di Jour, la autora del blog que ha hecho perder la cabeza a los internautas británicos con sus encuentros sexuales, la escritora del bestseller 'Diario de una prostituta' ha decidido revelar su verdadera identidad. "Soy yo, Belle di Jour, Nome: Doctora Brooke Mangnanti. Primera profesión: Escort, chica de compañía. ¿Cuántos clientes? Cientos, trescientos esterlinas la noche".

La doctora Brooke Magnanti, famosa por el personaje 'Belle di Jour', la escort que contó en la Red sus encuentros sexuales. Foto 'The Times'

Ha sido este domingo, cuando la respetable investigadora ha decidido romper su anonimato y contar la verdad de su vida. Detrás de aquella mujer que se inspiró en la película de Luis Buñuel para narrar en la Red su pasado de prostituta cuando no investigaba el cáncer y los efectos de los pesticidas.
Sus 'post' eróticos escritos como Belle di Jour, después de las largas jornadas en el laboratorio donde es la profesora Magnanti. La ex acompañante de hombres de negocios contó aquel pasado como si todavía su cuerpo fuera en venta, levantando escalpor entre los internautas que leían excitados sus historias de morbo y conquista.
El misterio ha terminado, tras los tantos rumores de la prensa británica que llegaron a decir que era un hombre.
Belle di Jour, una rubia de bata blanca, contó sus historias e inspiró hasta una exitosa serie televisiva que vieron millones de personas, ha decidido mostrar su verdadero rostro.
Ni siquiera la periodista del 'Sunday Times' podía creer que esta respetable mujer era quién decía ser, hasta que al final ha terminado por escribirlo en la edición del domingo y todos los han leído en el papel y también en su blog, contado en primera persona.
"Siempre he pensado que la parte de mi vida sobre la que he escrito se iba a evaporar un día. Que la habría tirado en una lata, completamente separada de mi verdadero yo, de mi ser real".
Así lo escribió y lo contó Brooke Magnanti, alias 'Belle di Jour'.
¿Cómo comenzó todo? Por aburrimiento, por provocar, por dinero. Era una buena estudiante universitaria terminando la carrera, pero Brooke, de buena familia quería mantenerse por sí misma.
Así que contactó la agencia Barbarella, especialista en buscarle compañía a hombres solos y de buena posición. Y nació 'Belle di Jour' a punto de licenciarse y escort.
Su carrera de prostituta de nivel duró hasta que la doctora Magnanti llegó al laboratorio Bristol Ini­ziative for Research of Child He­alth.
No se sabe si echaba de menos aquella adrenalina o quizá buscaba compartir aquellas experiencias, pero un día tuvo la idea y abrió un blog, después el libro y la serie de televisión.

belledejour-uk.blogspot.com/1 (first post and the old rest)
belledejour-uk.blogspot.com/2 (second old posts group)
First post
vendredi, octobre 24

Located what sounded like an excellent, small, discreet agency (word of mouth, as they say). After email contact and sending my photos, I finally arranged to meet the manager at the dining room of a central London hotel. She sounded very young and had a very strong Eastern European accent. Polish, maybe? Should I ask? Oy vey.
"How will I know you?" I asked. "What do you look like?"
"When I was younger everyone used to say I looked like Brooke Shields," she said.
"Ah, you must be very beautiful then."
"No, I am old and decrepit. Now people say I look like Daryl Hannah."

Posted by Belle at 3:50 PM

Sex beyond reproduction

Health benefits

Sex has been claimed to produce health benefits as varied as improved sense of smell,^[28] weight loss, stress reduction, increased immunity, and decreased risk of prostate cancer.^[29]

Sex between cohabiting partners lowers blood pressure and reduces stress, according to Stuart Brody, professor of psychology at the University of the West of Scotland. Brody's team monitored 24 women and 22 men who were exposed to stressful situations, such as speaking in public and doing verbal arithmetic, and kept records of their sexual activity. The men and women who had penile-vaginal intercourse responded more positively to stress "than those who engaged in other sexual behaviors or abstained".^[29][30] A study by Keith Light of the University of North Carolina went as far as to find a link between "partner hug" and lower blood pressure in women.^[29][31]

Frequent sexual intercourse was held to reduce the risk of the common cold by Carl Charnetski and Francis X. Brennan of Wilkes University in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. These scientists linked frequent sexual intercourse (once or twice a week) to increased production of the antibody called Immunoglobulin A or IgA, which can protect the body from getting colds and other infections. They took samples of saliva, which contain IgA, from 112 college students who reported the frequency of sex they had. The students in the "frequent" group had higher levels of IgA than those in the other three groups, consisting of people who were celibate, had sex less than once a week, or had it "very often" (three or more times weekly). The other three groups had comparable IgA levels.^[29][32] Charnetski and Brennan had previously shown that exposure to elevator music has a similar effect on IgA levels.^[33]

"Sex is a great mode of exercise," according to Patti Britton, PhD, past president of the American Association of Sexuality Educators, Counselors and Therapists (AASECT) and currently host of the website "Your Sex Coach". She notes that thirty minutes of sex burns 85 calories or more. She concludes that 42 half-hour sessions, or 21 hour-long sessions, will burn 3,570 calories - sufficient to lose one pound.^[29]

"Boosting self-esteem" was one of 237 reasons people have sex, collected byUniversity of Texas researchers and published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior. Some subjects who already had high self-esteem said they sometimes have sex to "feel even better".^[29]

Sexual intimacy, as well as orgasms, increases levels of the hormone oxytocin, also known as "the love hormone" which helps people bond and build trust. Researchers from the University of Pittsburgh and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hillevaluated 59 premenopausal women before and after warm contact with their husbands and partners ending with hugs. They found that the more contact, the higher the oxytocin levels. Oxytocin allows people to feel the urge to nurture and to bond. Generosity has also been credited and linked to a higher level of oxytocin. In addition, as the hormone oxytocin surges, endorphins increase, and pain declines. In a study published in the Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 48 volunteers who inhaled oxytocin vapor and then had their fingers pricked lowered their pain threshold by more than half. The oxytocin released during orgasm also promotes sleep.^[29]

Men who have frequent ejaculations, especially men in their 20s, may reduce their risks of prostate cancer later in life. Australian researchers reported in the British Journal of Urology International that they followed men diagnosed with prostate cancer and those without. They found no association of prostate cancer with the number of sexual partners as the men reached their 30s, 40s, and 50s, but men who had five or more ejaculations weekly while in their 20s reduced their risk of getting prostate cancer later by a third. Another study, reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association, "found that frequent ejaculations, 21 or more a month, were linked to lower prostate cancer risk in older men, as well, compared with less frequent ejaculations of four to seven monthly".^[29]

During sex, pelvic floor muscle exercises known as Kegels offer benefits for women. More sexual pleasure is expected to result, strengthening of the area, and help to minimize the risk of incontinence later in life.^[29]