Panic and the Erotic Art Tradition

 “That popular culture reclaims what high culture shuts out is clear in the case of pornography. Pornography is pure pagan imagism. Just as a poem is ritually limited verbal expression, so is pornography ritually limited visual expression of the daemonism of sex and nature. Every shot, every angle in pornography, no matter how silly, twisted, or pasty, is yet another attempt to get the whole picture of the enormity of chthonian nature. Is pornography art? Yes. Art is contemplation and conceptualization, the ritual exhibitionism of primal mysteries. Art makes order of nature’s cyclonic brutality. Art, I said, is full of crimes. The ugliness and violence in pornography reflect the ugliness and violence in nature.”

Camille Paglia, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson, London: Penguin Books 1990, P. 34-35.

“Unlike pornography, which often lacks imagination, erotic art allows us to partake in creative joy. Even if some of the pictures seem strange to us, or even annoy and force us to confront taboos, we still should open ourselves to that experience. Real art has always caused offense. Only through a willingness to be affronted can this journey through the geography of pleasure also be profitable, namely in the sense that this fantasy journey enriches our innermost selves. The humour evident in many works of erotic art is only accessible to those who can feel positive about claiming the erotic experience.”

Hans-Jurgen Dopp, 1000 Erotic Works of Genius, Parkstone International: Singapore, 2008, P.9.

Normally when I write on art, it is not based on my encyclopaedic knowledge of paintings and artists through reproduction, but on the first-hand feelings and thoughts I have had when confronted with the art object in an exhibition. In the case of erotic art though, I have not had that pleasure very often. Only at the start of August 1999 in Barcelona did I actually see a huge exhibition (Jardí d’eros) devoted to erotic and pornographic art works, thematically divided into themes like; Masturbation, Prostitution, Lesbianism, Sadism, Urology, Scatology, and Bestiality. The exhibition had skilled and passionate work by Caresme, Boucher, Ingres, Rodin, Klimt, Picasso, Picabia, Grosz, Schiele, Dalí, and many more. It is still one of the greatest and most thought-provoking exhibitions on art I have ever seen. It was only in October 2007, that such a show was staged in London and none of its kind has ever been seen in Ireland. Some might argue that the bracketing of ‘erotic art’ as a separate category is misleading, since so many artists have indulged in it. However, I suppose that it is no more spurious than exhibitions devoted exclusively to the still life, landscape, portraits, or abstraction. Yet, I do think the term erotica is mostly an evasion because there are so many ‘erotic’ works that present what are known as hardcore pornographic scenes and acts, but just because they are drawn or painted, made by a so-called Master, and in order to preserve their monetary and artistic value, they are euphemistically described as ‘erotic’. Personally, I call my work pornographic because I want to be as honest and direct as I can, and I am a cynic of High Art. Having drowned in a Fine Art world of lies for decades I seek to be as honest as I can about myself and my art. 

           

As a teenager, reading history books, I quickly became aware of how dramatically morality can change over time and in different cultures. But I had no idea how much morality would change repeatedly just in my lifetime. I grew up in Ireland in the 1970s and 1980s, where women were seen to be inferior to men, and homosexuality, pornography, prostitution, drugs, strip clubs, and sex shops were all illegal. Homosexuality was considered a sickness, the use of pornography perverted and sick, feminist were loathed, heterosexual men and women were idolised, but gay men, lesbian women and transvestites were reviled. I grew up in a world in which grown men casually threated physical violence on others, used macho posturing and violence to dominate others, and they were mimicked by most boys. But today nothing critical can be said about homosexuality, there are heterosexual men and women, gay and lesbians, but also transgenders, and a growing list of other versions of sexuality. Feminists dominate every aspect of political and social life, and men are now demonised for ‘toxic masculinity’ or what used to be called being a man. Today I live in a world in the West, where women are often considered better than men, and men are demonised, but also where homosexuality, pornography, strip clubs, and porn shops are all legal and even celebrated. For a brief few years in the noughties, ‘headshops’ selling chemical cannabis and ecstasy tablets were legal in Ireland. Now they are illegal. And throughout my life, people in power have insisted fanatically that their political and moral narrative was the only right one. So, pardon me, if I look at the whole issue of morality, law, respectability, and so-called normality with jaundiced eyes.   

            

 Just speaking about porn or writing about it, exposes a person’s identity, sexuality, ethics, politics, religious beliefs, and deepest fears. So, few are willing to speak honestly and openly about sex or porn. I have made a minor hobby of collecting and reading art reviews of erotic or sexually explicit art exhibitions from the 1980s onward, and I am always struck by how many critics adopt a cynical, mocking, and aloof attitude to erotic art. They rarely admit any arousal on their part, or admit they share a fetish. And if they are female art critics, their kneejerk response is roll out second-wave Feminist complaints about the denigration of women, and to rant about the misogyny of the male artist, deplore the objectification of the female models, and cast aspersions upon the male artist’s sexuality. Equally, many male critics make an ostentatious show of their concern for the sensitivities of women and forcefully distance themselves from the character and sexual desires of the artist. Then both male and female critics often play amateur psychoanalysts and suggest that the artist has psychological problems; claim he is a misogynist; deplore his sexual taste and fetishes; suggest he is a sexual abuser - or a potential one; or conversely suggest that the artist is impotent, and all his erotic art is an impotent overcompensation. In female critics, there is often a subliminal desire to blind and castrate the male artist. However, it is extremely rare for most of these art critics (especially female art critics) to be honest about their own sexuality, honestly analyse the nature of male and female sexuality, or admit to the bourgeois hypocrisy and narrowminded nature of such art criticism. All in all, many of these high-minded art critics talk as though sex, never mind erotica, or porn is beneath them. The only times many critics praise the erotic work of an artist is when their talent and genius is beyond doubt (though often even that is not enough to spare a male artist), if there is a broader celebration of sex within the culture at the time, or more often recently in the Woke era if the artist is female! 

            

Sex is the only thing that can devalue art. And the obscener an artwork is the less commercially, socially, morally and politically valued it becomes. Anti-art is a total fraud in the real story of transgression, only sexual work really risks total annihilation. Studying in the NCAD library from September 2007 – June 2014, it slowly dawned upon me at the very end, how little my art had in common with most of the art in the library. My work was too violent and pornographic. It was also too personal and confessional. I knew erotic art was rare, but trawling through the vast NCAD library, I slowly became aware of just how rare nudes never mind explicit erotic or downright pornographic imagery was in official Western art. 

           

Modern Western civilization has been in mortal combat with our primitive animal nature for centuries. Civilisation denies the nature of our animal instincts, hides it in ghettos, and in the darkness of night, and then denies nature exists, and claims that civilization is the truth of mankind. Christian, Feminist and left-wing critics like to complain about the tame aesthetic erotica of art, and claim it is an outrage, and libel against humanity. Yet, they are the liars! And the erotica of civilization, even at its most extreme, can never mimic, never mind embody the true baseness of the human sexual animal. To all the virgins, snobbish liars, and ladies who lunch, I hate to inform you, but naked women lounging on beds and looking for customers, are frankly not the worst that female sexuality can get, never mind male sexuality! And always remember, that underneath the velvet gloves of repression, idealism, and High Art fantasies are the steel fists of power and the threat of censorious violence.

            

Over the centuries, art in the West, has fought a constant battle with base pornography. And the greatest artists have been applauded for the sublimation of their sexual desires in the service of transcendent beauty and so called ‘truth’. The light represented in Western art represents only about 5% of the real universe of existence, 95% of which is made up by the invisible dark matter of life, deemed too ugly, immoral, or politically incorrect to record. While art has been seen as the reflection of the highest ideals and social values - pornography has been condemned for its revelation of mankind’s darkest inclinations. If art has represented civilisation’s most lasting universal values including religious, political, and humanitarian ideals, then the secret history of pornography has illicitly expressed the worst aspects of the human animal and is considered just throw-away trash. Art is seen as embodying virtue, purity, and morality whereas pornography symbolises filth and criminality. While Art is contemplative and pacifying, pornography incites the viewer to debauched action, so for many conservative art lovers, pornography can never belong to the realm of High Art! So, art has had to be protected from being engulfed by pornography, to maintain its rewarding position as the fundamental expression of the values of the élite, and as the ultimate commodity. In other words, the aesthetic has had to be sealed off from the baseness of pornography, with erotica as the only acceptably tamed version of sexuality allowed. In contrast to pornography which is seen as the expression of a negative vision of life and base immoral sexual impulses, desires, and acts, erotica is considered the life-affirming, humane and cruelty-free expression of the joy of physical ‘love’. But the commercial and social viability of erotica has proved not much better than pornography. And I have noted that people who I know for a fact are sexually depraved, would never dream of hanging an erotic, never mind pornographic artwork on their walls, never mind collect such work. 

            

For many, artistic porn is an oxymoron, neither sexually arousing as pornography nor artistically merited as art. My work is even worse, it is confessional expressionist porn, and says as much about my own mental anguish as my desire - and so it makes the viewer anxious and distressed. Porn in my experience is not an intellectual experience - just an animalist provoker of desire. Pornographic art on the other hand, in my experience is usually not very arousing, but very thought provoking. So, I look at pornographic art not for sexual release, but rather intellectual stimulation. 

             

Another problem with erotica and porn by artists is, that if you do not share their kink, it can be hard to appreciate their art. So, if you are not into muscular men the likes of everything from Michelangelo to Tom of Finland will leave you cold, if you do not share an obsession with dominant women, everyone from Henry Fuseli, Eric Stanton or Robert Crumb will seem absurd, if you are not obsessed with grotesque phalluses, all kinds of gay artists from Aubrey Beardsley to Robert Mapplethorpe and female artists from Louise Bourgeois to Sarah Lucas, will leave you indifferent. If you are not an alpha male lover of women then the early erotica of Picasso may seem offensive and if you have never been impotent, you may not understand the desire turning into repulsion and despair of his late nudes and copulating couples.

Like most teenagers before the internet, I was ignorant of sexual history, and had very naïve ideas about the sex lives of past generations. But that was only because most of our civilization especially our world of state and network television was set up to deceive us about humanity and hide our sexual and animal reality. So, like most teenagers, I thought that my generation had invented sex. Yet, I am not alone in that, long before the internet, I showed black and white ‘Stag’ films from the 1920s to people and the first thing they said to me is: “It must be a fake!” They are not fake, and what they and all the other pornographic artifacts of human history proves, is that practically every perversion and act of sexual acrobatics has been done or imagined a long time ago by pioneers of decadence. Viewing everything from cave paintings to salon paintings to the shelves of porn shops, it also becomes clear that human sexuality is stable, persistent, and politically reactionary - women display and men react. 

To my mind, all erotic and pornographic art works are socio-political. Artists making erotic art, do so, knowing full well that they will face social debate, opprobrium, and even political censorship if they then take the step to exhibit such work. Museums rarely put on erotic or pornographic art exhibitions because they fear that their benefactors will not give them any further donations, that board members will rebel, that corporate sponsors will pull their advertising and sponsorship, and that online lynch mobs will call for the exhibition to be cancelled or no-platformed. So, they usually do not show explicit art. Those who attack explicit art do so on a socio-political or religious basis. Not because they are whiter than white themselves. They deny sexual truth and refuse to allow anything that contradicts their vision of social life and manners existing in the public forum. In the name of religion, idealism, progress, democracy, civilization, or Feminism, people demand the censoring of reality. But once they do this, they go even further, they claim that the totally diminished and cleaned up version of reality to be what life is really like! This is typical of fanatics who confuses fantasy with reality and take one for the other.          

              

I have had a deep shame of my sexuality since I was ten or eleven. I was a hypersexual child and I used masturbation as a form of self-comforting. And in my masochistic fantasies of women humiliating and abusing me, I could control, rationalise, and eroticize the horrible things that were happening to me in real life. But I had no one to educate me about sex, relationships, or sex positivity. Having spent my life alone, with a mother who idolised intellectual men, and spending my time reading high literature, watching romantic comedies and the stories of famous artists, I assumed that women adored male artists and intellectuals! Much later I realised that apart from a few nutty art groupies in history books, most real women did not give a dam about art, or a man’s intellect, or creative talent. Most only cared about a man’s power and money and what he could do for her.     

               

Culturally, I grew up in Ireland in the 1980s, where sex was shameful, masturbation was depraved, and having sex outside marriage was horrifically evil. This was compounded by the abuse of my mother who projected onto me her shame as an unmarried mother who had lived in sin with my married father. Later, seeking self-flagellation, I constantly read male-hating radical-Feminist texts and watched countless feminists on TV decrying toxic masculinity and men who used porn. All this contributed to my chronic depression, self-loathing, and later multiple suicide attempts.

             

Ireland in the 1970-80s, was one of the most silenced, repressed, and sexually hypocritical countries in the world, where nobody talked about their real feelings, sexuality, fears, or traumas. At the time, Ireland was one of the most socially conservative nations in Western Europe and had moral restrictions on almost every aspect of life, the most draconian anti-sex legislation, and strictest censorship laws in the EU. Irish attitudes to sex were medieval in their morbid shame, hatred of the flesh and demonization of sexual women and perverted men. Everyone put up a brave front, afraid of malicious gossip and losing face. Only after drink was consumed, did people confess the details of their sex lives or emotional troubles to their closest friends. It was only at the turn of the millennium, that Ireland truly adopted the confessional and therapeutic culture and that had emerged in America decades before. Coming from my sinister Irish background of silence and lies about sex, I think censorship is far more dangerous than anything else. Ireland had some of the strongest censorship and anti-sex laws in Western Europe, yet we had an epidemic of incest, child abuse and rape. Worse still, some of the most horrific acts of abuse were committed by teachers, priests, and nuns - who were supposedly our moral guardians. And these crimes were covered up by an even larger number of the clergy and political elite. 

            

All issues involving sex are contentious and may never be resolved satisfactorily. Most of us know what it is like to have sex with a stranger and feeling ecstatic while it is happening, but the following day feeling shame, guilt, regret, or loneliness. So, if we as individuals do not have a consistent feeling towards our own sex life - how can any society moralize about the mass behaviour of everyone else. The actual sex act may often be loving, ecstatic and thrilling, but our moral lives are far more complicated than the mere sex act.

              

For centuries, puritans and Feminist have tried to play a sight of hand trick with sexual morality by claiming that there is no connection between female desire and male desire. They have demonised men’s sexuality and suppress women’s sexuality and attempted to make out that women are always the victims of men. In many cases they are. But the far more dangerous and unspeakable truth is that many women are as sexual as men and their desires are both complimentary and complicit with male desire! From the time that they are young girls, most women feel that men have all the power in society. But the one-way women can take the power back from men is through sex! They quickly learn that most men, no matter how strong, powerful, intelligent, or creative they me be, have an Achilles’ heel – their susceptibility to female manipulation and desire for sex with beautiful women! On the other hand, men realise that women have one great Achilles’ heel of their own – their attraction to men that are socially powerful! The abject fear of insatiable female sexuality and emotional manipulation and subconscious male fear of impotence or castration is behind centuries of patriarchal repression. In fact, patriarchal repression many have been as much about protecting men from women - as protecting women from men. Moreover, the extremely simplistic notion of patriarchal power, never considers how vulnerable and disenfranchised many young men are in society. So, to overcompensate for the sexual power many women have over them, some men indulge in macho bullying and thuggery, despotic moral vindictiveness, brutish slut-shaming, abuse, rape and dealing in death. Sex brings out the strongest emotions in people, everyone is both a puritan and hedonist - judgmental of others - but pleading for understanding of their own excesses. Men punish women for their slutty behaviour - yet are also attracted to it. Meanwhile, many women who grow up in difficult natural environments, dangerous neighbourhoods, or war zones, are more likely to be attracted to strong alpha males who can protect them. 

              

Today, because of many women’s financial and social independence, they are often not looking for the traditional alpha male of the past who had a good character, a respectable profession, was a great potential father, and with whom they would be forced to live with for the rest of their lives. Today, many women’s idea of an alpha male would have been considered a narcissistic cad or bounder of the past, with great looks, muscular body, sexual power but a character that is appalling. In many ways these men are the trophy partners of women today, the way buxom bimbos were to men in the 1950s. And the long-term disaster of these relationships means less to women today, because many of them either do not want kids or only one or two, and they can easily walk away - often with a very beneficial court settlement.   

Many girls and women reject many boys and men because they are too shy, too quiet, lack self-confidence, are too needy, or are not acting cool enough. Many girls do not like guys who are clingy and needy – they want to be the centre of attention and receiver of love not the giver. To many women these are irritating traits in men which prevent women from accepting them. They want a cool tough guy. But many women do not want to make themselves vulnerable and let men know what they are doing wrong. The men must find it out for themselves! But if men are honest about their sexual power – it is a turn-on to many women. The biggest thing some women love in men is mastery and dominance! Many women love when a man takes the lead and has strength and power. They love a man who can show that he is not afraid of them. All this is built into a woman’s primal brain hardware. If a man looks weak, timid, afraid, and other guys can crush them – he is not attractive to many women. Many women do not want to take the lead in any way. They want to be reactive and play the submissive role and they do not want to take the blame for sex.

So, women often long for an untameable rugged alpha male stud, but also love to domesticate and control these men and ‘change them’. Romance novels and chick-lit are full of stories of naïve virginal young women being seduced by cool bad boys, who through their cunning and love manage to change into devoted husbands. To make matters even more complicated, women in mid ovulation are attracted to aggressive bad boys, but during their period, pregnancy, or if they are on the pill (which tricks the woman’s body into thinking it is pregnant), they are attracted to gentle men who will be caring fathers. Even many PHD student girls, do not want pale nerdy men, who look like they never leave the library, have never seen daylight, and look frightened when they are outside! These bookish young women lust after dominant men and are disappointed by their nerdy and passive boyfriends, and dream of finding a macho thug of boy or older ‘daddy’. And if they find these men, guess what? They accept all kinds of put downs from them and still fancy them! Even though they would never have tolerated even a tenth of it from nerdy beta males!

             

For men who are not aggressive alpha males, young women’s sexuality can be frustratingly passive and reactive. Many young women will make no attempt to approach a man or initiate things, but if a man tries it on – they may accept it! But if does not happen, it often means nothing to them! In their nubile youth, there are plenty of men in line! Yet, frustratingly for many women, many men are naturally passive. For example, in Nancy Friday’s compilation of men’s sexual fantasies in Men in Love: Men’s Sexual Fantasies (1980) four times more of their fantasies were passive rather than active. And many men enjoy going to prostitutes because they can lie back and let the prostitute do all the work. In addition, in most porn films, it is the woman who is the aggressor, and the man just lies back and enjoys it! But this is totally unrealistic! Because even porn stars in their private lives - want the man to make the first move and initiate things. Likewise, even in swinging circles it is the men who are expected to be the aggressors. That is why most porn is a total fantasy. Most sane and sober women do not act like porn stars and initiate things in real life! Nor are most women the kind of femme fatales ones sees in erotic thrillers who enjoy seducing men! So, maybe it is women, not men, that demand that men be the sexual aggressor!

So, it is often women, and not other men, who demand that a man ‘man-ups’ and lives up to the masculine identity women are so attracted to! It is overlooked that in the 1970s and 1980s, some of the most reactionary, homophobic, and misogynistic people were women, who liked their ‘men to be men’ and loathed sensitive, weak, or effeminate men. And even today in the West, it is often women who become disgusted and angered by pathetic men who are takers rather than providers. Or they demand men to ‘man-up’ when it suits them, like if they want a man unafraid of their sexuality in other words that they are sluts; if they want the man to financially support them; or they want men to accept their bitchy and aggressive behaviour. But at no point today in the West, are women required to adjust their behaviour to suit men. Some women also like to use ‘real man’ as a term of abuse whenever a man causes them to get angry – “you’re not a real man, I need a real man!” But the ‘real man’ they are so obsessed with is nothing but a mute, wage provider, sex toy, therapist, and compliant macho slave. 

The way romantic films avoid the crude, manipulative and deceitful nature of modern relationships and assure us that love still exists and is possible, is the ‘cute meet’ of romantic comedies, where the characters quite accidently bump into each other and fall in love at first sight, it is a calculated way to absolve both the man and woman of being cunning players. Similarly, the initial hatred of the alpha male by the female character in romantic novels, neatly absolves her of being a slut or gold-digger. But romantic comedies are lies!

Many young women enjoy aggressive bad boys because they allow them to explore their own dark side. They can also put all the blame for their behaviour on the bad boy. Whereas a good boy only makes them feel guilty and like a whore for wanting raw dirty sex. So, although at first, many quiet, shy girls date sensitive, gentle boys, after their sexual confidence grows and they hit their twenties – they suddenly hunt for bad boys too. And many girls experience their sexual awakening with bad boys. Only after they have had their fill of debauchery, and hit their thirties, do many women cast around, for some naïve beta male sap to marry them, and often support their children from other men. But even in convenient holy matrimony, many women still fantasise about the idea of dark monogamy and being sexually owned by one great alpha male worthy of their body and soul. Pop music for example, is full of songs about a woman’s total and helpless abandonment to one great man regardless of how he treats her. This is what many women talk about amongst themselves, because they are obsessed with their relationships with men, and it means so much more to them than to most men. Monogamy for many women, often means being possessed by one man, and being safe under his protection. And despite feminism, many women still get turned on by that old-school polarity and power dynamic. Women are constantly saying that men should be more sensitive, caring, kind and honest. The fact is they are not really talking to all men. They are talking to the 20% of alpha males they are attracted to and treat them like shit. They do not even remember or are aware of the vast majority of men they ignore, reject and quickly forget who are often really sensitive, kind, caring and honest but women do not give them the time of day. In fact, telling these men they need to be more sensitive, kind, caring, and honest is only serving to make them even less attractive to women. Many beta males need in fact to be taught how to be more dominant! And the alpha males’ women are trying to persuade to be nicer are not even listening to these women! In the modern dating world, young women have enormous sexual privilege they do not even understand they have. They are constantly being approached by men and can have sex any time they want. So, they have no understanding how lonely and sexually starved many men are or how hard it is for a man to get sex, and they do not see that it is not just sex men are missing out on, they are also missing out on affection, affirmation, emotional development, and companionship. So, most women are obsessed with relationships. They do not see the attraction of random sex. Nor do most women know just how easy it would be for them to get random sex with almost any many they find outside their house. And most women find it almost impossible to make the first move or ask a man for sex because they have been conditioned by society not to be promiscuous, they are fearful of being slut-shamed, and are terrified of being physically or sexually abused. And since women prize relationships so much they cannot understand why any man would want to have sex with anonymous women. So, women have contempt for men looking for sex and think they are shallow and trashy people. Of course, if the situation was reversed and women had to fight to get attention, affection, intimacy, sexual pleasure, and their fantasies fulfilled they would not be happy! Women also seem to think that men know that all their demands for social equality, feminism and sexual respect only really applies to the social world and not to the bedroom. Women who are by nature illogical seem to think men should know that in the bedroom many of them still want to play out primitive, old-school games of female submission to a dominant male. 

              

So, during the day, in college or the workplace, women claim that they want a kind sensitive Feminist man - yet at night, they compete with other women for the attention of alpha male brutes in nightclubs. Because although women talk in public about feminism and the sins of toxic masculinity in the bedroom many of them still want the traditional, strong, masterful man and they want to be in a submissive position. So even though women have their modern puritan and Feminist brain, that they use during the workday, when of course they want to be respected, and they want a nice guy, who is polite, courteous, and politically correct. At night, in their private sexual lives, many women cannot help but get turned on by men who display some manly and dominate characteristics. These perverted female fantasies are the exact opposite of equality, they are about the ancient male/female polarity and interpersonal power dynamics! Suddenly during sex they hate Feminism and want to submit to the nasty male! They want these bad boys because the excitement of sex and relationships with them are more memorable than the ennui of life with a wimp. And often they hope to save the bad boy! But they still say in public that say they want the kind, sympathetic, respectful, Woke guy, to try to convince themselves and others that they are better than that! 

So, once an alpha male enters the dating scene, all women’s so-called rules go out the window. Women constantly tell beta males “I don’t want to risk our friendship!” Yet strangely, these same women never tell an alpha male this. To the alpha male they suddenly offer submissiveness and sex on a plate even though with beta males they had nothing but criticism, tests, and conditions. Meanwhile girls-code can also go out the window and they do not care what girl they betray to get the man they want so badly. Moreover, many of the bad boy, alpha males of today are not stupid! Like many of the cunning alpha males of the past, who pretended to be good Christian men in society, but acted like depraved animals in private, many of today’s alpha males are cunning liars, who pretend around women that they are extremely respectful – but really, they are just biding their time. Only when a woman rejects them or argues with them - does their mask slip - and reveal a misogynist as base as any before Feminism. To many of these players, Feminism is a brilliant invention, because it has led to free love and decadence, and many Feminist women are crazy sluts, and easily manipulated by any man who talks of ‘love’, acts respectfully and Woke. These men have their nice guy persona around women and their real macho pig character around their male buddies. They are also not crazy and stupid enough to make the kind of artworks I make or write the kind of things I write. They even deny ever looking at porn or using sex workers!   

So today, in the age of Tinder and other dating apps, which gamify dating, many male and female relationships are sick, twisted and totally hypocritical! For many people, shorn of all their ideals, love has become an animalistic battle ground and form of cunning gameplay, moreover the antagonism between both sides has become poisonous.  

            

It all started with the sexual revolution and female liberation of the late 1960s, which was a happy hunting ground for sexual predators as diverse a Jim Morrison, Charles Manson, and Pablo Picasso. Alpha male psychos, cult leaders, rock musicians, artists, and businessmen never had it so good! But beta and omega males looked on aghast, unable to exploit the freedom of women, because they often lusted after and chose men of the worst kind of character. Yet, for decades the beta and omega males, were too dumb to see what was happening, and thought they were lucky to get the heartbroken, angry, and bitter female leftovers of alpha males and bring up their children. The sexual revolution, and militant feminism in the late 1960s, opened-up the social possibilities for women to date whoever they wanted and choose their sexual partners. But this led to hypergamy (women dating up the social ladder, which led to 20% of men dating 80% of the women) and polyamory (non-monogamy was developed by some radical feminists from the 1970s as a way to challenge traditional patriarchal heterosexuality). But they often chose to date alpha males, or cool bad boys who embodied the dark triad of Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism, rather than the nice, gentle, beta males they socially claimed they like. The old notion of the alpha male father became outdated. In the past, women had been completely dependent on men, they did not have their own careers, and needed a man to protect, support and bring up their family. However, from the 1970s onwards, divorce and child support laws and social welfare in the West gave women and their children a safety net they had never had. Meanwhile, women entered universities and the workplace at the end of the 1960s in the West and by the turn of the millennium women were out preforming men in schools and universities and later the workplace. Women began to have their own education, careers, money, friends, and family. So, they often only wanted a man for romance and sex. Thus, women began to chase alpha male himbos the way men chased bimbos in the 1950s. So, men began to feel the same insecurities about their bodies and character that women had suffered from for hundreds of years. Which led to the backlash of Incels and MGTOW in the noughties and twenty-tens. Bizarrely the likes of MGTOW harked back to old all-male monastic societies. And the idea formed by Incels, of the alpha male, whose masculinity was defined by how many women he could seduce and fuck, was also a backlash against homosexuality and gender bending males. The Incel community was in the hundreds of thousands, and some of their language in forums was disgusting and disturbing, and an evil handful went on to murder innocent people in appalling and barbaric mass-shootings. But not all Incels were evil just because they were looking for love and felt dreadful pain from not having a female partner. However, Alt-Right dreams of returning to some 1950s TV fantasy world, was totally unrealistic. Far too much had changed in society.

                

Sexuality is one of the most dangerous elements within society that can potentially ruin lives. Erotic art has often been prohibited by churches, states, dictatorships, and pressure groups. The mere hint of sexual scandal has ruined the career of countless politicians, clerics, businessmen and celebrities. In the past, artists had to fear the censorship and punishment of the church or state, but today artists fear the online petition, and virtual lynch mobs who destroy their careers and lives. However, throughout history in all kinds of far-flung civilizations we find erotic artefacts. The erotic is a form of fantasy arena, in which people can sexually express themselves without endangering society directly.

Sex makes hypocrites of us all; puritans become obsessed with filth; gays who hate the thought of sex with women idolize divas and fantasize about being dominated by Amazonian women; lesbians fixate on dildos, cucumbers and fisting; Feminists are secretly attracted to dominating alpha male brutes; dykes claim to hate men yet do everything in the power to look like and act like men and psychologically dominate other women; whores are desperate for love and respectability; chaste people secretly desire animalistic debauchery; and I paint porn full of psychotic liberated whores but in real life I am terrified of them. Erotic art and pornography operate along the fault lines of our ideals and our base realities.

Because we all have bodies and spend our lives observing and judging the bodies of others, it is the most difficult thing of all to paint and the most controversial and contested. And if those bodies are engaged in sex the subject becomes socially explosive. The human body is both flesh and selfhood, animalistic and divine, matter and spirit, individual and tribal member. Moreover, people do not have politically correct fantasies, and many of them are in fact criminal too. But you cannot fully police desire, though many on the right and left have tried. In fantasies, relationships and marriages are betrayed, power is abused, boundaries are not respected. Moreover, in fantasies, strong people may fantasize about being abused, or weak people fantasize about having the power to abuse others. So, in many ways sexual fantasies are a distorted mirror to the real world, one in which social taboos and norms are transgressed. Instead of the normal world, where men spend enormous amounts of time, energy and money trying to attract a willing female and often fail, in the porn world every woman is a willing slut with none of the hang-ups of ordinary women, full of self-confidence and a sex drive even more manic than their own, so that one man is usually not enough to satisfy her! Thus, the most socially and morally repressed societies, often produce the most extreme erotica. Erotic art and pornography exploit the contradictory mess that is male desire, female empowerment, free speech, free enterprise, exhibitionism, voyeurism, Feminism, and violence against women etc. 

As Will Durant in his masterpiece The Story of Civilization pointed out, sexual morality is a fluid and constantly changing social force. At times societies go through a phase of decadence but it is usually following by a phase of puritanism until a new generation rebel against that too. When under the patronage of Pope Clement VII, Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel, it was quite acceptable for Michelangelo to paint many of the figures naked. However, after both their deaths Pope Paul IV ordered a painter to paint pants on the figures in The Last Judgment! The battle of the sexes is not just between men and women, it is also between good men and bad men, good women, and bad women. Our moral outrage against those who fuck freely is as much about jealousy and fear as concern for moral rectitude. Bad men and women are seen to have so much more fun than the good, even if for them their sexual promiscuousness often comes from deep insecurities.

Famously under the hierarchy of the salon, history painting was supreme, followed by portraiture, landscape and finally still life painting. However, this hierarchy did not even acknowledge the existence or aesthetic value of caricature or erotica. For centuries art critics, philosophers and artists have discussed sometimes in bitter terms, just what makes one artwork an erotic masterpiece, deserving of respect and value, and what makes another artwork degrading, sinister and misanthropic pornography of no value other than as a masturbatory tool for immature and degenerate fools?

“That which is pornography to one person is the laughter of genius for the other.” D. H. Lawrence quipped. (D. H. Lawrence Quoted by Hans-Jurgen Dopp, 1000 Erotic Works of Genius, Parkstone International: Singapore, 2008, P.7.) Personally, my number one criterion - was visual quality. I found badly made, incompetently drawn, clumsily painted or poorly photographed work repulsive. Once a work struck me as a fine artwork, I could engage with its story. 

           

Judeo-Christian limitations on sexuality in Western Art are so well know they are clichés. Less well known, is the way philosophers from Kant to Hegel and Schopenhauer advanced an asexual vision of art devoid of sexual stimulation and real-world connections. A Formalist art critic like Roger Fry, believed that erotic or pornographic content interfered with aesthetic pleasure. Writing about Indian sculpture with a sweeping lack of concern for cultural context, Fry wrote: “A great deal of their art, even their religious art, is definitely pornographic, and although I have no moral prejudices against that form of expression, it generally interferes with aesthetic considerations by interposing a strong irrelevant interest which tends to distract both the artist and spectator from the essential purpose of a work of art.” (Quoted from A Dictionary of Modern and Contemporary Art. Ed. Ian Chivers & John Glaves-Smith, New York: Oxford University Press, 2009, P. 241.) But the remove of sexual attraction and lust from notions of beauty and the attempt to suggest that one could have a disinterested interest in the beauty of the opposite sex was absurd and a lie.

It is also not much appreciated that libertines like the Marquis de Sade had very little to say about art in his pornographic writings - and in fact his objections to art were similar to Plato’s distrust of the unreality of art, but for very different reasons, Sade loathed the idealism of culture, was intoxicated by violent action, and wanted everyone to wallow in the reality of the sexual mire. When one looks at porn films, one is immediately reminded of how little language or artifice plays in sex, how simplistically vulgar it is when people do speak and how comical most attempts at narrative are. Yet the body has a language all its own, and the great artists have highlighted this in their work.

The story of erotic art is also the story of censorship. Although pornography is consumed in a gluttonous binge by men and increasingly many women all around the world, orgasm is followed by self-disgust, shame and the obsessive deleting of internet browsing histories. “Yet, even in its tamed versions, eroticism remains a demonic power in human consciousness because it echoes the dangerous song of the sirens – trying to approach them is fatal. Devotion and surrender, regression and aggression: these are the powers that still tempt us. The convergence of desire and longing for death has always played a big part in literature.” (Hans-Jurgen Dopp, 1000 Erotic Works of Genius, Parkstone International: Singapore, 2008, P.8.) So, porn is schizophrenically desired and abhorred at the same time, sometimes in the space of a few hours. This is the reason for the astonishing hypocrisy of society when dealing with issues of pornography. 

 

Until recently, the British Museum kept pornographic books, illustrations and drawings under lock and key – available only to scholars. In was the same at the secret Cabinet of the Archaeological Museum in Naples, which housed the illicit images of Roman decadence. Even today, to members of the art elite, the realistic and obscene depiction of copulating couples is the sign of a work by a non-artist, who is unable to inspire great ideals with their art.

Pornography is the servant of masturbation; the former depends upon the later. But to this day, masturbation is looked down upon as a selfish and pathetic act, a substitute for real sex by losers with no life and unable to court a willing partner. Yet the most common and frequent sexual act in the world is masturbation, and pornography is merely an extension of masturbation. To conservative people, the only acceptable sex is supposedly between a man and a woman, who truly love each other, and are very romantically loving in their sex. Moreover, they think that these couples must ideally be married and having sex for procreation. But it is this kind of sex that is in fact in the minority and always has been. Most sources since Alfred Kinsey in the 1950s say that 90% of men and 65% of women masturbate from time to time. Moreover, the vast sea of porn on the net and sales in the millions of vibrators in sex shops around the world bare such figures out.  Few still believe that male masturbation results in blindness, hairy palms, loss of vital fluids or madness (all utter nonsense), but a stigma still lingers around it in polite society. As for female masturbation, it is looked on as dirty by some people, and something only lonely, desperate, or ugly girls do by others. In fact, all types of people, beautiful or ugly, in and out of relationships or even married masturbate. Some couples enjoy masturbating together and enjoy looking at porn together. However, solitary masturbation has nothing to do with courtship, love or even sex. It is a primeval form of self-comforting, that forms part of men and women’s private world. For men it usually takes the form of a fantasy of voyeurism and aggressive action, and for women a fantasy of exhibitionism and submission.

For men, the eye is the major erotic organ. Everyman knows the quickening of heartbeat, the wide dilation of the pupils and the stirring of the loins, that strikes after a glimpse of beauty, whether on the street, on television or even in an art gallery. That is why the visual arts have for so long been such a potent medium for lust and for the art lover the erotic work provides both an aesthetic thrill and a sexual charge. “In principle, the phenomenon of ‘voyeurism’ is not an aesthetic category but a psychic constellation. In French linguistic usage, a ‘voyeur’ was originally a spectator or participant. The negative aspect of forbidden seeing, with sexual connotations, arouse in the 1880s. Shortly afterwards, Sigmund Freud took up this definition as a perversion of the human spirit and banished it to the dark chambers.” (Stripped Bare: The Body Revealed in Contemporary Art, 2004, P75.)

             

One of the great lies of the early anti-porn brigade, was the notion that women were not aroused visually, did look at porn, and could not possible enjoy looking at porn never mind cum to it. Added to this, was the demonization of men who looked at porn and characterisation of them as immature adolescents, losers, or perverts. But it is now known that many women look at porn on the internet and some watch more than the average man. Though in personal experience, I have found that while women watch porn, they do not watch it as much as me. But then I am a freak! Two women I knew who watched porn, loved seventies porn, and watched the same scenes repeatedly, and came every time! Whereas I got bored of a porn scene the minute I had seen it and cum. I only re-watched exceptional porn videos. I have also masturbated to porn with three women in my life and found it a very sexy experience though later in the relationship it could also lead to fights over what we watched! Women watch porn because women do not really understand the penis, but they like them! And porn is a prick show! Everywhere you look there are naked or semi-naked women, but porn to is one of the few place’s women can see naked men. It also helps women get in the mood for sex and learn new moves. Moreover, it is entertaining like a freak show, helps women to safely explore fantasies they are afraid to admit or live out, or see what their partner likes. But porn is funny to a lot of women because they are much more realist than men and porn is made to cater to male fantasies may women find absurd and are far removed from reality. So, they are also more cynical towards porn than men. Finally, women (shock horror), like to masturbate to porn! 

Great art depends for some of its power on its ability to sublimate our grosser sexual thoughts into more mysterious and suggestive erotic formulations. But successful pornography (at least for the male viewer) depends upon gynaecological detail and the staging of well-loved pornographic clichés like; tangled orgies, fevered ménage-a-trios, lesbian titillation, strict mistresses disciplining cowering men, respectable innocents with old decadents, or even female congress with animals like dogs, mules, and horses. Gunter Schmidt states that pornography is “constructed like sexual fantasy and daydreams, just as unreal, megalomaniacal, magical, illogical, and just as stereotypical.” (Gunter Schmidt Quoted by Hans-Jurgen Dopp, 1000 Erotic Works of Genius, Parkstone International: Singapore, 2008, P.7.) None of these stories are part of man’s glories, they form part of his primitive animal nature preserved still in civilization, and it is these qualities that High Art constantly tries to rise above.

The oldest depiction of the human form is the Venus of Hohle Fels carved from a mammoth’s ivory tusk. It was discovered in a cave near Schelklingen in Germany in 2008. It dates backs from 40,000BC to 35,000BC, and has massive breasts and hips like a vulgar chicken’s body. It was clearly a fertility idol in its day but now it reminds one of an Art Brut pornographic sculpture. Early pagan art like the Venus of Willendorf, gives us clues to the idol like status of the fertile woman, creator of man. In this and other similar figurines of the same period, we see repeatedly anonymous female figures (their face like a helmeted mask) with pendulous and bulging breasts and wide and powerful childbearing hips. In this very early period of human history, it is thought that men had not recognized their role in conception, so female childbirth and fecundity was seen as a mystical event to be worshiped. And the pornographic frankness of the Venus of Hohle Fels shows that men’s sexual objectifying of women is hardwired, ancient and constant.

By the time of Greece and Roman, when it was discovered the role sperm had in procreation the pendulum had swung in the opposite direction, and images of phallic power became rampant as men’s penis and sperm were glorified in phallocentric sculptures and frescoes of hilarious scale. Yet, it also spread the lie about the penis, that has been taken up by misogynistic pornographers and repeated by anti-sex radical-Feminists, namely the notion of the penis as a constantly rock-hard sexual weapon. Since then, the erect, hard prick, that endlessly ejaculates upon woman after woman, has become the centre of the erotic universe psychologically, politically, and physically. Such exaggerations objectified the penis, and ignores the simple fact that for most of its life the penis is a flaccid and very vulnerable organ, and its testacies can easily be wounded by a gentle kick or even something just brushing off them! 

Ancient Greek art was full of humorous Attic red-figure cups (dating from 490-480BC) depicted scenes of fellatio, intercourse, and sodomy. Moreover, the earliest dildos discovered by archaeologists, date back to the ancient Greeks. However, in its highest art, that of sculpture, few such images exist (or at least survive) instead the erotic force of desire was masterfully sublimated into the deeply thought out poses of athletic warriors and naked male nudes. In a state whose very life depended upon the bravery of its soldiers, there was a cult of athletic male beauty. For over 1,600 years the remains of the Roman town of Herculaneum ten miles north of Pompeii lay buried beneath a sudden deluge of Vesuvian ash. It was not until 1738 that the ancient settlement was re-discovered. And what was found by archaeologists astonished and shocked the puritan Christian world. In Roman culture, art was a mirror of life, so the buildings of Herculaneum a Roman town were replete with frescos of all kinds of sexual congress, painted in a shameless and matter of fact manner. The phallus in Roman times, was seen as a good-luck charm to ward off jealousy and misfortune. So, outside in the streets of Herculaneum there was a profusion of stand-alone male organs, protruding from street corners and shop walls. The fall of The Holy Roman Empire, the sacking and terror of Europe in The Dark Ages and the rise of a deeply puritanical Christian church put an end to the Pagan excesses of the past and replaced the cavorting Bacchus and fauns with the crucified Christ and Mary Mother of God, ended incest and enshrined monogamy in Christian marriage. But at the same time, the Christian church understood that brothels and prostitution were a necessary evil of Christian matrimonial monogamy and turned a blind eye to them. As Western art became the tool of the church, the monarchies and the rich Merchants and Bankers it became a medium for religious, political, and social propaganda. High-Art had to enshrine the most glorious, refined, cultured, and sophisticated aspects of man to set an example to the common man, impress the foreign dignitary and flatter the Bishop and Prince. Naturally enough, coarse images of base sex had no place in such edifying public statements. That said, artists still managed to a find constant excuses to place female nudes into their religious and historical scenes.

Often art is thought of representing the greatest ideals of society, but often it represents those aspects of society that are marginalised and have no other outlet but culture. Homosexuality was reviled in society, but it was glorified in Renaissance art. In 1440, there was no clear sexual agenda in Italian art but by 1500, it had clearly become homoerotic in focus. With the birth of the Renaissance and its rediscovery of ancient Roman and Greek art, Italian art became a homoerotic sauna room with The Sistine Chapel its bathhouse. So, it is surprising how little explicit imagery of homosexual activity there is in Italian art of the time, even in surviving drawings. But there is plenty of evidence in Donatello and Michelangelo’s work to indicate the lust with which the young athletic male was held in by many artists. Even when female nudes do emerge, they often have the body of an athlete on steroids and are clearly based on male models. Sodomy in Italy during the Renaissance was rife, and Florence was so notorious for it that it was called the ‘Florentine vice.’ Both Botticelli and Leonardo da Vinci were charged with sodomy, while a minor Renaissance painter Giovanni Antonio Bazzi was so flagrant in his homosexual lifestyle that he was given the nickname Il Sodoma - by which he is best known today.

By the late Renaissance and into the Baroque the depiction of Greek and Roman myth gave artists a pretext to show titillating scenes of women; undressing, kissing cupids, copulating with swans, clouds, or showered by gold, carried away by bulls and even raped. However, such ancient paintings do not arouse even the worst decadents today, such is the antiseptic awe High Art is held in, and so desensitized have we become through exposure to hardcore porn. Yet, I confess that paintings and drawings of female nudes and erotic coupling by artists like; the School of Fontainebleau, Lucas Cranach, Agnolo Bronzino, Titian, Tintoretto, Antonio Correggio, Peter Paul Rubens, Francois Boucher, Jean-Honoré Fragonard, Thomas Rowlandson, John Henry Fuseli, Pierre-Paul Prud’Hon, Francisco De Goya, Utamaro, Gustave Courbet, Gustav Klimt, Egon Schiele, Pablo Picasso, Salvador Dalí - set my teenage mind on fire if only because I had no other outlet. But I also found great emotional comfort from feminine and maternal images of women because I was so lonely, unloved, and abused by my mother. The glorified, tender, and humane but also grossly idealized image of women in these paintings, aroused my lust, but also my fear of inadequacy in relation to female physical and moral perfection. 

During the nineteenth century, several artists and illustrators in Europe were famous for producing erotic drawings like Thomas Rowlandson, Johann Nepomuk Geiger, Mihaly Zichy, Aubrey Beardsley, Félicien Rops and Franz von Bayros. Similarly, in Japan artists like Katsushika Hokusai, Kitagawa Utamaro, Torii Kiyonaga and Utagawa Kunisada also created erotic art during the early nineteenth century which became a hit when seen in Europe. 

Although the subjects of ‘High-Art’ paintings can often be identical to the subjects of soft-core porn, we hold the first in awe - and the later in use-and-throw-away contempt. It is this capacity of art - to neutralize, contextualize, glorify, or enshrine subjects, that if seen in newspapers, magazines, porn videos or video games, would be subject to moral condemnation, censure or even prosecution and destruction, that most confuses the common man. Perhaps the state of grace granted old erotic/pornographic art is an indication of the tolerance we have for the artifacts of long dead civilizations and recognition that erotic images have the most power when it is of people we think we know. For example, take a famous nude by Titian or Courbet and recreate it with a famous Hollywood, TV, or social media star of our day in your mind, then imagine the impact that such an image made public would have. In fact, erotica/pornography has often been used in history as a form of ‘black-propaganda’ against others. Western erotic art is full of anti-ecclesiastical, anti-monarchist or anti-nationalist forms of satirical erotica with copulating priests, debauched nuns, lesbian princesses, unfaithful wives of soldiers and so on. The porn world is a great leveller, it seeks to unmask all of humanity as a rutting pigsty. But it is also highly idealistic, imagining a utopian paradise of equal human beings shorn of all their social, class and racial prejudices, pretensions, and shame. That is why characters like; bored housewives, horny librarians, accosted mailmen, nymphomaniac nuns, submissive businessmen, or lusty police officers add such spice to ordinary erotic plots. Porn is thus not real and never has been, it is like an alternative universe where normal social rules do not apply, and everyone ends up fucking. Porn works in the same way that mainstream movies works, by the willing suspension of disbelief of the viewer, aided in porn by intense sexual arousal that can let the viewer fantasise and almost believe that what they are watching is real. 

Before the late nineteenth century pornographic art works were rare, collectible, and expensive, pornography was the privilege of the rich and well connected. Even the large print runs of erotic etchings, was nothing compared to the landslide of images that photography and later film, video and now the internet can provide the compulsive masturbator.

The invention of the Daguerreotype photographic process early in the 1840s, and the growth of photography in the late nineteenth century, brought up all kinds of contradictions between painting and photography, and even reproductions of paintings. Centuries old visual ethics were questioned in the form of the female nude. Why was a painting of a nude appropriate in a gallery, when a photograph of the model was obscene, and why did a reproduction of the painting, passed around with pornography also became obscene? Why was the nude in a painting a goddesss, but the model in a photo a filthy prostitute? If painting gradually became more and more daring in its depiction of the female nude, it did so, as photography and cinema took over as the major arbiters of reality in the world. The shock of Modernist nudes was a largely meaningless art world tremor compared to the psychic havoc photography would wreak upon the world, exposing people to everything from naked bodies to provocative sex, to slaughtered soldiers and civilians shorn of all the ethics and humanity of civilization. Typically, the viewer of the painted nude had wondered about the model who was usually a professional, but photography brought up questions not only about the subject, their life, psychology, status but also issues about the world in which they live. Often the viewer of photography became a detective looking at a social outrage or possible crime scene. 

The Daguerreotype was also quickly exploited by pornographers who instantly saw its potential for the recording of erotic mechanics. From the outset, photographers utilized the settings, themes, and compositional strategies of great painters of the nude like Ingres. There is a modesty, tenderness and respectfulness in these early Daguerreotype nudes that is charming and quite beautiful, and as records of the intimate lives of nineteenth century men and women, they are priceless to the historian, though to the masturbator of today they are pretty tepid stuff. Nevertheless, these early photographs marked a huge shift in the nature of erotic/pornographic art, from a fantasy conjured in the mind of the artist and noted down on paper, to the hiring or coercing of women and men into acting out real sexual acts in front of the camera.  In other words, from the free mind, to the prostituted performer. That is why as a believer in creative freedom I can forgive and respect the writings of the Marquis de Sade but also feel revulsion at his crimes in the real world and the sight of his practices acted out in life and broadcasted on the internet. The first is an idea, the later often a crime. Nevertheless, by the 1870’s Europe was awash with titillating soft core and some hardcore photographic porn. Moreover, in some of the earliest peepshows in France at the start of the twentieth century, the artist and his model, was a frequent titillating trope that proved a hit with giggling or seedy voyeurs, who associated life-painting with obscenity. 

Yet, mostly before Eastman Kodak’s Brownie No. 2 camera, at the start of the twentieth century, representation was a recognition of power, importance, respectability, and conformity. Representation was expensive and reliant on the skills of a painter or very much later a photographer. With the Brownie No. 2 camera, representation became more democratic and demonic – but until the mass use of Polaroid cameras in the mid-1960s, people still had to bring their film to be developed by a printer, causing them to self-censor or risk prosecution if their subject matter was risqué.

In France - between 1840 and 1969 over 2,000 pornographic books, engravings, and objects, marked with a special code “Enfer” (Hell) were held in a special section hidden from the public in the Bibliotheque National in Paris. It was the French solution to the dilemma of the librarian keen to preserve records, and the Puritan, fearful of the corrupting influence of these works on the uneducated and immature.

           

Men have been fascinated by female masturbation since the dawn of time. But the earliest artistic depictions of female masturbation date back to Greek Attic vases. The Greek dancing hetaera were cultivated companions (they were said to be courtesans compared to the lower class pornai or prostitutes), who would often give public displays with dildos, as a form of symposia on female sexuality. But saucy images of women at their toilette or masturbating only really became really popular with the French court during the Rocco period and often these images were commissioned by the Marquise de Pompadour to titillate the lecherous Louis XV. With the publication of the Marquis de Sade’s novels Juliette and Justine at the end of the eighteenth century an anonymous artist was commissioned to create over 101 copper plate engravings depicting all kinds of sexual congress including female masturbation. Later, in the mid nineteenth century, Courbet painted his infamous The Origin of the World, an exquisitely realistic depiction of the torso of woman with her legs spread and her dark, hairy, pubic mound exposed. By the late nineteenth century and at the start of the twentieth century artist like Rodin, Klimt and Schiele obsessively drew, highly personal and intimate drawings of their feral models masturbating. While plenty of artists in the twentieth century drew similar images of female masturbation, their work no longer had a central role in visual taboo breaking. 

Erotic art and pornography repeatedly prove, just how eccentric and perverse men’s sexual fixations can be. Because what turns-on one man, can bore another, and disgust yet another. The good news for women is that there is not a single body type or part, or female flaw of character and behaviour that some man somewhere does not get turned on by. There is of course a general mainstream form of porn (boy/girl, girl/girl or girl/boy/girl) that appeals to most men just as most Hollywood films appeals to the general public. However, scratch the surface, and one finds not only great divergence in the peccadillos of the common man, but also in nations and cultures as a whole. For example, while the fantasy of a late teenage girl (in legal porn that means a girl aged eighteen or nineteen or who looks younger) in a school uniform is common in Ireland, England, and America, we come nowhere near the almost worshipful idolatry and abuse that schoolgirls in Japan are subject to in their porn. Meanwhile no other country has ever seemed to have the passion for spanking and discipline than we see in England (perhaps the result a strict public-school education.) German porn appears to be obsessed with the goo of semen and the splash of urine that goes far beyond anything one sees in Great Britain or the US as well as a perplexing fetish for grannies. The French seem enchanted with doll like Lolita's and anal sex with their girlfriends whereas Denmark and The Netherlands in the 1970s had a tolerance for bestiality that shocks even the worst decadents elsewhere. As for America, they appear addicted to the thrills of interracial gangbangs and the seducing of cheerleaders. But everywhere in the world, men are enthralled by the image of two or more women making love.

The erotic sensibility must be cultivated just as the literary, philosophical, or historical sensibility has to be cultivated. For many the erotic is a zone of fear, which they seek to repress at all costs. They make love in the dark and never try to rationally understand their sexuality or acknowledge it. Their lives are lived hypocritically, in repression and ignorance and they despise anyone like me who openly explores their own sexuality. Often, a work of art's greatness is judged by its subject. High art from the 15th-17th century depicted biblical scenes, in the 18th century it was historical painting, in the 19th century it was the landscape, in the early 20th century it was abstract and in the late 20th century it was the conceptual. But as I have mentioned, at no time in western art history has the erotic or pornographic been considered a major subject for artists. This despite the fact, that artists as great as; da Vinci, Romano, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Rubens, Boucher, Fragonard, Ingres, Géricault, Courbet, Degas, Rodin, Felicien Rops, Klimt, Schiele, Picasso, Pascin, Grosz, Balthus, Dalí, Warhol, Gilbert & George, and Koons, have all made famous erotic art works. Often masterpieces of erotic art have been dismissed purely on the grounds of the content, regardless of the genius of the artist or the skill of its technical execution. So, it should really come as no surprise that my work has had such a frosty reception by the art world and the public. With so many sexually based images in my oeuvre, I know my work will never find corporate or institutional support.  

            

The division between erotic art works that are deemed acceptable and pornographic works which are reviled and banned from public venues has long been a subject of intense debate. An argument not helped by the cunningness of many artists throughout history who have cleverly produced semi-adventurous work which steps slightly outside the norm but not so far as to receive universal condemnation. The trouble with erotic art is you cannot run a lie dictator over it to see if the artist had the right motives, was a good person, or that the image was created with love and honour.

             

For me, the greatest difference between an artwork of sex produced by an artist and that produced by commercial pornographers, is the degree of personal obsession, thought, skill, feeling and complexity the artist brings to the artwork. But another equally important factor is the element of the differed reality of the artwork. As I have mentioned photography, film, video, and the internet, does not represent an idea of sex, it represents the actual event, documented like a sport. The drawn, sculpted and painted pornographic artwork though is an interpretation of sex that usually is a product of the artist’s mind or an intimate relationship with a model. However, even when the model is used, their representation lacks the scientific reality of the photograph. As such, these erotic art works are the stuff not only of arousal but also contemplation and thought.

As I have suggested, the commonplace notion that the erotic or pornographic cannot be art is based on historical ignorance not reality. Any study of art history worldwide quickly revels that nearly every single civilization produced erotic art works. But such a study also reveals that no matter how much erotic art might flourish in a particular period, it is just as quickly attacked, banned, hidden, or even destroyed by later more religiously or politically inspired censorship, and destruction. Such destruction was largely symbolic in terms of works of literature and to a lesser extent, etchings and lithographs (since the sheer number of such copies prevent a total obliteration of its history), but catastrophic, for unique art works like; Greece Attic vases, Roman frescoes, Hindu sculptures in Indian temples, the Renaissance oil paintings of intercourse by Giulio Romano (a star pupil of Raphael) or a drawing by Schiele ripped up in front of him in court by the judge. Moreover, countless fuck-doodles and erotic watercolours and oil sketches by countless artists have been destroyed after their deaths by relatives fearful that these ‘aberrant’ works would destroy their relative’s reputation (today these works might in fact have resurrected a few lost reputations.) Frankly, given this history of self-censorship, familial censorship, political attack, and religious condemnation, it is a miracle that any erotic artworks survive. The history of erotic art proves two things, firstly that every great artist brings their own unique take on sexuality. That can be both a blessing and a curse, since sometimes despite the skill or wit of an artist, their personality and sexual preferences can alienate viewers who do not share their feeling about sex or fetishes. Secondly, that certain sexual practices have had universal interest to artists and their patrons. 

          

To a connoisseur like Kenneth Clark, the main criticism of erotic art is its inferiority as art, compared with the masterful work of the old masters. But such an argument to my mind is utterly spurious. The level of skill, wit, and subtlety of the frescoes in Pompeii, the sculptures of Hindu art, the pillow books of Japan, the drawings of Egon Schiele, the watercolours of George Grosz, and the drawings of Dalí to my mind are just as great as most of the higher forms found in the visual canon.

             

Yet, I loathe the watered down and timid erotica served up as transgressive by so many Neo-Academic and Neo-Salon artists more concerned with spicing up their dull careers than true rebellion. I loathe their fetishization of the hidden, the teasing, and dance of the seven veils. I consider it cynical, defensive, and totally exploitive of the audience. I loathe their pretentious need to announce clearly in their work that they are hip-professionals and intellectuals with clever ideas. I loathe their desperate concern with their artistic reputation and censoring of their truly spontaneous desires. I loathe their twisted gender and feminist politics, and transformation of every piece of erotic into a political statement. Finally, I loathe their ‘inquiry’ into the sexual. Because they never really reveal, never mind analyse their own sexuality, behaviour, or morality.         

              

In the mid-1970s, before the second wave of Feminists attacked the porn industry, mainstream porn was something both men and women could enjoy together. Both men and women flocked to see blockbuster films like Deep Throat, Behind the Green Door and The Devil in Miss Jones. 

              

The sexual revolution of the late 1960s began with left-wing hedonists and pacificists, then it was taken up by women’s liberation and turned into Feminism after women grew angry by both their political marginalisation, and their treatment by men during the sexual liberation, and their Feminism quickly became man-hating, and moralistic.

            

Feminists ranted on and on about men’s sexualization of women and then proceeded to rant on and on about female sexuality. Feminists constantly railed against men’s misogyny, yet their own misogyny towards their gender and sexuality, and self-hatred was extraordinary. Moreover, in their acres of texts decrying the evils of men, there was rarely any mention of women’s sexual perversions like a love of submissiveness and masochism, nor was there any mention of women’s lust for men, or fixation on cock, but perhaps far more importantly there was scarcely a word about women’s love for men. Feminist books filled with bile about men, rarely acknowledge any love for their fathers, brothers, lovers, or sons. It was frankly disgraceful! 

             

Men had been at the forefront of every social justice battle and in so many revolutions since the nineteenth century – but they were notably silent and absent in the fight for female equality. The sexual revolution had dreamed of a world were men and women made blissful love and had profound spiritual connections with each other. But quickly the psychological defects and even psychiatric illnesses of many of these hedonists showed that such blissful connection was almost impossible. These idealistic hippies could preach free love and have promiscuous sex, but they could not remove the primitive, animal instincts in men for power and domination and for submission in women. ‘Free love’ was often, nothing but a wicked game, used to disguise cynical manipulation. Women could not help catching feelings after having sex with a man, or becoming pathologically jealous of other women, and men who wanted to avoid all responsibility in life used free love to play a numbers game with women they did not give a dam about. But it was not just the sexual acts that set men and women apart, nor the differences in their bodies, biology, psychology, or desires, it was also their unique childhoods, past, and character that made the battle of the sexes endless.

             

But the marketing of porn proved far easier. So, while the hippie dreams of free love often came crashing down with great acrimony, porn became a commercial juggernaut because solitary voyeuristic masturbation was easy in comparison. Bleeding-heart hippie idealists loathed that pornography had emerged as such a dominate force after the sexual revolution and women’s liberation. And bewildered intellectuals who had profited for centuries from creating illusions in totally censored civilization, could not understand what the attraction of pornography was to ordinary people. The explosion of porn in the 1970s, created a vast new capitalist porn industry which filmed, edited, and marketed bodies like soup cans or any other product in the marketplace. But the body in love that had been the dream of the hippies became invisible and we would have to wait for Reality TV in the noughties for love to be packaged, marketed, and turned into a voyeuristic sport like sex had been in porn. In porn, desires, fantasies, and perversions became standardised before the consumer even had time to acquire their own. There was no longer any room for the individual imagination, and fantasies and perversions went from being secret, personal, and idiosyncratic to social, mass media, and a form of group hysteria. Thus, much of the early criticism of the porn industry came from the left in Europe and America.

            

But there were also many women from the right and left in politics, and within Feminism that also hated pornography. So, in the early 1980s in America, Feminist and right-wing Christian religious fundamentalists united to attack the porn industry. Both wanted to reimpose the ideal of the virgin that suggested that women were best when they were innocent and chaste. Both were hopelessly idealistic, puritan, moralistic, and horrified by sex. They characterised all porn as violent, exploitative, degrading to women, and a danger to society. The subsequent battle was not against sex, as it had been with puritan crusades against prostitution in the 1880s, it was against the representation of sex! In 1974, the American Feminist Robin Morgan famously declared that “pornography is the theory, and rape is the practice.” (Theory and Practice: Pornography and Rape, from 1974, in Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a Feminist, 1977.)

             

Second-wave Feminism claimed that 50,000 years of human existence since the cavemen, had all been a lie, and women had been conditioned to be the way they were, because of a vast patriarchal cultural conspiracy. Flying in the face of evolution, biology, and social history, they wanted us to believe that everyone from cavemen to the ancient Greeks and Romans, and societies from the Dark Ages to the Fin de Siècle were wrong, they tried to ignore centuries worth of art, literature, and social documentation, they tried to claim that men were not naturally sexual predators, women were not naturally sex objects, submissive, and subservient, or that most men were active and most women passive. They believed that all they had to do was change language and culture, and censor everything that contradicted their theories, to change men and women. But as I will explain later, every measure to correct or change sexual behaviour results in new ways to pervert the new manners and codes.

             

The media coverage these anti-porn and anti-sex Feminists were given was entirely disproportionate to their actual support. Because for every embittered Feminist reading, frigid or lesbian woman there were probably nine who were still man crazy, loved sex with men, and would never associate themselves with anti-sex Feminism. It is frankly astonishing that a woman like Andrea Dworkin filled with such insanity, self-loathing, internalised misogyny, impotent rage, and misandry could have been taken as a spokesperson for Feminism never mind womankind. Nothing she wrote was based on objectify sociological studies, behavioural studies, psychology, psychanalysis, or physiatry. She simply used her own extremely sad life, sexual abuse, and life as prostitute, to create a grotesque misrepresentation of all men, women, and sexuality. She then tried to justify herself, by quoting extremely capricious and extreme extracts from literature by male authors even most men found bizarre characters. Dworkin and her lunatic fringe regarded any woman who enjoyed their feminity and loved sex with men - as betrayers of the sisterhood and collaborators. And they also made Feminists who enjoyed porn, feel doubly guilty as both a woman and a Feminist. But Andrea Dworkin’s insane King Canute like stand against the waves of not just pornography, or male sexuality, but also female heterosexuality was doomed to abject failure. 

               

So, no sooner had the duality of sacred love versus evil sex of Christianity been abolished in the West at the end of the twentieth century, than Feminists replaced it with the duality of ethical feminist love versus evil misogynistic sex and porn. Feminists tried to fight nature, instinct, biology, gender, psychology, and history, with pure left-Liberal reason, wishful thinking, and idealistic demands for equality! That is why they were so fond of using art which was essentially a fantasy, and the law, which was essentially the undemocratic enforcement of laws upon society by a hypocritical elite that deemed itself the representative of virtue. Decades of Feminist diatribes, changes of law, and enforced broadcasting legislation, as well as vicious female backlashes towards men who stepped out of line - virtually silenced men in the West especially in the UK and USA. Men could no longer talk truthfully about women, sexuality, or gender. Women had created a Potemkin village populated by frigid characters from a Jane Austen novel, which created the illusion of civility. It seemed that all men had become incredibly politically correct New Men. But behind the façade many men seethed with macho arrogance, primitive lust, and hatred of women. Then in the noughties, social media, exposed the reality! Many men had not changed at all. Many still held violently misogynistic and sexist views about women and sex. They just knew they could not express them around women, in public, and especially on TV! And perversely it was often later Feminists obsessed with ‘consent’, that the longing for ‘consensual rape’ play and S & M, became so popular because for them it was the ultimate taboo. 

             

The Radical Feminist vision of porn and heterosexual sex was a completely distorted, alienated, absurdly idealistic and puritanical. Men were always aggressors; women were always victims. Women were completely asexual beings that did not respond, never mind become aroused by male sexuality, and men thought of nothing but raping and abusing women. Radical Feminists postulated men of the worst kind of psychological character and women of the most divine and blameless psychological character. I frankly did not care what any ignorant religious nut-bags thought about sexuality, porn, or my art, but I was terrified of the reaction of women, no doubt because I had been so abused by my mother and I had grown up so depend not only upon my mother but also mothers who helped me when my mother was unwell.  So, I felt overwhelmed with guilt for all the sexism and sexual cruelty of men before me.         

              

Yet at the same time, when I heard second-wave, radical Feminists, describe porn as degrading to women I revolted. I simply could not understand why women had any right to special measures to protect their so-called dignity. Women could only be degraded, because for centuries they had been simultaneously totally powerless and silenced in society, and at the same time revered and idolised in religion and art as symbols of purity and goodness. For centuries, painters in the West had venerated, glorified, and treated women like Goddesses. It was only when women began to fight for emancipation, the vote, and equal rights, that painters began to paint them more realistically and then in a progressively more frightening manner as male painters feared women’s new freedoms. Throughout the twentieth century in the West, in film, on TV, and in the media, women’s beauty and moral perfection had similarly been glamourised and idealised. But porn created a different vision of woman that was more realistic and admittedly baser and more animalistic. But how could one define the degradation of women? Were certain parts of a woman’s body degrading? Were breasts degrading? Was the vagina degrading? Was a kiss neutral? But what if the man or woman was more aggressive in the kissing, was that degrading to one or the other? Was the missionary position degrading? And how did you define the subordination of women? Was the doggy position a form of subordination? Was the woman on top a form of female empowerment? Was fellatio a form of female subjugation? Or was cunnilingus a form of male subjugation? When so many women loved and desired men and enjoyed sex, how could the act of making love, or even just fucking be degrading? Was it merely degrading because it was recorded on film? Was it degrading because women were being paid to have sex on film? Even through prostitution, and women marrying men for resources or money had happened since the dawn of time. How did you decide and who decided? Feminists, religious leaders, judges, or our so-called betters in the ruling elite? Who gave them the authority and right to decide for everyone else? How could women claim to be the equal of men and capable of doing everything a man did, and demand equal rights, if they could not be thought about with the freedom one thought about men? To me it all assumed that women were semidivine patronized creatures that could not be critiqued or thought about in certain ways. Of course, I loathed rape and rapists, but I did not think that because a minority of dreadful men abused women that the whole nature of women in print, photography and film should be censored from everyone else. How on earth could you have freedom of speech and expression, if half the population could not be addressed, critiqued, or exposed to the light of day? 

Citing rare and contentious examples, Feminists claimed that women hated doing porn, were forced into it, and did not get any pleasure, never mind have orgasms on film. But looking at decades of porn, I could count in the dozens the number of women who really looked traumatised or unwilling. And since those videos did nothing for me, I quickly moved on to the tens of thousands of others, where the women were clearly empowered, revelled in the power of their feminity and enjoyed the process. There have been many miserable looking porn actresses, but mostly they are shockingly revelling in their sexuality, even when doing horribly submissive and humiliating things. Moreover, the only miserable prostitutes and cam girls I have seen are those with no customers. And frankly, one of the reasons I could never be in porn (even if I could guarantee getting a hard-on) is I am such an emotional wreak and it would be far more obvious on camera than the supposed misery of porn actresses according to Feminists. My scares on my arms alone would tell a story. I frankly would have a nervous breakdown the night before my audition, never mind preform on camera again and again and again! And frankly fourth wave Feminists have given up on this lying argument because the evidence is so overwhelming that so many women like to fuck, get paid and be made famous for being whores, even if they are slut-shamed and stigmatised in society and called victims by Feminists! In fact, studies on porn performers have found that the ‘damaged goods’ hypothesis is not true of most performers, and many had higher levels of self-esteem and happiness than normal women. Of course, there is tragedy in many of their lives, just like there is tragedy in most of our lives, but I wonder if Feminists ever cared as much about the countless disposable homeless men with childhood abuse that was never recognised or treated, because they never had the female option and skills of playing the victim, and so had mental health and addiction problems and no ability to get paid for sex.

            

The uncomfortable truth radical Feminists, right-wing Christians and left-wing Liberals would not acknowledge is that some porn actresses/prostitutes were submissive, masochistic, and loved the thrill of dangerous sex and male dominance, even if this was because of traumatic and abusive childhoods, or previous relationships with men. And they cared more about having fun and making money than upholding the moral standards of the bourgeois élite. The dirty secret of female sexuality was that many women were often not the victims Feminists claimed they were. Many were deviants, delusional attention seekers, and virtual psychos, a fact political correctness conveniently denied, and they used so called female passivity and weakness to deny all responsibility for their actions.

           

Famously in the 1970s, Feminists like Gloria Steinem declared that “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”. It was a totally absurd slogan, but one which explained a lot about the problem of radical Feminist analysis of sexuality, namely that they assumed that there was no connection sexually between men and women. But biology, hormones, psychology, instinct, and nature had made most women sexually and socially dependent upon men. Radical-Feminists then went on to analyse heterosexual sex and pornography, as though they were alien conspiracies, that had brainwashed women into thinking they desired men, and wanted and enjoyed heterosexual sex. But most of these radical-Feminist were men-haters, lesbians, or so bitter from bad experiences with men, they had sworn off men. 

           

So radical-Feminists tried to suggest that male and female sexuality had no connection and that women were the asexual, passive victims of male lust. But countless studies have shown that in fact male and female sexuality is symbiotic. Many men are dominant, and many women are submissive. It iss well know how perverted and kinky male sexual desire can be. Less commonly spoken of is the intensity of focus on penetration and fucking for women, their desire for endless hard pounding, and thus their obsession with male performance and mastery. Some women are obsessed with huge cocks, but most are obsessed with the hardness, staying power, and performance of a man’s cock. And while many more men are perverted, there are a lot of women with similar corresponding perversions. One just has to look at the simple act of a woman stripping and many women’s inbuilt tendency towards exhibitionism. I had seen many professional strippers and amateur girls stripping, live and in porn, and the difference was often like between day and night. The professionals know all the moves, but were often just clinically going through the motions, and they often looked bored out of their minds. Even to me, Feminist arguments against the ‘objectification of women’ were often valid in a professional setting if only because of the alienated nature of the transaction and lack of spontaneity. Whereas amateur girls, who entered stripping contests were often nothing short of orgasmic in their excitement - as they exhibited and exposed their bodies. This indicated to me that exhibitionism was natural for many women, and only made strange by the cold professionalism of many strippers. As for their male customers, puritan and Feminist inspired cinema liked to portray the men in strip clubs as ugly, dirty, greasy, fat, old men or weird dangerous sickos and losers. But often the men were in fact what would be described as alpha males, young, tall, good looking, ‘hunks’ even - but their character was as dark and sleazy as many other men’s. This was very upsetting to many women because they were subconsciously enraged that a good-looking man was spending his time and money on a ‘whore’ and not them. Remember, since the middle-ages, artists have used ugly caricature to demean those they despise like other races and insane people. In the case of Christian and Feminist artists/filmmakers, when they depicted men who enjoy paying women to strip or fuck – they depicted them as the dregs of masculinity in terms of looks, intelligence and character. They also objectified and caricatured these men as vile without exploring their humanity and the many often sad and lonely reasons some used sex workers. Some of the men who use porn, go to see strippers, or pay for sex, are life’s losers, but for a half an hour they can feel like a king with a beautiful woman who thinks they are smart, sexy, and fun to be around. Thus, anti-porn radical Feminists indulged in their own form of objectification of men, by characterizing all men who used porn as misogynists, enemies of Feminism and potential rapists, and failing to empathise on any level with lonely men. Instead of trying to explore the complexities of female exhibitionism or male voyeurism, and these men’s feeling of inadequacy and isolation and use of sex workers as a kind of sexual social welfare. Some of these men had emotional problems and lacked the social/sexual capital and status that normally guaranteed that women would throw themselves at them. Nor did anti-porn radical Feminists acknowledge the passivity and insecurity of many men, and the way porn was a form of surrogate fantasy world for them in which women did not constantly reject them or force them to constantly be the aggressor in sex, but instead women actively and aggressively participated. But time and time again, I have seen Feminists be told of male victims of physical and sexual abuse, mental illness, or social failure, and over and over again, they find a way of bringing it back to women and their issues! And I have been left seriously wondering if women give a dam about men! However, in the end, Dworkin and the other anti-porn crusaders battle against porn was a dismal failure, and only succeeded in viciously dividing the women’s movement and some would say totally derailing it in the 1980s.  

            

The late 1970s and early 1980s was also the decade of the politization of the clitoris. Some radical-Feminists claimed that female pleasure had nothing to do with penetrative sex and women only climaxed during penetration because of friction against the clitoris during intercourse. However, partisan Feminist sexologists like Shere Hite, were disappointed to note that only 13% of women did not like vaginal penetration during sex, over half preferred vaginal penetration, and many loved it! Later, studies of the G-spot revealed that the G-spot was connected to the clitoris and inside the vagina just behind the clitoris which made the doggy position in particular very arousing for a woman

              

In the early eighties, most men, like most radical-Feminists, assumed that women, did not like sex, so everyone was shocked by the extraordinary success of everything from Playgirl magazine to The Chippendale male strippers, and sex toy sales parties for women. The orgiastic frenzy of female audiences for The Chippendales in LA and New York in the early 1980s stunned everyone but was excused as revenge for over 10,000 years of men treating women like objects. Moreover, stories of some women, many of them married, having sex with the male strippers’ backstage, outside the clubs, or in hotels became widespread.   

              

Meanwhile, Feminists blamed sexism and misogyny on pornography, but they might as well have blamed cakes for obesity. Time and time again, I heard feminists and female art snobs deride everything, from the beauty of porn stars and prostitutes, to the beauty of paintings of female nudes by male artists. Such women who had spent their lives trying to assert their intellectual superiority - hated women who revelled in their feminity and sexuality. But it was nature and biology that made women objects not men, and most young women played their sexuality up as much as they could, because it was one of the few ways that they could have power over men, and gain social capital. It took me a long time to realise that Feminists were loath to admit their heterosexual desire for men, because they feared it would increase men’s power over them and cripple their political agenda. And the whole lie about the ‘male gaze’ was a cunning way to blame men for looking, rather than blaming women for acting out sexually. (Personally, I was later shocked watching reality TV, by how many of the first moves of gazing, flirting, exhibitionism, and groping was done by the women not the men.) I grew up in the 1980s watching constant debates about pornography, when it was claimed by radical Feminists and right-wing Christians that pornography turned men into rapists. Totally spurious links were made between porn use, and male abuse and rape of women. But to this day no link has been proved. In fact, most studies in the 1980s found that rapists and mass murderers came from religious or repressive homes and did not see porn until much later than other men and their greatest influence was not porn but the Bible!

                

Moreover, what has often really happened in recent decades is that many people have become increasingly atomized, alienated, isolated and avoid intimate relationships. So, porn has increasingly become for many men and women a way to avoid the danger of real intimacy and sex. Admittedly, some immature young thuggish men having seen porn have tried to dominate and inflict anal and rough sex upon their causal dates - in a desperate attempt to assert their masculinity against a liberated female sexuality they increasingly see as insatiable and demonic and try to punish. And because of such hook-up culture, many women are often so traumatised by such encounters that they go for months or years between hook-ups. And those born after 1995, are actually having less sex on average, than any generation since the early 1960s! What has also happened is that a significant minority of more vulnerable boys and men, have retreated to their bedrooms, escaped into a fantasy world of video games and porn, dropped out of life, and abandoned trying to have sex with real women, because they have porn induced, chronically low self-esteem, sexual performance anxiety, and even porn induced erectile dysfunction.

              

Since the early 1960s, the counterculture had attacked the conservative alpha male of the post-war period, and created anti-hero’s out of crazy, decadent, and tragic actors, musicians, and artists. The eighties had brought a brief conservative backlash with everything from Rambo movies, Chippendale dancers, to weightlifting poseurs. Yet, these muscle-bound bodies were the exact opposite of the lean and tough soldier’s body, because these dumb men could barely run down the road for a minute! This manic narcissistic building up of masculine muscle in the 1980s, was a hysterical response to second wave Feminism, female empowerment, and the end of patriarchy.

             

Meanwhile, from the 1980s onward there had been countless stories of awkward, shy, wimpy men, who were the centre of romance and lust for gorgeous women on TV and in the movies. I must admit that as a youth I adored these stories, because it seemed to me, that the only chance I ever had of meeting a beautiful girl - was if she pursued me! But these stories were pure bullshit, written by nerdy writers creating wish-fulfilment stories of aggressive and dominant hot girls, ignoring and avoiding alpha males, and choosing to chase shy nerdy boys. Such stories also neatly concealed the real animal nature of most dating, its games of male predatory seduction and cunning feminine manipulation. Such romantic stories of male impotence and female innocence also avoided the base nature of both men and women.         

            

The 1990s was notable for its bisexuality, and lad and laddett decadence. The early noughties brought about the ‘revenge of the nerds’, when almost for the first time in history, weak, weird, autistic and nerdish men ruled the tech industries and achieved more power and money than armies of brutes could never dream of. But no amount of money and power could make these wimpy geeks sex symbols for women - who still retained primitive longings for powerful cavemen. In a sense, the re-emergence of the alpha male in porn, reality TV dating shows (frequently produced by and for women), and social media, in the twenty-tens, encouraged the desperate overcompensation of thuggish men, who in all other respects had been left behind by the contemporary world. On reality TV dating shows, on social media, and in porn, muscular retards, with barely a high school education, who could not string a sentence together, and were just working-class tradesmen or personal trainers, found they had one last thing left to them – their bizarre continuing sex appeal to many women who retained reactionary, primitive sexual fantasies of physically strong, powerful, and masterful alpha males, or evil bad boys.  

              

The problem for men in the West today at least since the late 1970s, is that they have no credible narrative for masculinity, and they have become completely passive and reactive to the aggressive political actions, psychotic behaviour, sexual demands, and socio-political freedom of modern Western women. On TV many men have become stupid buffoons. In the 1970s, if a man worked hard, brought home a wage packet, and gave it to his wife, and had sex with her every now and then (regardless of how well, because only his pleasure was important) he had done his job as man! But since the 1980s, women have demanded to be sexually satisfied! And that men help in the house and with kids! But many men cannot be great lovers, soulmates, therapists, providers, and parents all in one. So, some women dream of combing a couple of men in one, having an open relationship, or cuckolding their husband. Some women do more than fantasize and enjoying being the kind of chauvinistic pigs’ men had been in the 1950s. Moreover, while in the 1950s, frigidity had been synonymous with many women in unhappy marriages, today in 2022, it is often men who are frigid and avoid sex, and the emotional entrapment and demands of women. Famously, in a Playboy magazine interview, the singer John Meyer who had a slept with a string of A-list female celebrities including Jessica Simpson, Kim Kardashian, and Taylor Swift told Playboy that he preferred masturbation and porn to real sex because he did not have to deal with women’s desires. Those men who do sleep with women, expect the porn star treatment, with their girlfriends on their knees giving them endless blowjobs. And many men now fake orgasm because they find real sex so unsatisfactory compared to the porn experience. Since the twenty-tens, almost a third of college men report erectile disfunction, because constant exposure to porn has desensitized them and they cannot get it up with real girls. And twenty percent of young men are now reported to have low sperm counts, and sperm counts in general have been dropping in the West since the late 1960s for reasons not fully understood. The more women outperform men in a particular field - the more men withdraw from that field. The more women excel academically, the more many men drop out, and exaggerate masculine traits of violence and sexual promiscuity.  

               

Under the new Feminist orthodoxy of the noughties, female sex was to be uncritically celebrated but men’s sexuality was deemed violent, and to be contained. So, since the noughties, white women have completely emasculated white men and completely silenced them in the public and cultural arena – but they happily twerk and gyrate to black male rappers who talk about treating women like bitches and hoes. The venom and hated of men in many female musicians’ music since the 1990s would never be tolerated if it were a man talking about women the way they do - unless of course they were black men. Meanwhile, time and time again on TV today, women and gay men can sexualize heterosexual men -and make lewd comments. But woe betide anyone who mentions a woman’s appearance for good or ill. Women want men to let them do anything they want and never even criticize them, but they also want men to continue to be strong, confident, providers and lovers no matter how appalling they are. Many women in the West have become so empowered that they are now as obnoxious and vile as many of the worst men. Meanwhile, violence committed by middle-aged women has sky rocked since the 1980s as they become more assertive and socially powerful. In many working-class neighborhoods in the West today, it is women who are in charge, and they form a kind of matriarchy.

          

Most women it seems to me, have absolutely no understanding of men, and many do not actually care about men. Many women only care about what they can get out of men, and what men can do for them. Many men in America today, are not completing secondary education, never mind university education, delaying adulthood, including relationships with women, and they are often still living with their parents, which makes it harder for these men to have a sex life. They are also living more socially isolated lives. In the face of Feminist political advances, men have lost all understanding of their masculinity or place in society. Men have been made to feel ashamed of their gender. So, the identities of many men have become impoverished, there is an epidemic of male suicides, male incarcerations in prison, and men with gambling or drug addictions. Of course, women are often disgracefully the target of male violence - but most male violence is directed at other men! Men today are vastly overrepresented in unemployment, drug overdose, crime, and suicide statistics. Many white men in particular feel that women and minorities are given more attention in the media, and nobody is paying any attention to men - even when they excel. Dropping out of life, living at home with their parents, playing video games, and masturbating to porn, these men do not want relationships - they only want casual sex. In fact, many American men, believe that society and marriage has become so biased against them that they have dropped out. So, the percentage of men in America who finish school, move out of home, graduate, become financially independent, marry, and have children by thirty has halved. And many of these men indulging in an extended adolescence have become losers in the eyes of many women. With the result, that people in America and increasingly in the West, are having less sex. The General Social Study in America in 2019, revealed that 23% of 18- to 29-year-olds were celibate in 2018 and 18% of women aged 18 to 29 had been celibate in the past year compared with 29% of men of the same age. The figure on men aged 18 to 29 years old who were celibate had increased from 10% in 2008 to 29% in 2018! Virginity is slightly more common in educated young men. Men living with their parents and who are not in full time employment, have much less sex than men in work and in a relationship. But the very sexless 2018 in America, might have also been a result of the #MeToo movement, though Feminists would argue that women were not subjected to as much unwanted sex. Sex life has become divided between women, successful men, and a huge number of unsuccessful men. Attractive successful men have so many women to choose from. In the past, when choice was limited, ugly, short, poor men could shine through their personality, but now women do not want them, and many men are virgins or very sexually inexperienced. Meanwhile, many women are not receiving as much attention from men or receiving compliments, so they are having more and more body, and mental health issues.   

              

Some also suggest that the unprecedented rise in homosexuality in the West is a reaction to increased female empowerment. Not that many women care about most of these drop-out men, because in the modern free love world, many women only care about dating the top twenty percent of alpha males, even if these creeps constantly cheat on them and abuse them. I know of no worse an example of this than, Rihanna’s song Love on the Brain, who was beaten black and blue by her psycho boyfriend, but she still kept going back to him “because he fucks me so good”.

             

Alpha males are typically tall, masculine, handsome, muscular, and confident. They have symmetrical faces with a strong jawline, and a muscular body with an inverted triangle. Alpha males are arseholes to females because they can have almost any woman they want. Or at least they think they can. Often women throw themselves at alpha males and have sex with them almost no questions asked, but beta males they make jump through hoops constantly. With beta males they talk about needing a decent man, an intelligent man, a man who understands their feelings, a deep and meaningful connection, but with alpha males they can often drop their knickers without even an extended conversation. So, often all their talk of men’s character and their own standards are bullshit! I used to think, many women loved alpha males, despite the men’s obvious stupidity and nasty characters, because they desired them! But now I realise, that it is even worse. Because they desire them, many women project upon alpha males all that they want to see in them! Suddenly some muscle-bound douchebag is not just a great fuck - he is so sensitive, deep, soulful, intelligent, and creative!

               

Moreover, Feminists fail to acknowledge the massive lack of power most men have in the domestic arena, which is first ruled by their mothers and later by their wives. In fact, the only real response of most men to female moral/social argument is to stay silent, outright lie, or ghost women. Feminists also fail to understand that male sexuality is driven by a constant desire to procreate with as many partners as possible and avoid commitment as much as possible, whereas female sexuality is predicated on emotional enmeshment, the needs of procreation and the desire to entrap a man into supporting their offspring. Since most attractive women spend their young lives fighting off the advances of men looking for sex, they have no comprehension of the loneliness of many men and extent to which many men’s lives no matter how attractive or socially powerful they are, is spent fighting to find female lovers and the constant rejection, humiliation, loneliness, and alienation it brings. Nor do women with countless family and social contacts understand how dependent many men are on an emotional connection with a female partner. In fact, many men who claim they are looking for ‘sex’ are looking for love, on the other hand, many women who claim they are looking for ‘love’ are really only looking for sex. Nor do Feminists want to acknowledge the way plenty of young women ‘get the horn’, and desperately go to nightclubs looking to get fucked by any willing man. Nor do they acknowledge how easy it is for virtually all these young women to get laid. In fact, women in the West now report almost as many sexual partners as men, but it should be remembered that men famously over state their sexual conquests and women famously under report them. Personally, I have known many women, who when I asked them how many men they had been with, have said around five to ten. But they meant those men they had intercourse with and failed to mention those men they let feel them up, finger fuck them, eat them out, or the men they gave blowjobs to! Nor do they mention, or frankly can even count, the number of boys and men they have kissed in nightclubs since their teenage years. We are constantly told about men who cheat on their partners but not all the women they are cheating with are single - many are also cheating on their men. And a shocking number of women today do the dirt on their boyfriends and husbands - with men in work. But they are often far more discreet about their cheating and cover their tracks better than many men. It is only when most single women hit their mid-thirties and men stop paying any attention to them, their biological clock is ticking, and the only men left are immature losers, that women begin to loath quality men for not wanting them and their impotent rage ironically almost mimics (minus the murderous terrorism of the exceptional cases) that of the young Incel men they had such contempt for when they held all the power in the liberated dating game. 

              

To this day, anti-porn radical Feminists are profoundly anti-heterosexual sex (many of them are lesbian), often have no real concern or love for sex workers, and merely use them for their own anti-male and anti-sex agenda, and they are profoundly anti-democratic, elitist, condescending, and hypocritical. That lesbians who not only do not desire men, but also have none of the heterosexual desires of a most women, nor any idea how to be a heterosexual woman, should have appointed themselves as spokespersons for women is absurd! But then many lesbians have often preyed on women who have fallen victim of men. These radical-Feminists raging against pornography have miniscule sales for their publications and on YouTube they are lucky to get tens of thousands of views, compared to the millions of views individual porn videos get on PornHub alone. Yet, these anti-porn Feminists are granted a disproportionate amount of social influence by gaining government funding (ironically, paid for mostly through men’s taxes), infiltrating Government agencies and influencing the making of laws, even though most of them and none of their policies have ever been voted for by the public at large. These Feminists constantly talk about the effect of pornography on women. But what about the effects of psychotic porn actresses and debauched liberated women on young men? Or radical Feminists on men and society? Moreover, for women who claim to be horrified by porn they spend a remarkable amount of their time as part of their ‘inquiry’ looking at the most extreme examples of porn possible so they can give out about it! On the radio or TV, these radical Feminists, play down their hatred of men, but on campuses in “women only” activist’s groups, they often freely blame men for everything wrong in the world, describe all heterosexual sex as rape, and advocate lesbianism.

              

In Freud’s ‘primal scene’, the child witnesses or hears their parents having sex and thinks that their mother is being hurt by their father. Ironically, if the father is making love with real passion and really giving her pleasure, the louder and more ‘in pain’ the mother will appear to be! So, the primal notion that women suffer during sex permutates our culture and tricks us into believing that all women are weak victims in constant need of protection from male lust. This is compounded by young boys’ belief, that women have a scar between their legs and they have been castrated. Not only does this make men fear their own castration it also makes them think women are sexually incomplete. Yet, the vagina is an incredibly complex and multifaceted organ of both pleasure and life giving. For a woman, being penetrated is a far more intimate and emotional experience than it is for the man penetrating. Constantly we are told men penetrate the vagina, but it could also be said that the vagina engulfs the penis. Sometimes a man can fuck a woman too hard, but it is also often surprising how hard a woman can like to be fucked, whether by a man or a dildo. One could also suggest that the greater physical strength of men, is compensated for in women by earlier intellectual, emotional, and sexual maturation, greater social skills, and solidarity, and frankly more cunning. Moreover, while men can be more physically violent, women can be far more verbally abusive. Men’s blunt and simplistic verbal attacks are nothing like the relentless surgical dissections of others made by women. And even when not being outright abusive, women frequently bombard their men and mankind with a stream of micro-aggressive comments. Not only do many women blame men for patriarchy, but at their most hormonal, they often blame men for their very gender and their bodies vulnerability and curses. Despite all their feminist hostility towards men’s power in society, and demands for equality, many women today still have ludicrously romantic and reactionary notions about how a man should woo them, and what a man should do for them. Moreover, although women constantly demand empathy and understanding of their feminity, and act as though they can see through men’s character and motives, most women have no idea at all what it means to be a man and the silent repressed suffering involved. Paradoxically, often the nicer, kinder, and more loving a man is to a woman in a relationship, the more she become the micro-abuser, constantly putting the man down! Because once she knows that he is a kind gentle man, and he would never physically hurt her, she feels able to act as bitchily toward the man as she likes. Then there is the strange case of the strong silent alpha male who may be psychically intimidating and sexually impressive but is almost illiterate and non-verbal, so he is about as socially clued-in as a dumb dog. So, while he acts like a useless lump, the women in his life run rings around him.

              

Of course, this is all talking about sexually normal and morally good people, but the problem with sex is that it only takes a few psychopathic male abusers to strike fear into everyone and poison sex. Which is why the hippie ideal of free love soured when unscrupulous men sought to exploit other people’s naivety and vulnerability. Moreover, men are still responsible for around 90% of all child abuse and virtually all rape. But historically, many laws used to protect women against dangerous men have also been used to control and punish sexually promiscuous women and deny them agency. 

             

Famously, in Greek mythology, Zeus the king of the Gods, and Hera the queen of the Gods, had an argument about who enjoyed sex more, men or women. Zeus thought that it was women and Hera thought it was men. To settle their argument, they asked Tiresias (who had been cursed by Hera to live as a woman for seven years) who he thought enjoyed sex more. Tiresias answered, “Of ten parts, man enjoys only one!” Yet, the debate on who is more sexual men or women, and who enjoys sex more continues to this day. Men use more short-term strategies, they are less picky, and they want sex more often. But they also have greater jealousy because of paternity issues and fear of being cuckolded. Women today in the West on average masturbate less than men, have fewer sexual partners than men, less one-night stands than men, and they are a bit more faithful than men. Though the divide is not that large and growing smaller. Traditionally it has been thought that it is men not women who get bored by their sex life in a monogamous relationship. But many recent studies have shown that many women can get as bored of a monogamous sex life as a man. Many wives who file for divorce, give out that their husbands are wimps, or have become wimps, and so they are no longer attracted to their husbands. Also, in committed relationships, many women lose interest in sex, because they no longer feel truly desired, and fear that their men are trapped, and only are with them because they have no other choice. But the women want to feel desired and chosen. That is why so many women have rape fantasies which are often only submissive fantasies, in which a man is so overcome by lust for her, that they risk everything including retribution and imprisonment to ravish her.

              

Educated women masturbate more than uneducated women, watch more porn than uneducated women, and they are more likely to have sex toys than uneducated women. Yet, the simplistic notion of female passivity in regards to sex, fails to take account of the amount of time and money women spend cultivating their beauty through makeup, clothes, accessories and a cunning learning of the art of seductive poses. For women, the feeling of being desired is central to their sexuality. Most women’s fantasies are about being desired and given pleasure rather than giving pleasure. Many young women become entranced by their own femininity, viciously compete with other women in terms of beauty and desirability and are intoxicated by the sexual power they hold over men. So, it could also be argued that female sexuality is far more all-encompassing than masculinity, spanning the cultivation of dress and make-up, the mere excitement of being wanted and desired, the ego trip of rejecting men, and being a spectacle of beauty, to fantastic vaginal grotesqueness - incomparable to the fairly straight forward male sex organ. So, although the penis is a constant source of amusement to both men and women, the vagina is usually an unspeakably frightening abyss. Women crave physical affection far more than men and sex for women can be far more emotional. But for women it is quality not quantity that matters. Because for women sex is deeper and more intense. Some women describe their orgasms as almost spiritual in intensity. The female orgasm seems to preform no evolutionary function, because women can conceive without having an ogasam, and women can enjoy sex in a way most female animals cannot. Women are credited with up to seven different kinds of orgasms including clitoral, vaginal, and anal orgasms. The female orgasm can be ten times stronger than the males. The head of the clitorises alone contains 15,000 nerve endings, whereas the head of the penis only has 4,000. The female orgasm is so strong it almost shuts down a woman’s brain. They are also capable of multiple orgasm, and unlike men they have no refectory phase (men need five to twenty minutes to recover). And almost every woman has a bisexual side. Moreover, in modern Liberal democracies, civilization is determined by the choices of liberated women not men. So, 40% of men never get to reproduce whereas 80% of women do. And the top 20% of attractive women have 80% of all promiscuous sex. Moreover, a female’s promiscuity may also increase her chance of reproducing because when multiple men ejaculate in a woman their sperm compete to fertilize the egg. The concealed ovulation of females and extended sexuality in humans (which means that female’s mate even when they are not fertile as opposed to most animals who only mate when a female is fertile), means that even beta males have a chance to mate with females because alpha males cannot dominate all the fertile females all the time. And beta males can be more faithful husbands and better fathers than alpha males who concentrating on mating not nurturing. It also means woman can exchange sexual favours for food, shelter, or money. So, humans have sex all the time, often just for pleasure, and pair bonding. Sex is about the transference of power. Men need to get power to get sex. But once they start having sex with a woman, they lose power. While the woman’s power increases! That is why it is often common in relationships for the men, not the women, to withdraw from intimacy and sex. It is also why so many men even in relationships, turn to porn and prostitution, because they want sex not only without commitment but also without enmeshment. 

               

Despite all the Feminist gibs at men for “thinking with their prick” many women in fact spend their lives thinking with their pussies and not their hearts. Teenage girls’ magazines have been notorious for their sexual stories and content since the late 1980s. Then look at the frankly rather creepy case of young girls and their infatuation with teen idols and boy bands and their slavish adoration of young men frankly too old for them. It is well known that the female teen market is one of the biggest in the world and the state these girls work themselves up into when they see their idols has no comparison in boys. Usually, such girls start fancying cute harmless boys, often prettier than a girl, or a clearly gay boy they hope to change, before moving on to so-called ‘bad boys’ who are frankly little more than vain poseurs and as harmless as the teen idol pretty boys they often were marketed as at first. Yet, from the start one thing is clear, many young girls would prefer to share a boy idol with thousands of other girls than bother with an ordinary boy all their own. There is also now a huge online archive of fan fiction created girls about their idols fucking them or having gay sex while they watch.

              

Girls love a bad boy, with an edge and naughtiness in appearance and personality, and they are sexually attracted to alpha males, but they are nightmare to live with or be in a relationship with. So, for long-term relationships they often pick a beta male. This leads to the perplexing duality of female pride and the way women can ruthlessly critique and put-down beta males with ease but pathetically forgive alpha males for all kinds of emotional abuse because they make them horny. Until that is, the alpha male rejects them! Then all hell breaks loose! Despite constant radical-Feminist demands that women should become independent from men, they are biologically interdependent upon men and their vaginas are built to have the most intimate connection with men. So, even women who masturbate with vibrators often report that it is not as emotionally satisfying as sex with a man. So, despite women’s romantic claims that they wanted a nice, caring, and sensitive man, they go weak at the knees for rugged men they dream of ravishing them, even if they are total jerks. Yet, the selective memory of most women is also astonishing. They love to tell people how ‘perverted’ men sent them pictures of their dicks on social media, but constantly fail to mention what they might have posted to provoke it or sent in reply. In fact, most young women today have sent nudes to a partner. They also fail to mention that although most women hate it when guys send them unsolicited dick picks. It is not because they are disgusted by penises or are not turned on by a hard cock if it is their boyfriends or a man, they have had some connection with. But because the kind of guys that send unsolicited dick picks are total narcissists and losers wanking alone at home in their underpants. They are basically saying look at me! Look at how hot I am with my big dick! Sending an unsolicited dick pick to most women no matter how big your cock is, looks more like a small dick kind of move. Besides most women are also disappointed by most dick pics because there is not much to see! And most women do not want to tell men how sexy they are! They want men to tell them how sexy they are! Similarly, women never mention the fact that many of them spontaneously and involuntarily laugh out loud, and mock men who have small penises on social media in the cruellest possible manner, and without any consideration for the feelings or mental health of the men. Personally, since I started on social media in early 2005, I have hardly ever friended a woman and I have only accepted their friend requests. Nor have I ever started any conversation with them. And I have instantly blocked any girl who tried to flirt with me, and I have only engaged with non-sexually threatening older women, who want to comfort me. I have never written that any girl is beautiful in a picture, unless she is already a friend of Carol and mine. And I have never written that any girl is sexy. Plus, I have never sent anyone sexy pictures of myself, never mind dick pics! So, I have never had a single girl send me anything either.

                 

The introduction of the pill in the early 1960s, was seen as a new beginning for female sexuality. For the first time in human history, women would be able to have sex as freely as men. But this did not consider women’s biology, psychology, and emotions. It only allowed women to have free sex with men they considered worthy of their bodies – alpha males and bad boys. But Feminism has constantly failed to acknowledge the dirty secret of female lust for bad boys. Since at least the 1960s a lot of women have flocked around Rock and Rap musicians of the worst character in search of debauchery. But there is no more disturbing an example of some freakish women’s attraction to bad boys that the groupies and fame whores that courted evil mass-murders and rapists like Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, and Richard Ramirez. And the fact that even the most desperate to find love woman (with no options) would rather not be with a nice, harmless man because they rightly expect the sex with them to be a boring dud. Moreover, although in our Western post-Feminist societies it is forbidden to judge any woman on her looks or critique her in any way, it is perversely, perfectly alright (and in fact so common as to be unremarkable) for a woman to judge all men not only on their looks but their whole character, biography and bank balance and decide who they wanted to sleep with without question, debate, or appeal.

                 

So, many women just talk of ‘love’ as a way of concealing their far less acceptable feelings of lust and greed. Unlike, boys who have a direct physical and visual expression and incrimination of their arousal and desire in their hard pricks, girl’s arousal is more subtle and emotional. That is why naïve young girls often mistake lust for ‘love’. ‘Love’ allows many women to be wanton without any responsibility for their lust. In fact, women check out men all the time.

                 

Now at the age of fifty-three, I can honestly say that I think love and sex have nothing to do with each other. Sex can be an expression of love, but mostly it is just animal rutting. And I have loved so many people I have never had sex with and adored my numerous cats and dogs. So, I firmly believe that ‘love’ has been cunningly used by both men and women as an excuse for sex and alibi for debauchery.

               

The so-called mystery of women is nothing but the constant concealment, deceit, and purposeful disinformation of women. Women are mysterious, because the last thing women want is men to understand them, their motives, or actions. Women’s mystery and their secrets - are their greatest strength! Women are physically weaker and less physically violent, so for centuries they have used cunning, manipulation, and deceit to get what they want. In the game of love, many men are like rank amateurs in chess, just moving pieces and seeing what happens, whereas many women are like grand masters thinking twenty moves ahead. The game of love and sex is far more impatient, serious, and dangerous for women. Moreover, the risks and rewards of love for women are far greater than for men.

             

There are many things women love and find sexy about male sexuality. First is many men’s pure acceptance of women and adulation of the female body. Many women are very hard on themselves and are constantly find fault with their bodies. But most men have such a positive attitude to women’s bodies and women love this kind of male attention. Many women love the way they can sexually enthral a man with their feminity like a snake charmer over a snake. They love their ability to hypnotise a man with their body and sexuality. Some women are also turned on by the mastery of men and the way they can command them. Even though today this may seem politically incorrect. But it feels natural to many women in lust. Some women secretly love the anger and coldness of men because it is very powerful, scary, intense, and dangerous and in the bedroom setting it is truly magnetic. The next thing many women love about male sexuality is its dirtiness. It is raw, uncompromising, uncommercialized and not prettified like female erotica. Which is very sexy to many women. Then there is the complementary fantasies of men and women that fit like a lid to a pot. Many women have submissive fantasies and many men have dominate fantasies. Then there is the strength of men, and their ability to protect and defend a woman. Many girls love the idea of taming a wild male and seeing the strength of that man used softly and devotedly towards them. Finally, many women are fascinated male culture and the strange exotic otherness of it.

                

In studies on female sexuality, it has shockingly been found that women are not only just as aroused by watching porn as men, but their range of arousal is greater than men. Female sexual appetite is more varied than mens, since they react to heterosexual and homosexual porn, and women are even turned on by watching bonobos (monkeys) having sex. During the tests, run by psychology professor Meredith Chivers, women were connected to plethysmographs, a prob that sat inside the vagina and measured blood flow and resulting lubrication. The women were also asked to press a button every time they felt arouse by a video. Crucially, straight women reported that they were only turned on by heterosexual porn - when the sensors indicated that they were aroused by all the forms of pornography! And lesbians claimed only to be aroused by lesbian porn – when the sensors indicated that they too were aroused by all the forms of pornography! In fact, women’s minds and bodies seemed to be living separate lives. Yet, the same tests on men showed on average that they were only turned on by women if they were straight, or men if they were gay, and not at all by bonobos. And men turned out to be more aware/honest in their reporting, unlike women who either could not sense they were aroused or lied. Later, preliminary research has also shockingly found that women are aroused and become lubricated by the sounds of rape scenes. They suggest that evolution has resulted in women becoming lubricated when threatened by rape, so that a man does not do permanent damage to her vagina. But arousal does not men consent.

                 

Women like gay porn, because women can see men’s bodies and faces, which they never see in straight porn. And porn for women does not always mean romantic porn. Many women like BDSM, and women search twice as much as men for violent porn. Women may look at rape porn to confront their worst fears, to heal after trauma by returning in a controlled way to the source of their fear, or in a desire to go to the female extreme of transgression.

              

Political correctness is not sexy for women - but being desired is almost orgasmic. Women, despite what Feminists claim, want to feel desirable to men, and the more male attention they get the better they usually feel about themselves. It is a sign of just how strong young women’s sexual desire is that they ignore a lifetime of sex shaming, policing by their family, the potential of being called a slut, the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases, the risk of pregnancy, and the threats of violence or rape, to have sex with strange men they have just met in nightclubs or online. No man ever faces such costs or dangers. Women love to say, “men are only after one thing!” But women are even worse – they want everything! They want a man to befriend them, to provide for them, mentor them, father them, breed them, and they also like to collect men just for entertainment and emergencies - when they need a quick fuck or when their present relationship fails to work! The only reason this is not obvious to most men is that most women are by nature secretive, and many are also highly manipulative. So, they are not stupid, and do not give their game away to men.

                

Many women think about sex as much as men, but they do so in a much more critical manner. Because a woman must make sure she chooses the right man to become her partner. This has all to do with biology. A man can produce millions of sperms a day, but a woman can only give birth a few times in her life. It is like comparing a Browning .50 caliber machine gun with tens of thousands of rounds of ammo and an old-fashioned Colt 45 with just six bullets. You do not understand female sexuality, if you do not understand that women believe that it is a gift they bestow upon only the most worthy men. Men must earn the right to have sex with women. So, women are very selective about who they have sex with, because they can only have so many babies and they want to give themselves completely to the kind of man they think can be a good protector and provider. Many women see their love as a gift that they give to only the best man who owns them body and soul. So, women are constantly comparing and anylisising men. Is he attractive or intelligent? Does he have potential? They care less about what he has done in the past and are more concerned with where he is going. They want a man who is tall, dark, handsome, educated, have a good job, own his on home, is socialable, fits in with their family, be a good kisser, good lover, and great father for their children. Also, women want a soulmate and a man they can talk about their feelings to. But he also must be rugged and manly. In the end, most women settle for a man who combines the best qualities of strength, compassion, humour, and fidelity. Though the more attractive, well-educated, or successful the woman is, the greater her expectations are in a man in terms of wealth and education. Naturally, all this is confusing to men. And millennial women have become even far more selective. They want to find a man that is on their economic and professional level. Only a few men can meet these high expections, which is why many men think women are not interested in sex. Most men do not make the list. It is also maybe the reason why most women do not give a dam if a man is gay (unless he is already their partner) because that just thins the field of men even more towards those real alpha men they want. But once they have an alpha male, many women start to lust after an even higher status alpha male! In the economics of sex, it is all about supply and demand, cock is everywhere and easily had, and thus cheap, but pussy is often unobtainable or has to be paid for in many ways, so it is expensive. There are hardly any Incel women, because no matter how ugly or horrible a women is, she can always get laid. Even the most average looking girl can go to a nightclub and be approached by four to six guys in a night! According to figures found by the likes of the data analyst Bradford Tuckfield, on dating sites, 80% of the women are only attracted to 20% of the men but the men are attracted to roughly 50% of the women. On Tinder, men accept 46% of profiles, women only 14%. On OK Cupid, men start 80% of the conversations, thought they are mainly aimed at young women. This is why women are so competitive in the dating world. It is not that women do not want sex with men, it is they only want sex with the right man. And the more they have satisfying sex with a man, the more they become addicted to him, and jealously guard him from other women. But it is getting worse, as I have noted, for the first time in history women in the West are out preforming men in school, university, and the workplace and many are earning more than men. So, most women are now independent, and a man must have added value to interest a woman and if a man has a lower educational level or earns less, he might be less interesting to many women. And many women admit that they have been unfaithful and divorced men not because their husband was cruel or abusive, but because they were or had become sexually boring. And most women would prefer to be the second or third wife/mistress of an attractive, powerful winner than the only wife of a loser. That is why women so often complain that there is a man drought. Because, only 20% of men are attractive and worthy partners for most women. Although many women like to say politely that size does not matter - of course it does. Most women would like an average to above average sized cock and find small cocks laughable. Although many find really big cocks hurt too much.

             

As Simone de Beauvoir observed: “The normal sexual act in effect puts woman into a state of dependency upon the male… Normally, she can be taken by the man at any time, whereas he can take her only when he is in a state of erection.” (Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1949, London: Picador Classics, 1988, P.395.) In other words, sexual intercourse puts women in a state of dependency on men. A man cannot be forced or raped. The whims of his penis rules the bedroom.

            

The hysterical way women laugh at anything phallic shaped or any word that reminds them of cock is a tell-tale sign that they think about it constantly whether on a conscious or subconscious level. Having sucked two cocks myself, I can say that it did absolutely nothing for me either positively or negatively. It was like sucking a rubber truncheon and just as pointless. So, I cannot say how many women really want to suck cock or get-off on sucking cock, but I do love the way women in porn worship cocks like they were the most sexy, delicious, and important thing in the world. Because every man wants women to think his penis is as important as he thinks it is! In fact, many women enjoy giving blowjobs, and the power they have over the man, and the pleasure they can give him. But they also selfishly know that the quickest way to get a man hard is to blow him, and then he can fuck her as hard as she wants him to. Women envy the way men can pee standing up, love the velvety texture of the cock, they find men cumming on, or in them, releases opiates and give them a sense of accomplishment and intimacy, they love the way it is easy to tell if a man fancies them, they like the fact that cocks are so uncomplicated and easy to please, and the way they rule the bedroom, and give so much pleasure, and sometimes women dream about having a cock so they could feel what it is like to fuck a woman.

             

But as a young man, I had foolishly assumed that the most beautiful women were frigid or too good to have or enjoy sex. I thought only ugly girls had casual sex because they had such low self-esteem and could not afford to be as picky. So, looking at commercial porn in the 1990’s, I was astonished to see incredibly beautiful women who were sluts, but I put it down to them being freaks desperate to make money and thought that they did not really enjoy it. But seeing amateur porn since the noughties, I have been depressed to realise that many of the most beautiful women are sluts and they also have far more opportunity to be sluts than ugly women. Moreover, they can take far more pleasure in their bodies and male attention because they are so attractive. A beautiful woman’s desirability and the male attention it brings - creates a frenzied feed-back loop - that makes her want and enjoy sex more and more. In fact, sex is far more a part of a woman’s identity than a man’s. From the clothes they wear to the make-up they put on, women are much more conscious of their sexuality. Whereas men do not display their sexuality that much at all. Women’s sexual passion is almost entirely linked to their sense of their own desirability, and women’s fear about their own attractiveness, is one of the most common sources of their lack of sexual drive. Whereas men can be ugly, fat, and old and still want, feel entitled to, and be capable of unselfconsciously fucking even stunningly beautiful women way out of their league!

              

As a middle-aged man, I look now with some fear to the youth, worried that their present day soaking in porn on the internet might lead boys to become aggressive misogynists and girls to become masochistic sex objects. Or make both boys and girls fear intimacy. But it already seems that social media and porn are making both boys and girls deeply unhappy with their bodies and genitalia and feel inadequate about their sex lives. Women today are not only competing with other women in the real world for male attention - but porn stars and cam girls in the virtual world. Which may explain why since the noughties, girls have dressed more and more provocatively to attract men. Ironically, even though people are having less sex than in decades, we also have more images of people having sex bombarding us than ever before in history. I have absolutely no idea what effects seeing so much depraved and perverted porn will do to their sense of themselves, the opposite sex, or the ideals of romance.

              

In the past it was the anonymity of the city that allowed women to express their individuality and live secret lives away from the prying eyes of their family. But today the internet has allowed the sexual life of any women to be exposed. For centuries, bad girls in cities, had lived a double life, acting sweet and innocent around their family and beta male saps, but acting like whores with the bad boys they had hunted down. Meanwhile, innocent beta males had a naïve belief in girls’ innocence because they had no proof to the contrary. In the past, nerds, geeks, and beta males may have heard rumours of girls having sex with alpha males. But often, if caught out, these girls pretended to be forced by bad boys to do things they did not want to. However, with social media, beta males can now watch these ‘good’ girls flirt with creepy alpha male guys and see photos and videos of innocent looking girls of all types fucking alpha male thugs. This makes the failure of the beta male more real than it has ever been since we lived in villages or caves. It also shows the beta male, what girls are willing to do with alpha males, even though they pretended around beta males that they are pure and innocent and would not even let a man kiss their hand!

           

 We have gone from a world in which most of us in our youth knew virtually nothing about sex to a world in which we know far too much. It is like we have gone from a world dictated by the censorious rules of embittered spinsters - to one shaped by the debauchery of psychotic liberated whores. I do know that young people are looking at many images beyond their comprehension, which may damage their growth into mature adulthood. Porn assembles some of the biggest and most beautifully formed dicks on the planet and they are wielded by some of the biggest studs on the planet who can not only get hard on demand and stay hard, they also know how to angle their bodies toward the camera so their dicks look even more powerful and dramatic. And in close-up shots, even average sized cocks look enormous! No wonder so many men with average or smaller or misshapen penises feel so bad about themselves, and some are even avoiding real sex out of embarrassment. And now many women are watching porn too, and their expectations have also changed, and often when they have one-night stands with men who have small penises they think they are pathetic, refuse to see them again, and they sometimes make fun of them afterwards.

               

The thing is, porn used to be about pleasure, a celebration of lust. However, today, much of the porn on the net is a freak show, a circus act, or a horror flick, appealing to young men’s and even some women’s interest in slasher films, extreme reality television humiliation, and online gore. I have spent life arguing in my art and writing for free speech and freedom of expression and defending men from the worst misandristic bile of radical-Feminists. But frankly some men are so sick, vile, and evil and the porn they make so disgusting - I struggle to defend them, never mind have any sympathy for them. More and more, a lot of porn is about hate, rape, and lust for death rather than mutual pleasure. Call me old fashioned, but I like my women to enthusiastically participate, rather than be drugged, comatose or a corpse. Is all this because, men now know that many women enjoy and want sex as much as them, and so they try to punish women during sex for their lust? Having lived through countless moral panics I am wary of saying it will all end badly. Maybe all this extreme internet porn will have no effect of society at large, maybe it provides a safety valve or therapeutic release for those into various niche perversions. Besides, you can never underestimate the simple delight men take in seeing beautiful girls posing, undressing, or masturbating which continues to remerge in new forms like The Suicide Girls, cam girls or girls next-door doing OnlyFans. 

             

However, one of the most annoying and ludicrous things of contemporary porn and OnlyFans girls is the over-acting of the female stars. Their fake eye rolling, fucking, and screaming like they are giving birth, or sucking cocks like they are the most crazily delicious things on the planet and moaning like lunatics as they suck. It is as though, the job of the porn star today, is to massively overcompensate for the indifference, hostility, and Feminist bitching of many normal women, and make men feel that they are desired and wanted. In a Western world in which women are competing with men in every arena, and women are constantly criticising, belittling, and nagging men, or blaming them for centuries of oppression, porn has become one of the few places where the masculine and the cock is worshiped. Yet, has sex and porn become one of the few places left where men can dominate women and in fact most women want them to be dominant? Has sex has become one of the last uses for increasingly disposable and redundant men? And are men really in charge? Or have they just become walking and talking sex toys for porn actresses many of whom will get richer than they can ever dream of, or expendable husbands on the matrimonial stud farm, who are finished with once their sexual use is over, and they then must then sign over half their wealth and most of their parental rights, for the privilege of having been with a woman.

               

As I have mentioned above, today on the internet, every possible kind of sexual deviation and perversion is catered for – but the erotic or artistic vision is almost invisible. A quick survey of internet daily porn galleries will quickly reveal just how dark, sinister, misogynistic, and abusive some men’s sexual feelings are towards women. However, I would argue that what you are seeing is passive-aggressive, impotent propaganda for male supremacy in a world increasingly dominated by women who are excelling in school, university, and the workplace. In fact, many of today’s businesses rely on great communication, social skills, teamwork, and networking, things many women are naturally better suited to than most men. It is striking that in the West today, where it is rare to hear men openly and honestly discuss women or sex in public, that the levels of violent and aggressive misogyny in porn has exploded out of almost nowhere.  

             

Since the late 1990s fuelled by rolling news and social media, American and British societies and culture have become hysterical. It almost feels like every month brings a new hysterical moral outrage and witch hunt. Old notions of reason, law, and justice have buckled under the pressure of maniacal puritans. Perversely, the explosion of obscenity and unpalatable truth on the internet in the noughties, coincided with a moralistic shutting down of red-light districts, calls for new laws on every kind of moral or social infraction, a renewed censorship of TV and public and political speech in the name of political correctness, identity politics, and Woke puritanism, and growing laws to curb the freedom of the internet.

              

Since the noughties, the dead tree media (newspapers) and dying old people TV channels have picked endless fights with the internet. Almost every week there is a new moral outrage over what exists on the internet. In particular, the dying old media, were outraged that the internet did not have to submit to the legal, socio-political, and moral restrictions that they had to. So, over the years, when I heard the likes of the Irish, British, or American state TV and network TV journalists talk cynically of the lack of freedom in Iraqi, Chinese, or Russian media I rolled my eyes to heaven. The greatest trick of state propaganda is to make you think you are free, your media is objective, moral, and truthful, and enemy states are uniquely brainwashed by evil propaganda and misinformation. In reality, every state has a dominant ideology which underpins everything said, everything questioned, and more importantly dictates what is never said, and never questioned. The dominant narrative dictates what stories are told, why they are told, how they are told, and how much criticism of those stories is allowed. The dominant narrative is not only political, is also socio-political, sexual, moral, and religious. In the West the dominant narrative only changes through political or military coup d'états, public protest, or militant action. The ‘truth’ or the appearance of the ‘truth’ and who gets to dictate what is the truth, is in fact what politicians, lawyers, activists, police, and the military spend their lives fighting over. 

             

When looking at erotic art, you have in one condensed image both a representation of the male artists’ desires and a clue to his fears. On the internet, many porn sites are anonymous, staged in foreign countries and its male controllers and actors are hidden and beyond scrutiny, public reproach, or investigation. The pornographic artist on the other hand is as much on view as his muse, he cannot escape responsibility for his work. This I believe gives the artist’s work a moral dimension and subjective vulnerability, unseen in commercial porn.