Wednesday, July 06, 2005

I think I may have found my calling as a sex advice columnist

Surprisingly enough, my column from last week, which discussed some of the finer points of pornographic politics, was a big hit with the readers. I received a record number of e-mails, all of which priased me for my talents, and most of which recommended some sites for me to visit in the further pursuit of good porn. Thanks, dedicated readers!

Also, from now on, my title is no longer "campus personality Rebecca C. Brown." It's "campus personality and globally-appreciated author Rebecca C. Brown." I got an e-mail from Finland on Monday, and something from a law student in London last week. Though, according to The Man at the Daily Cal office, I'm not allowed to publish the e-mails that I receive in my DC inbox on my blog, I can tell you (I think) that he was essentially thanking me for being a sexually enlightened female voice, and that he forwarded my column to a few of his "girl friends" who didn't like being filmed having sex with him. I'm probably also not allowed, according to my contract, to publish my responses to these e-mails, but I'm going to do it anyway. Enjoy


Glad to be of service! I hope you were Googling "cock slap" when you found
my article. That would put a ray of sunshine in my day.

Allow me to play sex advice columnist for a moment. No, sir, you are not
sick or demented or even that unusual in your desire to create homemade
porn. Homespun sex videos are a popular alternative to regular porn
because they allow the producers to dictate their own "plot" and pacing
and moves and, of course, porn stars. They are also (usually) less sullied
by silicone and stupid stage names and bad acting. And who doesn't enjoy
getting filmed naked with a gentleman who could potentially later release
that video on the internet without his co-star's authorization?

Oh, wait. Yeah. See why your girlfriends might not be so eager to strip
down and be filmed having sex?

Undoubtedly you are a very trustworthy and respectful fellow, but in this
century it's difficult for a woman who does not want to make porn her
livelihood to have sex on camera without some reservations about the
eventual home of the footage.

There are also social and personal issues at play when a woman declines to
be taped. You said "girl friends" (plural), implying that you are not in
an exclusive long-term relationship, which might prove to be a road block
in your quest for cottage industry porn. I'm a fairly outgoing and
confident woman, and it was months and months before I would allow my
boyfriend to take nude pictures of me. Even to the most self-assured
women, the camera's lens can be pretty intimidating, and it's more
intimidating when the man behind the camera isn't someone with whom you
have an exclusive and serious relationship predicated on trust and

The women you ask to film might also feel that, by introducing a camera
into the situation, you/she/both of you will feel obligated to perform
unnaturally and/or attempt to replicate what you've seen in professional
pornography, rather than "acting naturally." This would defeat the whole
point of homemade porn, and would be enjoyable for nobody.

There are thousands of women in Britain alone who would be pleased as
punch to have sex with you in front of your camcorder, and with the help
of the internet these women should not be hard to find. But if a
girlfriend hesitates to get down and dirty with you on tape, don't cajole.
Be considerate, and try to be sensitive to the issues I mentioned above.
Some women will NEVER be convinced that amateur porn is their cup of tea;
other women will discover, with the help of a kind and considerate and in
no way pushy guy, that they actually like having sex on tape; other
women will fuck your brains out on video faster than you can say

Good luck finding a willing film lab partner! It's a healthy and
potentially beautiful use of modern technology, if executed correctly and

Have a splendid Independence Day weekend. You should be glad that America
won that war. You're better off without us.

Thanks for reading!
For the sake of full disclosure, I have to reveal that I've never done anything even vaguely sexual on camera, but it's not like I said otherwise in the e-mail, and as long as I write with a tone of authority I think I sound like I know what I'm doing. Isn't that what all good advice columnists do? Pretend to know more than they actually do? Dude, they should let me do Sex on Tuesday next semester, even though I graduated in May and know nothing about sex and disobey Daily Cal rules.

Also, sorry for the light posting this past week. I was in SoCal for five days, livin' it up in my new (er, new to me) car.


It's no surprise to me: all the femminists I know are very "sex-positive" and comfortable discussing porn. The 60's femminists saw the miniskirt as freeing! It was only later that certain puritinical-type "femminists" started seeing all porn as sexually warping.

In conclusion, the internet has lots of porn.
Start an online petition, Rebecca, to get you on Sex On Tuesdays next semester.
I think the Daily Cal has hired post-Cal columnists in the past, like Maxwell Yim, but that dude was such a great columnist, I guess they had no choice.
Um, was that a joke, BAD, about him being a great columnist? I just read a few of his articles, and though they were full of really great ideas that any college sophomore with a copy of "Capital" could have re-crafted, and though they weren't patently bad, they aren't my style. But you were being sarcastic, because that's your style.

Let's hear it for styles!
Oh, yeah, it was a joke. I don't know if you were around for my tirades about how stupid his columns were. Eventually, I quit doing them because of how painfully boring it was to actually read his columns.
However, him being a post-Cal columnist was not. I think I recall him saying such when I talked to him once.
oh, Maxwell Yim. Only arts editor ever who would edit with the goal of making articles harder to understand. that's populism for you.
I haven't read the sex part yet, but clicking through did lead me to the car column.

On driving in LA, Rebecca writes: "Parking is plentiful, streets are wide, left turns are protected, and freeways are populated by competent drivers. Operating a vehicle in LA is like going on Double Dare, taking the physical challenge, then finding that the only obstacle is to figure out why Marc Summers is so damned excited about orange flags."

Okay, not one of these things are true. I don't know if that's what it's like driving in Long Beach, but in LA proper, we sit in intersections waiting for red lights so one or two cars per light can make left turns, while traffic backs up for blocks behind. Even the widest of streets is not wide enough for the massive amount of traffic. Parking is scarce and expensive. Freeways are populated by skilled but reckless assholes. Operating a vehicle in LA is like going on Double Dare, expecting the obstacle course to be a breeze, and then getting stuck forever when you can't find the flag in the giant nose. People do it because they don't have a choice. Buses just mean you get stuck in traffic, except you're not driving and you have to wait for them to pick you up. Trains don't go anywhere useful.
I agree. The red-light thing especially struck me as fundementally backwards. I grew up in San Diego, land of protected left turns. I know what good left turn lanes havers look like, good left turns havers were a friend of mine. You, LA, are no good left turn lane haver.

That was a very unwieldy reference.
Seriously, Rebecca, you've been driving for all of... how long? Like a week? Spend a year commuting and tell me your opinion of LA driving. Long Beach to LA is an hour and a half on many days. Even better, check out this:

Around 6pm or so on any typical work day. The Red diamonds you see everywhere mean 'Injury crash and/or Lanes Blocked'
Post a Comment