Wednesday, October 19, 2011

For science!

One of the unexpected benefits of having multiple sexual partners is that we can talk about and compare our bodies and our sexual preferences; the differences between us are often fascinating.

For example, my vagina is deeper than Lupa's; this is probably why we enjoy different sensations when being penetrated. She prefers ribs and bumps and textures, while I prefer smooth, deep, hard fuckings. As another example, Gene has a bigger clit than I do, which means oral techniques that drive her wild just don't work on me.

The other fun thing about my sexual partners is that I have more people to learn from. Not too long ago I was having sexytime with Lupa and Ume, and when I gestured for Lupa to start sucking off Ume, she hesitated. "I actually don't know very much about how to do that," she admitted.

"All right, lesson time!" Ume said, sitting up. What followed was a brief anatomy lecture on the parts of the male genitalia and the relative sensitivity of each part. He then showed us a handjob technique he called "Five-Star Exploding Palm Technique" that I have to try out on Master next time we're together.

I know that when people say someone approaches sex "academically," they mean it as an insult. But for me and my lovers, it's the opposite; we love learning, we're curious people, and we enjoy engaging each other intellectually as well as - and sometimes at the same time as - sexually. (The subject line is often the "excuse" we provide when we suggest a new sexual activity.)

I don't know how common this attitude is in the population at large. Sometimes I get so wrapped up in our own little kinky/poly world that I forget we're not the norm. For example, I recently read a study that found the median "ideal number" of sexual partners for both men and women was one. Only one?! I thought. That can't be right! It's gotta be two or three. Then I remembered - most people do that whole monogamy thing. Oh yeah...

I need to be careful not to have my worldview lose the wider perspective. That would be unscientific. :)

No comments: