Mouse

The best aphrodisiac

This from Isabel Allende’s Aphrodite

That men are still closer to the monkey than women, I haven’t a doubt. Men’s sexual impulse is triggered by the eyes, an inheritance from those simian ancestors whom the female summons when she is in heat by means of a noticeable change in her intimate parts, which turn red and take on the morbid appearanc of a ripe pomegranate. For some reason, this works like waving a red flag at the males, should they not be paying attention.

Among humans, visual stimulus is equally irresistible, which explains the success of magazines filled with half-naked women. Attempts have been made to exploit the same publishing market among female readers, but images of well-endowed youths unfurling their charms on full-color pages have been a fiasco; they are more often bought by homosexuals than by women. We women have a better developed sense of the ridiculous, and besides, our sensuality is tied to our imagination and our auditory nerves. It may be that the only way we will listen is if someone whispers in our ear. The G spot is in the ears, and anyone who goofs around looking for it any farther down is wasting his time and ours. Professional lovers, and I am referring not just to lotharios like Cassanova, Valentino, and Julio Iglesias, but to the quantities of men who collect amorous conuests to prove their virility with quantity—since quality is a question of luck—know that with women the best aphrodisiac is words.

Sounds like a good reason to try to hone my skills en-blog this year.

Posted by 'mouse on 02/03 at 09:23 AM

Today’s serious professional lover charges clients in 6-minute billing increments. They don’t take checks.

Just testing, ‘mouse, to make sure commenting is working properly. The notion that I know anything about professional loving is simply ludicrous.

Posted by Keith on 02/03 at 09:59 AM
Ohhhh, you’re back and so is your comment field. Happiness, happiness. :)

Posted by bakerina on 02/03 at 10:27 AM
I am so glad to know this. I have been seeking the G-Spot like a frustrated spelunker lost in a deep mine shaft. Maybe this is why singers always get laid..even the ugliest ones.

Posted by Br. Ezra on 02/04 at 09:13 AM
Of course, since I can never leave well enough alone, I feel as if I must diverge, just a little, from Ms. Allende’s point. I would agree that men are creatures of visual stimulation, whereas women’s stimuli are a bit less visual-based—which could explain why my male friends tend to like dirty pictures, while my female friends tend to like dirty books. :) That said, I certainly hope that Ms. Allende is not suggesting that women do not like looking at naked men, because, hell, I certainly do. Whenever I hear one of those tiresome old “the female body is a work of art, but the male body is just weird,” I start to get fidgety and wonder if it would be in bad taste to pull the knitting out.

Now, if she is suggesting that there is a certain inherent ridiculousness in girlie magazines that manifests itself when you try to put men in those same positions and then sell the results to women, I’m totally down with that. I always found Playgirl pretty risible, not because the men were naked, but because they were posed in such laughable tableaux (no, I don’t want to watch you balance your checkbook or take out the trash!). Give me a nice nude in repose, and I’ll look at him all day. Give me a nice nude with a way with words, though, and I’ll listen, closely. ;)

Posted by bakerina on 02/05 at 08:58 AM
Bakerina speaks wisdom in those last two sentences. Amen.

Posted by shari on 02/08 at 04:07 PM
I coulda told you that. In fact, I did when you asked.

Posted by molly on 02/09 at 08:17 PM
The old adage, “Men fall in love through their eyes, women fall in love through their ears,” is still true, however simplistic that line seems.

Still, a nice, lanky man looking at me with one eyebrow raised just so… oh yeah. And if he’s naked? Oh, hell, yeah!

(word veri is: “eyes31” heh.)

Posted by Joan of Argghh! on 02/23 at 12:25 PM
ok g, give yourself time to transcribe this rare quite moment and do it, go ahead and write something again. it couldn’t kill you, and don’t you owe it to yourself?

so i’ll tell myself that the muses were just figments of my imagination. cooks behind the buffet line offering up endless dishes of things both delightful and sometimes completely inedible. (I could not credit them more for my self evolution without incriminating myself, and that isn’t what i came here to do, you see? certainly it has been a long enduring habit of yours/mine, years before the computer evolution even, i’ve been concocting stories for people. remember the first one? and who it was written for? you must. but the impetus that drove me/you into that fabulous forray of fermenting fictionary line by line story telling came with barely different motivation. i just wanted approval, and company; adult conversation in the fragments and snippets that it might come to me. i was desperate, and so too, appeared the comically large black crow who dropped at my feet the slip of paper with that fateful address upon it.

i don’t return for commiseration or pity, i return for attention, escape, self-stimulation. here i am again losing my train of thought. forgive the interruption…

Posted by goliard on 02/28 at 09:20 AM
yes, what i wanted to say was that you ought to know that women are visual as well, in terms of reading words. personally, i have much more appreciated a well turned word or two moreso than a self-deprecating full spread frontal nudity shot.

Posted by goliard on 03/04 at 09:16 AM
When did these comments appear? How did you lure out the goliard-bird, ‘mouse? Tell me how!

Ah, on your post? What Bakerina said. Completely and utterly.

Posted by boot on 03/06 at 04:01 AM
breadcrumbs boot, breadcrumbs. an now if he could just get me to my point with some semblence of coherency…

what i wanted to get to was a question, if i’m just reading the words- is that visual stimulation or aural (sp?) stim.? it makes me wonder. hm.

Posted by goliard on 03/06 at 09:11 AM
I think reading words counts as a sub-group of aural.

... leaving more breadcrumbs.

Heck, take the whole loaf! Just keep coming back.

Posted by 'mouse on 03/07 at 06:10 PM
G, I think it depends on whether or not you read the words out loud to yourself…

:o)

Posted by Joan of Argghh! on 03/07 at 06:16 PM
I can’t find an email addy for you, so forgive the aside here. I think David Mamet might be onto something.
Or on something.

;)

Posted by Joan of Argghh! on 03/12 at 07:27 AM