SEX IS NEWS

On his Facebook page, Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times op-ed columnist Nicholas Kristof wonders why there isn't more coverage of "sexuality and relationships" by news organizations. ("Don't always like the guy, but I love this," observes Salon's Tracy Clark-Flory, a friend of mine, which is how I found the post.)

Porn star / Photo credit: Susannah Breslin

The previous day, Kristof had shared a link to a New York Times article by Natalie Kitroeff, "In Hookups, Inequality Still Reigns," a thoughtful piece on why, it appears, young women are less likely to reach orgasm during one-night stands than in relationships.

"[C]ome on, Nick, raise the bar a bit higher on topics," one commenter wrote on Kristof's Facebook post sharing the link, suggesting the subject of sex was nothing more than salacious.

The next day, Kristof wrote:

I reposted a story here yesterday by Natalie Kitroeff about research on women's sexuality, and had some pushback from followers who thought the topic was beneath me, low-brow sensationalism. Hmm. Let's talk about that. Actually, I think news organizations probably should cover sexuality and relationships more than they do. These are issues that humans spend a great deal of time and worry about, and that relate greatly to happiness. If there's scientific research that can offer insights, why isn't that as important for news organizations to cover as recent events in Eritrea? I think this is completely different from the kind of celebrity sex gossip that TV spends way too much time on. But maybe I was just leering as I read it. Your thoughts?

Nearly 1,500 people liked Kristof's considered question, and nearly 250 people commented on it. Which would suggest sex and relationships deserve serious discussion. Which would suggest they deserve serious coverage.

So, perhaps you are an active reader of the reporter dedicated to sex coverage at the New York Times, or the one at the Washington Post, or the one at the LA Times. Or, perhaps you are not. Because, of course, they do not exist. Sex gets packed in with other things, to sell it to the masses. It is something we all do (fuck, that is), it is something we all share (relationships, you know), but we do not address it directly. We treat sexuality and its complexities as if we are children, hiding our curiosity, pointing and rolling our eyes. Sex? You can't be serious.

Online, it's a bit of a different story. There's Clark-Flory at Salon and Amanda Hess at Slate. They cover the sex beat -- and, at the same time, gender, culture, politics, business, science, too. In print, they have no equivalent (not that I'm aware of, at least). Too much sex makes advertisers twitchy. Newspapers have to produce a product that can be spread across the family breakfast table. Too much raciness and you risk alienating your readers. Surely, you will be accused of pandering to the lowest common denominator.

And that's too bad. By sweeping sex under the rug, the media perpetuates our ignorance of it, underscoring the anxieties around it, dooming to silence productive, interested conversations about it.

MAN, THAT BOOTY

According to MediaTakeOut, "Houston Men Are Getting GIGANTIC BOOTY IMPLANTS ... So That They Look Like NICKI MINAJ!!" Behold, the male mega-booty trend.

A new trend is emerging amongst gay men in Houston - BOOTY IMPLANTS. We're not talking about TRANSGENDERED folk either . . . men with implants is apparently the new style out chea!!

Peep one man showing off the new trend on his Instagram page. Dude got CAKE!!

An MTO commenter adds this behind-the-scenes report:

Yea ive seen before and after man real talk dude *** himself up iwas floored because it makes you wonder what was the point of no return or the little voice that said "ok this is enough" As long as hes cool with it idk why others are tripn... He said he isnt changing i almost passed out when I asked him lol It all started with him tryna please his ex who actually funded the earlier procedure so i guess he went overboard...

Another commenter IDs him as Sir-Omi Lieurance. On YouTube: "This is me. This is my body." In another video, he declines to explain how his butt came to be: "What I did to my body, if I did anything, is not anybody's business." According to his Facebook, he lives in Atlanta.

[MediaTakeOut]

THOSE SASHA GREY AMERICAN APPAREL ADS

Several years ago, I hosted a series of controversial American Apparel ads on a previous iteration of this blog. The model in one of the ads was porn star Sasha Grey, and in the ad, she was exposing her nipples and her pubic hair. Occasionally, people search for those ads and arrive here. This is the original blog post I wrote in December 2008 about the ads.

Sasha Grey for American Apparel

Sasha Grey for American Apparel

If you haven't noticed it already, I've got a new American Apparel ad up on the site. The model is adult film star turned star of Steven Soderbergh's upcoming call girl movie "The Girlfriend Experience," Sasha Grey. Won't you welcome Sasha?

The ads are part of a new campaign that only appears here, at my friend Debauchette's site, and on Last Night's Party. Debauchette's model is adult film star Charlotte Stokely, and LNP's model demonstrates the fun that can be had with personal electronics.

While some feminists like to spend their time caterwauling about the supposed sexism of AA ads, it bears mentioning these ads were conceptualized and shot by Kyung Chung, who, it also bears mentioning, is a woman. Previously, Chung got feminist knickers in a crack-splitting twist when she shot herself for a Manhattan AA billboard. Gee, it's a good thing feminists are ripping their hair out and clawing at their eyes and pulling down the drapes over supposedly sexist ads shot by a woman, or I'd have, like, no self-esteem.

According to AA's Shawn Shahani the new ads are "definitely our most racy web ads that we've ever created." And if you're confused as to what's being sold here, Shahani explains: "We're selling socks. Thigh-highs because it gets cold when you're otherwise naked."

You can read about my first ad here, find out what Fast Company has to say about the new campaign here, or buy some thigh-high socks here.

Update 1: Debauchette: "Two things I love about Susannah’s new AA ad. (1) It’s hot. And (2) Sasha Grey has pubic hair."

Update 2: Fimoculous: "In addition to that Sodebergh flick, Sasha Grey is also appearing naked in skyscraper ads for American Apparel around the internet."

Update 3: Gala Darling: "American Apparel have taken the leap to totally naked advertisements — well, except for the socks."

Update 4: Molly Crabapple: "Not a huge fan of AA ads, but oh the lovely Sasha Grey one one me over."

Update 5: Buzzfeed: "A young porn star lands a Hollywood Role and appears nude (like, totally nude) in a new American Apparel ad."

Update 6: Fleshbot: "As far as we're concerned, American Apparel can use sex to sell whatever they want—as long as 'sex' means 'naked Sasha Grey.'"

Update 7: Nerdy Grrl: "Let me just say I can’t think of an ad campaign in the history of ad campaigns that would make me want to buy socks, but, by golly I think I need to go and get me some socks."

Update 8: Nerve: "We always wondered when advertisements would feature nothing but naked woman and the name of the product ... "

Update 9: There are some rumors floating around that the ads are fake. They're not. They're real.

Update 10: SlackerTalk: "Sasha Grey does for pubic hair, what Justin Timberlake did for sexy."

Update 11: Pipeline: "Somehow, Charney's ads, which double as cheeky send ups of exploitation chic and clear examples of actual exploitation, have become targets for post-Feminist love and ire."

Update 12: URB: "However, they've pushed it to the limit this time and decided to just let it all hang out."

Update 13: Scanner commenter Lawston Found points to an amusing and relevant Bill Hicks bit on sex and advertising: "Drink Coke!"

Update 14: Examiner: "This isn't just some sexy model wearing some socks, after all: Sasha Grey is one of the most foul-mouthed females in hardcore porn, and she's somehow managed to take ownership of her own exploitation and twist it around into something like a feminist statement."

Update 15: NBC: "In a move that should not surprise anyone anywhere the latest (NSFW) ads from American Apparel feature a model wearing little to nothing at all."

Update 16: XBIZ: "The ad marks a continuing trend for Los Angeles-based American Apparel, which features many scantily clad models in its advertisements."

Update 17: AVN: "Is it still a 'mainstream crossover' if you're showing bush?"

Update 18: Portland Mercury: "Sex and youth selling clothes is ubiquitous, AA is just not bothering to 'beat around the bush' if you'll excuse the pun."

Update 19: LA Pretty: "And I also love how their ads at least attempt to deviate from the norm by actually portraying real-looking people, which is probably why they're so erotic and unnerving because that's something that we rarely get to see."

Update 20: mashKULTURE: "It was really the only logical next step in the evermore controversial ads that make up American Apparel’s marketing strategy that full-frontal nudity, and the use of porn stars would be inevitable."

Update 21: Debauchette: "If we’re talking about depictions of women, I want to see more of this, of women looking you in the eye and fucking owning their sex."

THAT'S OBSCENE

From a review of Whitney Strub's Obscenity Rules: Roth v. United States and the Long Struggle over Sexual Expression in the Wall Street Journal:

It shouldn't be surprising that progressives have certain visions of a good society and are willing to suppress speech in pursuing them. Such liberal objectives aren't different in kind from the desire to maintain a culture with limits on the expression of sexual vulgarity, a desire once expressed on both the left and right. Neither objective is anti-intellectual; both involve large aspirations that aren't reducible to arguments about short-term empirical evidence. Mr. Strub's simplistic left-right frame notwithstanding, "Obscenity Rules" shows that both liberals and conservatives are often willing to subordinate freedom of speech in their quest for what they believe to be a decent moral order.

[WSJ]

VIRTUOUS INVESTING

Do you believe in virtuous investing? I don't. The intention of investing is to make money; the intention of capitalism is not to do good.

For those who embrace vice, like me, there's the Vice Fund. For those who prefer something more pure, there's Ave Maria Mutual Funds.

Four practices that will get a company banned from the Ave Maria funds: Supporting abortion; supporting embryonic stem cell research (because it "is closely linked to abortion"); contributing to Planned Parenthood; and involvement with pornography.

While the philosophy no doubt will rankle progressive sensibilities, it's hard to argue with the results.

Ave Maria's flagship Rising Dividend fund carries Morningstar's top five-star designation and is up 26.8 percent in 2013. That puts it in front of the S&P 500, which has gained 25.3 percent on a total-return basis. The fund has $642.2 million under management as part of Ave Maria's $1.4 billion total handle.

[CNBC]

I'M GOING LONG

Thanks to the folks at Longform for including me in "The Longform Guide to Sex Work," which was also featured last weekend on Slate.

Along with my own "They Shoot Porn Stars, Don't They?", the lineup includes Susan Shepard's excellent "Wildcatting: A Stripper's Guide to the Modern American Boomtown" and Mark Jacobsen's fascinating "The $2,000 an-Hour Woman."

"OK, so what are we going to do?" a man standing off-camera asks in a voice that sounds as if it has been digitally altered. "Should I just beat the shit out of her?"

[They Shoot Porn Stars, Don't They?]