|Blogs > rm_scite > My Blog|
I have come to disapprove of the definition of foreplay. Not the notion of it! It seems to be defined as anything that isn't penetration. Am I confused after seeing too many lesbian porn-movies? Because it seems that "foreplay" can be a perfectly viable form of sex in its own right. It's no big secret that most women can't achieve orgasm as a result of "traditional" sex in itself. That may partly be due to the shortcomings of men, but there aren't many sensitive zones inside the vagina.
One might consider these ideas nothing more than the ranting of someone who has no practical sexual experience. I would like to turn the issue around; doubt my words when I speak of how you only need an erection to satisfy a woman. If that happens to be true for a certain man, then credit to him! For the remaining 95% of the male population it is hardly productive to divide sex into careful caressing(viewed as an necessary evil) and "real" sex.
This brings me to a related issue; are there still people who have sex under the covers with the lights turned off? I guess if you put some effort into it, that could work. But doesn't it boil down to trying to hide each other or to hide the sex? If people are so embarrassed about sex that they need to shroud it in darkness, they're hardly going to achieve any marvels of sexual ecstacy... But maybe that's none of my business. As Peter Griffin says in The Family Guy: "Whatever floats your boat..."