18 June 2008

39 sex talk

last night, in the course of one of our typically rambling conversations, meggie and i wandered back to the fundamental subjects of our friendship: weddings, birth control and lubricant.

and in the midst of this meggie recalled that when we were 16, there was a rash of articles in seventeen magazine. a rash of articles about girls getting pregnant through their underwear.

i think maybe i'd blocked this out. because i remember- as a 16 year old girl who wasn't having sex but always wore underwear- how very fucking scary this was.

as i remember it, these stories were always the same. a good girl who french kissed. or stayed out too late. or dated a bad boy. or made a B- in history. or didn't wash her gym shorts. and then oops!

there were no details of sex, so in my naive, overly creative, 16 year old mind, there never was sex. there were just random, pantily conceived babies.

and this, of course, threw all my sex education- which was already a little shakey- into question. as though the notion that chickens climbed into the beds of married couples and shoved eggs up the wife's vagina wasn't a traumatic enough beginning, then came this revelation that the sacred underwear shield was so easily permeated.

mind you, i was 16. i'd been introduced to my reproductive organs in a health class where they were illustrated in pancake batter on a griddle. monica hadn't gone down on bill. i hadn't read the star report. and partner and i hadn't yet begged definitions of oral sex, g-spots and orgasms from her mother at the christ presbyterian academy fall fundraiser concert and endured the horror of hearing the words sometimes when a wife loves her husband she puts him in her mouth uttered by mrs. house as michael w. smith crooned in the background.

so in my little innocent world back then, because of these damn articles, there was a sudden fear that anything- hand-holding, kissing, shopping, baseball, oh my!- could meet with equally reproductive results. as though babies could be picked up like the common cold.

i'm somewhat better educated these days. and i get what these articles were trying to do. clearly seventeen was playing the abstinence card in a big, big way. but now i can't help but wonder: 1) what the hell were those editors thinking publishing shit like that? and 2) how many sex lives did they destroy?

39 comments:

Les Savy Ferd said...

the editors are clearly saying that no matter how many pairs of underwear you have hanging out on the line to dry, the somewhat noble and deeply stupid stork will still manage to fly around and through all these brightly colored garments to leave a swaddled bundle on your doorstep.

Bear in mind if your life is a warner bros cartoon, the bundle may contain a rascally rabbit or mischievous and ill-tempered gorilla.

oline said...

i fear for the sex education of any swaddled bundles dropped on your doorstep, dear piratO.

and pray tell, have you wolf paraded???

Les Savy Ferd said...

i have not. my many and varied adventures of the past few days have taken me hither and yon! (but alas not to the record store... but soon forsooth.)

taramoon333 said...

well seventeen certainly did not destroy my sex life. I was a ym girl, better makeup tips.

oline said...

oh jmills. you are so young & modern...

and i see you're back in the world of technolication. exciting. you're saving the 27th for the frankpank sleepover, right right? because what better way to spend a friday night than lying about in our drawers watching sandy bullock films and eating cupcakes?

s.h.e. said...

so, let me get this straight. if the pantie is worn, you could still get pregnant? and, now, those who actually wear panties are still at risk for getting pregnant. so, why wear panties?

but, then, i begin to ponder about the history of the pantie. as we've gone from the granny pantie, to the thong, to "free-ballin'," it's interesting to take note that the population has increased ten-fold during it's evolution. so, is "seventeen" to blame? because now that the panties are off, more things get up in there, leaving the poor, unsuspecting girl who thought that panties actually lead to babies, pregnant with twins. and, if panties do get you pregnant, would this explain the conception of Jesus? that has always puzzled me.

either way, when it took forever to hold hands, just think of all the risks we were avoiding. could you imagine raising a gay baby with a gay daddy? you'd never look at a rainbow the same way again.

also, i've always had a very innocent view of ms. house. however, now i can only see her putting a man in her mouth and that's a little perturbing. thanks.

oline said...

yuck yuck yuckety yuck. to all that jazz.

Meggie said...

Ok, seriously choked on my Coke at Mrs. House explaining oral sex. So disturbing.

Caro, you wanna play a game? Ring around the...

s.h.e. said...

what the yuck? you don't have to sound like you're 17... ;)

but, really, you've presented an interesting conundrum with this post. what great meaning does the pantie hold? what is it's purpose today? why would "seventeen" lie about such things, when obviously it's easier to get pregnant without the pantie protecting your precious piece from someone else's man entering it or from some horrible phantom sperm on a bench seeping it's way inside through the fabric? see what kind of questions you leave me?

oline said...

ok, my dear SHE. somehow your mispelling of panty is making it even more painful to read. and, according to meggie, superpower phantom sperm does exist. i'm just saying... (what a horrid turn this has taken!)

and no, meggie eggie darling, i do not want to play.

Les Savy Ferd said...

croftie, who may not be even aware this comment thread exists, is somewhere, perhaps in a coffee shop getting her morning caffeine, shuddering uncontrollably.

also, i will not just sit back and have man/phantomkind take all of the blame for this. Ever think some of you ladies might just have super ultra-eggs? Able to bend the laws of physics in order to perpetuate the species?

oline said...

i still blame the chickens.

s.h.e. said...

my sweet OLINE. you are wrong. here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pantie
turns out, we're actually both right. i'd stick my tongue out and say,"nah nah n-nah nah!" but that would be immature. and we both know, we are not immature.




;)~

oline said...

gosh, the english language is an unecessarily nasty, nasty thing.

s.h.e. said...

does "pantie" now sit on the same list as "absorb" and "moist"?

oline said...

honeypie, it's been at the head of that list for epochs.

Les Savy Ferd said...

you leave the baby chicks and their cutness out of this reproductive apocalypse

s.h.e. said...

good heavens, my sweet. how ever did i not know?
just to refresh my memory, what other words make your innards shrivel up like a prune?

oline said...

pirateO, birds are always to blame.

dear S: moist, womb, loins, smear, morsel, absorb, wad, supple, chunk, spittle, spray, splatter, smut, panties, jamboree, chaw, tween, meats, runny, PJs, swat, spigot, peter, thigh, prance, swaddling, keepsake, cuddle, doodad, journaling, cherish, treasure, tingle, spread, stringy, chow down, jam, jelly, junk, loamy, foamy, finger, palm, thumb, swipe, staff, bliss, pop, pipsqueak, nugget, cloths, slather, lather, bogus, spew, spunk, spelunking, jiggle, pick, bunion, juicy, chub, spooning, saucepan, spatula, slink, galore, pork, loom, spindle, glitz, chintz, chiffon, canker, shimmy, pudge, plump, bump, pregnant, kink, fandango, dollop, crab, bulb, penetrate, polyp, crevice, tubular, tinkle, headway, sneaks, cluster, crank, strum, flak, swindle, slather, blouse, fondle, purple.

and no i did not sit and think of these all just this minute. this would be the jack black's body sanctioned list of disgustificating words. personally, i'm not bothered by things like glitz and treasure and chiffon (unless they have been endowed upon women who are not prostitutes), but croftie is so they're on here for the team. it's a jumping off point.

(and if this spawns a series of comments on moist saucepans, i swear on ann shirley there will be heads on pikes.)

Les Savy Ferd said...

evil man smells baby, stabs snowman just got a whole new chapter where just about each sentence will contain one of these choice nuggets.

oline said...

i imagine the chapter "evil man smells baby, stabs snowman, and says lots of disgusting words" would be easily serializeable in something like vanity fair. your public eagerly awaits...

Les Savy Ferd said...

"it was a dark and foamy night..."

oline said...

GROSS!

Les Savy Ferd said...

"... we were all hanging out at my Uncle Bogus's house."

s.h.e. said...

oh, i want a turn!

the plump bunion pranced over the headway, lathered in dollops of pregnant thighs, all the while absorbing in the runny bliss that began to cuddle up to it's tubular heart, causing a slight tinkle to slowly propel itself onto a purple blouse.

oline said...

oh, s. i know that doesn't actually mean anything. that plump bunions don't tinkle runny bliss onto purple blouses. but that has to be just about the filthiest thing ever written on dear old innocent OITC.

and, piratical sir, whatever were you doing at uncle bogus' house on the dark and foamy night??? evil man smells baby, stabs snowman just gets better and better.

s.h.e. said...

color me pleased!

oline said...

the color purple, no?

s.h.e. said...

sure. any other color would probably get my panties in a wad.

Les Savy Ferd said...

"We weren't making much headway on the Times Literary Supplement's crossword puzzle when..."

oline said...

i don't know what's worse there- the glaring spelling error or the use of a word derrived from "supple," which now- thanks to croftie and the glories of hyperlinking- only ever makes me think of angelina jolie's lips.

Meggie said...

Um, pantie is a gross word. That being said, Mike hates the word poo. It seriously disturbs him.

I miss playing ring around the...

Linda said...

does ann shirley not have an E? or am I not familiar with this name upon whom you are swearing?

s.h.e. said...

who is this ann(e) shirley? if only i had the internet, i'd know, but it'd be mighty kind of you to inform the ill-informed like myself.

Meggie said...

Steven, if you don't have the internet, how are you reading this blog????

Linda said...

of green gables, my friend. of green gables.

oline said...

yes, yes. anne shirley of avonlea and green gables fame. and i was apparently having some trust issues there and overthought to the point where anne's instance that the "e" be included must by default mean it wasn't genuinely there. i've since seen the light.

s.h.e. said...

Dear Meggie,
That was a joke. I was being lazy. Your gullibility makes me smile.
:)
S.

Meggie said...

I was being sarcastic at 6 a.m. I was too tired to apparently properly type sarcasm.

If anyone is gullible, it is so Caro.