Lords & Ladies Troubled By Your Sexual Practices!

Warning: this article refers to anal sex; do not continue if the subject matter might offend!

*

Apparently, peers of the realm are at it again. All my adult life they have been discussing this sexual practice or another. They are as obsessed as the modern main-stream media and popular culture. On this occasion they were caught trying to blame urban, pornography-using, heterosexual males for the spread to the rest of the country of the practice of anal sex.

[Image description: scene of man engaging in anal sex with woman,

on ancient Greek pottery; photo © u/k]

Utter poppycock*! This kind of sex has been going on for æons. When I was at university, it was then known that anal-sex, so-called sodomy, was more widely practised amongst hetero couples than between gay folk. Contrary to popular opinion homosexual men do not necessarily desire to be stabbed up the derrière. Whilst folk may have tried it, they have not enjoyed the experience and so refrain. Of course, contrariwise, other individuals enjoy the experience. As with most things: some like, some dislike. Some straights like, some dislike. And remember, dear reader, in this day and age any female partner is quite capable of giving her male partner a good rogering up the backside, and thus rubbing the all-important prostate-gland, whilst simultaneously stimulating her own genitalia, for example with the aid of a strap-on dildo.

What someone gets up to sexually is no-one else's business, as long as it is consensual. I personally would not wish to participate in sexual activity involving cutting, and so on. To me such practices are personally repugnant. But that is no reason for me to condemn nor police others' activities.

Conservatives are meant to be Libertarians or at the very least laissez-faire  i.e. hands-off approach and small state. I suggest the Tories, along with all other Parliamentarians, keep the state out of citizens' bedrooms!

* From Dutch 'pappekak' meaning 'soft dung' and thus nothing to do with penes other than a serendipitous co-incidence.

Jolene / Sherlock

Some of you may have read my review, Jolene: A Queer Perspective, of versions of Dolly Parton's classic back in December last year.

In this post I shall be taking a closer look at the video I referenced by April Simons which she created using images taken from the BBC's Sherlock.

Here is what I originally wrote about the work:

The clever juxtapositioning of Sherlock characters, Watson (singer), Holmes (man) and Moriarty (Jolene) with Dolly's version along with some very judicious editing of shots from season 2 finale The Reichenbach Fall are perfectly combined to create a purely queer melodrama.

Now I am going to expand a little on why I personally like this mini film noir.

One obviously realises I am queer and am quite partial to men. I have to admit to fantasising about a troilistic affinity with Watson and Holmes. I am certain I am not the only person who has imagined a romp abed with the two detectives. Partly this can be put down to the show actually playing on the "Are they queer?" flirtations, malentendus, interactions and so forth. No doubt this is down to openly gay Mark Gatiss, a co-creator & writer for the series as well as the actor playing Sherlock's brother Mycroft. Additionally, the British good-looks of the protagonists also have to be factored in. Furthermore, I have been a fan of Martin Freeman. who plays Watson, for quite some time - just a cuddly teddy-bear to my fantasy. Benedict Cumberbatch I only became aware of in 2009 after Marple: Murder Is Easy was broadcast by ITV; but he has charisma -  a definite turn-on.

[Image description: John & Sherlock leaning heads together & holding hands when drunk,

in Series 3:  Episode 2, The Sign of Three; © BBC]

In the series, we get used to seeing Holmes & Watson in various states of attire and undress: a sense of domesticity pervades. As I recall: we are never shown Watson's bedroom, though we are given a glimpse into Sherlock's in one episode when Watson complains of some woman being there. Does John actually use another bedroom or does he share with Holmes? (This recalls to my mind the bedroom scene in Gilda - I admit my most favourite film ever - between Johnny & Ballin which hints heavily at their sharing the bed.) Of course, sharing a bed does not mean anything sexual occurs; John & Sherlock might simply lie side by side without any tactile contact - recalling respectively army and boarding-school conditions.

In April's drama we see John fresh from cleansing answering the telephone for Sherlock. The re-use of this by April from being about consternation of involvement with an arch-enemy to a potential dalliance with another suitor is clever, Watson's expression being appropriate for either scenario.

Jim Moriarty, as played by Andrew Scott, has a more conventionally US handsome look (not my type; though in a foursome with the other two…!). As such, he is perfectly cast as the better-looking guy who might steal Holmes from Watson, or as Jolene filching "my man" from the singer. The idea that it appears to be a game to Moriarty is also one possible interpretation of Jolene being capable of having any who she so desires.

The courtroom dynamic of glances, miens and gestures highlights John's/that of the singer's status being undermined.

I love all the parallels and the manner in which April has interwoven them, whether deliberately or sub-consciously is immaterial.

Oh, and one final comment, that does not really fit in with the narrative above. The running scene where Holmes & Watson are hand in hand, are they running just for fun or for a purpose?

April's mini drama deserves to be seen by more folk: I hope you will view & enjoy it!