Prior to having surgery anal sex was one of my main ways of having sex.
Unlike so many TS/TG sisters today I was initially attracted predominantly to men.
Allowing my boyfriend to fuck me anally was being as much a woman for him as I could be with the body I had.
After sex reassignment surgery anal intercourse became just another way of having sex, one of several that I commonly practiced.
I never saw it as being all that painful or messy if done correctly.
I never felt horribly degraded by letting someone I cared about penetrate me there.
One of the nice things about not believing in god or religious taboos is not being as sexually hung up about certain acts.
Safe and pleasurable takes precedence over religiously ordained.
I lived in New York State when I first started having sex. Before I came out as transsexual I was considered a sissy gay boy, a princess in training really and the ways I had sex were a crime.
Prior to having SRS all the ways I had of making love with a man were a crime.
I moved to California in 1967 and prior to 1976 it was a crime for me to perform oral sex on either a man or a woman and definitely a crime for me to let a man fuck me anally.
We had to get rid of Ronnie the Nazi Rat Reagan before we could enjoy sexual freedom in California.
California’s sodomy repeal effort began in 1969 with urging from Morris Kight, Rev. Troy Perry and others. The repeal bill was introduced to the California legislature starting in 1969 by Assemblyman Willie Brown, and every year afterwards until its passage in 1975. In 1975, the liberal Democratic state Senate Majority Leader, George Moscone — running for Mayor of San Francisco — twisted many arms for its passage. The Senate deadlocked on a 20-20 vote, Moscone locked the chamber doors, until Lieutenant Governor Mervin Dymally could fly back from Denver and cast the tie-breaking vote. It was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown.
The rise of AIDS 1980s made anal sex (or for that matter oral sex with men and heterosexual vaginal intercourse with men) a risky behavior that mandated the use of condoms.
Still many women and men continue to enjoy guilt free anal intercourse as one of the dishes available at the banquet of coercion free feast of human sexuality.
A new — and almost entirely unreported — study about anal sex and pain shows how little we really know about it.
By Debby Herbenick
October 6, 2012
That anal sex remains taboo may explain why a study about anodyspareunia – that is, pain during anal penetration – received little attention when it was published in the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy. The study should have turned heads: It was the first research on anodyspareunia among women; it was conducted by a well-respected scientist (Dr. Aleksander Stulhofer from the University of Zagreb); and it was centered on young women and sex. That’s often the kind of research that attracts media attention (Young women sext! They get pregnant! They give oral sex! You get the picture …). However, anal sex remains such a strong taboo that this otherwise important study barely turned a head.
Except it did turn mine. Here’s why. In an incredibly short period of time, anal sex has become a common part of Americans’ sex lives. As of the 1990s, only about one-quarter to one-third of young women and men in the U.S. had tried anal sex at least once. Less than 20 years later, my research team’s 2009 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior found that as many as 40-45 percent of women and men in some age groups had tried anal sex. With its rising prevalence, I felt it was important to devote a chapter of my first book, “Because It Feels Good,” to anal health and pleasure — only to find that a magazine editor wouldn’t review it because the topic of anal sex was “not in the best interest of our readership.” Even though nearly half of American women in some age groups have done it! She added, “In the correct circles, I personally will be suggesting the book to those with whom I can share such a resource.”
Hmm. The correct circles. Which ones would those be? The ones where scores and scores of women openly sit around talking about anal sex between glasses of wine?
So taboos persist and anal sex remains hush-hush even though more people are doing it. What changed to make it more common, anyway? It’s not entirely clear – after all, rates of masturbation, vaginal sex, oral sex and other sexual practices don’t seem to have changed too much. However, it’s commonly thought that the widespread access to porn played a role. Some research has found that anal sex was shown in 56 percent of sex scenes studied even though national data of real people’s sex lives show that fewer than 5 percent of Americans had anal sex during their most recent sexual experience.
Honest, evidence-based answers to questions about anal sex are difficult to come by. You’d think we would know more about a behavior that’s become a common part of Americans’ sex lives – one that, for all its potential pleasures, remains among the riskiest sex acts when it comes to spreading sexually transmissible infections (STI) including HIV. Yet there is strikingly little scientific research on anal sex. The list of what we don’t know about anal sex is far longer than the list of what we do. This makes it difficult for sex educators to feel truly confident in answering people’s very real and important questions.
Continue reading at: http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/anal-sex-sciences-last-taboo
From Common Dreams: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/10/06
This past January, almost exactly 20 years after its publication, Tucson schools banned the book I co-edited with Bob Peterson, Rethinking Columbus. It was one of a number of books adopted by Tucson’s celebrated Mexican American Studies program—a program long targeted by conservative Arizona politicians.
The school district sought to crush the Mexican American Studies program; our book itself was not the target, it just got caught in the crushing. Nonetheless, Tucson’s—and Arizona’s—attack on Mexican American Studies and Rethinking Columbus shares a common root: the attempt to silence stories that unsettle today’s unequal power arrangements.
For years, I opened my 11th-grade U.S. history classes by asking students, “What’s the name of that guy they say discovered America?” A few students might object to the word “discover,” but they all knew the fellow I was talking about. “Christopher Columbus!” several called out in unison.
“Right. So who did he find when he came here?” I asked. Usually, a few students would say, “Indians,” but I asked them to be specific: “Which nationality? What are their names?”
In more than 30 years of teaching U.S. history and guest-teaching in others’ classes, I’ve never had a single student say, “Taínos.” So I ask them to think about that fact. “How do we explain that? We all know the name of the man who came here from Europe, but none of us knows the name of the people who were here first—and there were hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of them. Why haven’t you heard of them?”
This ignorance is an artifact of historical silencing—rendering invisible the lives and stories of entire peoples. It’s what educators began addressing in earnest 20 years ago, during plans for the 500th anniversary of Columbus’s arrival in the Americas, which at the time the Chicago Tribune boasted would be “the most stupendous international celebration in the history of notable celebrations.” Native American and social justice activists, along with educators of conscience, pledged to interrupt the festivities.
Continue reading at: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/10/06
From The Los Angeles Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-voting-rights-tea-party-20121004,0,3351653.story
By Michael Finnegan
October 5, 2012
A Maryland congressman has opened an investigation of a group that has tried to remove thousands of voters from registration rolls across the nation in advance of the presidential election.
The inquiry by Rep. Elijah E. Cummings , a Democrat, is being started a week after Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) urged the Justice Department to enforce voting rights laws, citing a Los Angeles Times article detailing attempts by an Ohio offshoot of the group, True the Vote, to strike hundreds of students and others from voting rolls.
“At some point, an effort to challenge voter registrations by the thousands without any legitimate basis may be evidence of illegal voter suppression,” Cummings told True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht in a letter on Thursday. “If these efforts are intentional, politically motivated and widespread across multiple states, they could amount to a criminal conspiracy to deny legitimate voters their constitutional rights.”
Cummings is the ranking minority member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Engelbrecht, a Texas tea party leader, has described True the Vote as an effort to prevent election fraud and clean up voter registration rolls. The group recruits volunteers, largely through tea party networks, to scour voter lists, challenge the registration of those they believe are dead or do not live at their listed address, and monitor the polls on election day.
“True The Vote has forwarded Congressman Cummings’ letter to its legal team and is more than happy to avail itself” to the congressional committee, the group’s spokesman, Logan Churchwell, said by email. “In the interim, True The Vote invites Congressman Cummings, or any other interested parties, to participate in any training sessions in the weeks ahead.”
From The New Civil Rights Movement: http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/nom-laundered-a-quarter-of-a-million-dollars-equality-group-charges/politics/2012/10/05/50352
by David Badash
on October 5, 2012
Mainers United For Marriage, a group working to support legalization of same-sex marriage in Maine, is charging NOM with having “laundered a quarter of a million dollars” into the Maine marriage campaign, in continued violation of Maine’s state ethics laws. On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to even hear a case NOM tried to file, after losing several appeals that are requiring NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, to do what every other non-profit is required to do: make their list of donors public once it reaches a certain threshold.
“In 2009, NOM raised and spent $1.9 million to deny same-sex couples the freedom to marry,” Matt McTighe, campaign manager for Mainers United for Marriage, said via a statement. “This year, the organization has already laundered a quarter of a million dollars into the anti-marriage campaign – with more to come – and once again it refuses to disclose where the money comes from. Our campaign is proud of the nearly 14,000 donors who have contributed to the campaign to win the freedom to marry in Maine. NOM continues to hide in the shadows.”
“Maine voters deserve to know who is trying to influence this election,” McTighe said. “Maine law is clear, and NOM refuses to follow the same rules that every other campaign in the state must abide by. How can voters trust anything they say when they refuse to follow the law?”