We Didn’t Invent Sex

*For those of you who have been around for a while and who get flash-backs.  This is a blast from the past post, written originally in May 16 2011.  Largely I still stand by it.  I will note that since then what I’ve seen more of is the younger generations convinced of the old boomer idea that sex solves all ills, and pushing it at older people as though they think older people never heard of it.  It’s like “Oh, you’re depressed?  you need more indiscriminate sex and fewer inhibitions.”  Mind you, I’m not running down sex.  I’m a fan.  But like fire it’s a powerful force and sometimes inhibitions and considerations are what keeps us from burning our house down.  Also, anyone under thirty who thinks they know everything about sex to the point of preaching to older people needs to take a really deep breath and then go sit in the corner, because that’s where ridiculous brats belong.*

I became conscious of this when reading comments on a blog yesterday, where people seemed to be under the impression that fifty years ago most kids didn’t know sex EXISTED or what it consisted of. This is something I run into over and over again. For instance, in my (and Sofie Skapski’s) take on Pride and Prejudice (now with more dragons)  A Touch Of Night people were shocked, shocked that Lizzie would believe Bingley and Darcy were having an affair, because “how would she know about such things?”

This is very silly. Heinlein said that each generation thought they’d invented sex. He’s probably right, just like every generation thinks the next one is going to h*ll in a handbasket ever since the old testament was written and possibly before. (At some point we’ll decipher the scrawls in caves and come up with “things aren’t as they used to be. New generation can’t hunt, can barely gather. This newfangled agri thing will be the death of us. By next winter, no humans.)

It is however fostered by rule two of sex “everyone lies about sex.”

This is perfectly understandable, heck, acceptable to us today when we can look at surveys that say most boys are active and most girls aren’t and roll our eyes and go “and all of them lie.” BUT we tend to go misty eyed and think the past is another country where everyone tells the truth. And since what tends to survive puts their best foot forward, we assume we invented sex. We are the wicked generation and now our kids will pay…

Some reality checks: first, until our current generation where we are isolated from the animal kingdom and nature in general (but have the internet as a compensation.) kids couldn’t avoid seeing sex. Someone in that same blog yesterday was outraged that we thought “children in the past stood around watching animals have sex.” Look, even if they weren’t in farms, they had pets. They didn’t castrate their pets. It was inevitable they’d see something. And no, they’re not stupid enough not to know what it was. Plus, kids listen to adults talk and who knows? Perhaps there is such a thing as instinct.

The chances of a girl of Lizzy’s intelligence not knowing about sex and its “usual” variations are zilch. (And before you tell me that household pets aren’t homosexual, yes they are. Okay, not exclusively, and usually it’s a dominance thing, but she’d have seen it or heard of it.) Oh, she might have no idea of the exact mechanics between humans, but the concept would be there.

Okay, there are always un-really innocent people. Perhaps it’s a gift or a grace or they just lack instincts. However, growing up in a very traditional society and not paying much attention to what animals do, I’d worked out the basics of sex by the time I was eight. Not in practice of course, and I’d gotten some things laughably wrong (one or two of them didn’t get corrected until I got married and I think my husband still chuckles about them) but they weren’t in the essentials. Mostly they had to do with details of male anatomy and such. Still, I did have a friend who in the last year of highschool was COMPLETELY puzzled as to why a neighbor wanted to borrow her parents’ siamese cat “so that their cat could have kittens.” It wasn’t a put on, she really was flabbergasted and no, I don’t understand HOW, since she wasn’t stupid. Not the brightest bulb, perhaps, but she’s now an MD, so she couldn’t be completely dim. I suspect her mom, a very pious woman, just blocked off her intent to even inquire.

But this is not normal. This is not sane. Most sane kids, no matter what class and era, work out what happens by adolescence. It’s impossible to be that oblivious to one of the central preoccupations of mankind. And if you care to dig into Victorian biographies (or earlier. The regency was far more daring) you’ll find out that the lives of people were often as complex as they’re now, they just kept a better facade.

So, why does it matter? Well it matters for two reasons: one is that if we think we (or in the case of our generation the boomers who came just before us, because it’s impossible to ignore the fact that they claim to have invented it. They’re so intent on telling everyone) invented sex we tend to give the discovery way more importance than it deserves.

The boomers fell into this trap. All the ills of the past were due to that evil thing “repression.” If only one destroyed traditional marriage and screwed around everything would be fine, great, hunky dory. Even more interesting, most neurosis and problems were because one didn’t screw around enough and if one JUST did it, everything would be fine.

Since most of civilization consists of putting the appetites we share with dogs to a useful social purpose, or at least put a good face on them, this view leads to dismantling civilization at its base. (Note here that I’m not advocating pushing gays back into the closet. Our treatment of homosexuality is as insane as anything else since the beginning of time, but as homosexuality has persisted and existed from the beginning of man, and as it exists in all the great primates, I don’t think just shoving our fingers in our ears and saying “lalalalalala” will take us back to where it didn’t. That too is part of believing that homosexuality was invented – with sex – yesterday. I do believe in gay marriage. No, I’m not going to debate it here. If you feel up to my opinions – and they’re profoundly traditional, not to say moralistic in base, even if I arrive at a very unique conclusion – look here. I don’t see any reason why all the appetites we share with dogs shouldn’t be socialized and made civilized.)

It also leads to thinking of sex as a cure all. If I had a dime for every time an adult informed me during my messed up teen years that if I just had sex I’d be fine, I’d be a very rich woman. You know what? They were wrong. I needed self-confidence. I needed knowledge of the world. More importantly, perhaps, I needed to know that I was normal (in ways other than sex.) Introducing sex to that equation would just have screwed me up more because sex brings instinctive feelings of attachment with it, and no man needed the ball of instability I was at the time. And no boy would be able to deal with it. Splendor in The Grass is not only a fairy tale, but one that deals with humans as they never existed.

Next, it causes us to give up hope in our time, and to view the generation after us as even more wicked. I mean, lookit, sex was invented yesterday, and look what they’re ALREADY up to.

So, let’s admit sex was not invented yesterday. It is not a cure all. We don’t need to evangelize the older generations with it. It won’t solve all our ills. [And just a year after this post I read about a woman giving her devout Catholic mother a dildo for Christmas even though her mother had asked her not to, because her mother needed to "loosen up" and "learn to enjoy pleasure." This is exactly what this article is talking about.  Leave people alone.  Chances are they know more about sex than you do, and have learned to cope with it in their own way.]  It should never be the center and fulcrum of anyone’s life, unless their life is very poor of other interests.

It is also not the end of the world that young people are fumbling around and having sex too early. Some percentage always did. We can guide them. We SHOULD tell them that it is not a cure all or the solution to all their problems. Most of them will figure it out, mind you, anyway. We can stop pushing the weirder stuff at them.

But in the end sex is part of the human condition. It’s one of those friction points between man and beast. One of the bits that is not like onto the angels. Shoulder it as one more of the burdens of all too mortal flesh, make it sublime with love, repress it and turn the drive to something else, or indulge in it to clear the mind BUT don’t think you’re the first to do any of it. Or that you’ll be the last.

Oh, yeah and GRUMBLE let’s stop writing books where everything turns on sex and where the climax (eh eh eh eh eh – what? I never said I wasn’t juvenile) is when someone realizes someone else is really good in bed and therefore the plot is resolved. Unless you’re writing a porno (if you are, how does it pay?) this is just stupid and boring. Sex is just one of the primary colors, and not even a very good one. All you’re doing when you’re only writing with it is imitating pre-schoolers who finger paint an entire sheet in black because it’s the most visible color. Stop that, wash your hands (eh eh eh eh eh eh eh) and bring out the other paint pots. Love, charity, tenderness, hope, or even intellectual curiosity are far more satisfying as plot motors.

110 responses to “We Didn’t Invent Sex

  1. Good, you have started the repeats

    • On occasional Sundays. what shocked me, going back is how RECENT my fully starting to speak my mind is. Until 2011 this was still PRIMARILY about writing, and even that I was watching everything I said.

      • It’s a good one – bears repeating.

        Even if you malign my generation. I am a boomer, but I didn’t grow up in the States, and didn’t join in the fun and games when I moved to the States to finish college. Ew. My Mother brought us all up properly repressed – and I’m still grateful to her for it. Not all the consequences are benign, but we all survived fine, and produced another generation.

        No reason why you shouldn’t recycle – you have gobs of good posts, and most people don’t read far enough back into blog archives.

        Even if they do, they’ve had a couple of years to come up with new thoughts and new comments.

  2. It’s even more interesting when you realize that there are cycles to how we think about “sex”. Some periods of time are more libertine which are followed by more “repressive” times which are then followed by libertine periods, etc.

    Part of it lies in two factors. One, the “younger” generation thinks their parents are stupid. Two, (which is related to the first) the “younger” generations wants to rebel against their parents.

  3. I wonder if Paul hasn’t got a point about libertine and repressive cycles…
    But I do think it was possible at some points in the past for people to be relatively innocent about sex. I remember conversation at one of my parent’s gatherings when somehow all the guests (four or five couples, who were neighbors of my parents) began talking about how they first found out about sex – and one of the ladies (then in her seventies, I think, so she would have been a teenager in the Roaring Twenties) said she didn’t find out about it until she was almost twenty. From her first serious boyfriend, who was an artist – and he drew a series of sketches for her, by way of explaining. I think it would have been entirely possible, in a day when porn wasn’t available at every turn, and ‘nice people didn’t talk about it.’
    I was thirteen or fourteen, myself – Lutheran Church summer camp. The session was about becoming an adult, and all the things you should know about. No kidding, it was a sex-ed class at Lutheran summer camp. The head counselor gave the lecture on it himself, and I’d be willing to swear that the mechanics of it all came as a total surprise to most of us. After the class, none of the boys were looking at the girls, and none of the girls were looking at the boys. Our reaction was along the lines of “Oh, ick! I’d never!!!

    • Well, some people ARE startlingly innocent. Again, I had a friend who, living in a village, with animals and all, thought that a male cat had no function in the reproductive cycle.
      However, in general, in a time with no sex ed whatsoever (some parents gave their kids books. My parents figured out I could figure it out.) MOST of us — like 90% — had figured out all about sex and its more common variations in theory if not in practice by say 14. (I was early but this might have had something to do with the fact I REALLY hate people having secrets from me — no, seriously. If I also weren’t pretty determined to be left alone and therefore libertarian, I’d work for the NSA — and I’d figured out people tended to stop talking about CERTAIN things when I entered the room. So…)

      • Maybe where people grew up, and with what kind of families? I could believe that, for example, some city bred upper class Victorian or Edwardian (or even later) young adults might not have known much, if their parents were determined to protect them from the subject. Farm kids, on the other hand, could hardly miss the thing, any more than kids in poorer families could when the whole family slept in the same room and the parents would have to do it it the presence of their (maybe) sleeping kids at least during the colder seasons.

        And at least in Finland there seems to have been an accepted custom of premarital sex at least with the lower classes, before marriage – the boys would visit the girls during the summer when there was a bit more privacy, like people sleeping in these storage buildings we had here, they’d have the storage areas downstairs and rooms without any means to heat them upstairs, and the younger people on the farm would use the rooms when it was warm enough to do that – then he was expected to marry her if she got pregnant (at least if it was sure he was the only guy she had been sleeping with). One guessed reason for the fact that this was accepted – the ‘surface’ and church sanctioned morale was perhaps no sex outside of marriage, but this was supposedly something everybody knew was going on, and most in the communities both accepted and even encouraged – was that it was seen as fair to the guy to see that the girl could get pregnant with no problems before marrying her, at a time when being able to have lots of children, aka future workers, plus at least one viable heir at a time when many of them died in infancy was a very important thing for families and for the whole community. So if a girl did not have a good dowry one of her best assets as a future wife was the proven ability to breed.

        And since breeding was so important (both humans and animals) well, one could hardly avoid the sex part unless the parents were very, very determined to shield their offspring from the subject, and also had enough influence to make sure none of the other older people around their child talked about the subject (or the child was obedient enough to run when somebody started on it).

        And if my older family members – born in the early years of the 20th century – were at all representative, no, they didn’t talk about sex around me when I was a child, but they started playing with innuendos and teasing me about boyfriends (most of the double talk parts I got only some years later) around the time I started to develop curves, and stopped avoiding the subject around the time I was about twenty, which led to some shocks (like dirty jokes by retirement age aunts. Very dirty, especially the way they told them. Well, they had grown up on a farm… my uncles were far more retiring in my presence, no straight talk from them, but when there were no men present aunts didn’t hold back).

        • Heinlein also said that first babies for new brides often came at 7 months, and the fiction was that the first baby could develop in that time (I forget exactly how he put it).

          • For a while the medieval Church held that G-d gave some especially blessed (i.e. fertile) couples their first child less than 9 months after the wedding. Wink, nudge, don’t do it again.

  4. It pays decently well, thank you for asking.

    And even then, having the whole thing hinge on sex for anything longer than about 5,000 words is incredibly boring.

    • Yeah, when I wrote this I didn’t know, but I have friends making a living from it now. And I’ve read some of their stuff, and I agree with you.
      Meanwhile, if that’s your cover, shouldn’t the title and the author’s name be larger? This is by way of curiosity, since each sub-genre has its own codes on such things. That looks literary to me?

      • It’s mmf Steampunk and I was kinda playing with fonts and covers. The naked chick on part 2 kinda distracts from the font, I think. Fonts are the bane of my existence right now and I’ll probably go back and update them soon.

        • They need to be bigger. Think readable in thumbnail.
          I got this 10000 font package. Most of them are public domain, but the convenience of getting them all in one place helped. Then I tried fonts on until one clicked with the time period and mood. Sometimes the ones I really liked, like for No Will But His (AlteEnglish) were nearly unreadable, so off they went.

        • Steampunk? ::ears perk up, tail starts wagging::

          • Steampunk erotica :-) My other pen name is also writing Steampunk.

            Part 1 of the erotica if you want to check it out :-) http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GLB9JJ0

          • And this just went live today, if you’re interested ;-) http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HBID91G

            This one is definitely NOT erotica.

          • Ears? Tail? Et Tu RabidAlien?

            • Always on the lookout for a good steampunk tale. Most of what I’ve found is either YA (I’m not that young anymore, although they tell me I’m “adult”) or so poorly written/edited that I can’t read it.

              • I’m “waiting patiently” for my husband to get the third scifi adventure story out, so I can remind him of the intriguing musing he had about steampunk set in South Africa and Rhodesia, during the Boer War, where the Portuguese are trying to arm the Zulu with great and terrible machines to stop the advancing British armies…

                Waiting! Patiently!!

                • One problem with that — the Portuguese and the English had an alliance dating back to the 11th century — so that would need to be disposed of first.
                  BTW, I’m not ignoring your emails. things have just been more insane than usual.

                  • Ignoring? You or me?

                    I was just hoping I hadn’t lost a reply and could sneak on quietly by til Christmas before responding… (Last week I got two days off! It was only 57 hours in 5 days!) ..why is my husband acting like I’ve just come home from a business trip when I get a day off?

                    Anyway, I present the steampunk hokey-pokey: You put a little history in, you take a little history out, you put a little brass and gears in, and you shake it all about…

                    • Put the Belgians or the French in instead. It could be Louis Napoleon IV’s great move to expand the empire. It could also be in revenge for the close shave he had as a young man which he blamed on the British leaving him alone with the Zulus, and a sop to the French industrialists to bid and profit from another military project. If you have the French you can bring off an entente with the Belgians who were never comfortable having the British next door in Rhodesia, and could facilitate transport up the Congo, instead of across Namibia.
                      Also, France and Belgian were advanced manufacturing centers.

              • Hmmm, why am I starting to get an itch to write that steampunk Rada and Zabet story? That or I need to use more skin lotion, since the dewpoint is lower than the voice of a Russian bass’s with a head cold.

              • YA is, if not reliable, at any rate more so than the “adult” section. (and I’m solidly middle-aged.)`

    • Given the amount of creativity required to stimulate any level of interest beyond the most basic, I would hope the genre paid indecently well.

  5. Sez you. I got a patent.

  6. If I had a dime for every time an adult informed me during my messed up teen years that if I just had sex I’d be fine, I’d be a very rich woman.

    1) This bit of advice, IIRC, was rarely extended to homely girls.

    2) Typical Libby inversion. If you had the self-confidence and maturity that ought be a prerequisite of sexual interplay, you probably would have been fine. Just so, if you had the work ethic and marketable skills and self-discipline to enable you to save up enough $ to buy and maintain a house; making it easier to get that house makes those attributes less likely … and their absence ultimately more disastrous.

    Putting the cart before the horse used to be recognized as a bad idea.

    3) Once upon a time there was a concept known as “vulgarity” and recognizing (and avoiding it) were deemed critical elements of civilized behaviour. It wasn’t repression that caused people to avoid such topics, it was good taste.

    • You must remember that if teenagers don’t have sexual intercourse, it’s possible not to. As a consequence, an adult who did so can’t write it off as inevitable, and any downsides are clearly the consequences of deliberately chosen acts.

  7. If you feel up to my opinions

    Heh. I see what you did there! It works on several different levels, too, depending on which word you apply the emphasis.

    I grew up strict Southern Baptist. Sex happened, but it was something that was only mentioned if IMMEDIATELY followed by “is something we don’t do until you’re married”. I figured it out around 10 or 11, though, just from books I read and the occasional non-Disney movie I was able to watch at someone else’s house. *sigh* Sometimes I just wish I had been able to break away from that strict up-bringing a lot sooner, especially as I get older and look back and think “man, all that wasted time.” Then I look closer, and realize that I was such a loser/loner that it wouldn’t have made any difference at all.

  8. People who think sex is the solution to all problems are guilty of very shallow thinking, 5 to 7 inches, on average.

  9. Seems to me that there are two main reasons to repress sex in society

    a) a little touch of the forbidden adds spice and mystery and excitement; letting it all hang out just gets boring

    b) double entendres. It is so much more interesting to have a topic which we do not address directly and get to demonstrate creativity and wit by addressing through multiply-layered veiled reference. So much verbal playfulness would be abandoned if sex were a topic discussed as casually as football, cooking or shrubbery-pruning.

    As for the modern invention of sex, yeah, that’s why there are no references, jests, double entendres or just plain dirty jokes in Shakespeare’s plays.

  10. when we can look at surveys that say most boys are active and most girls aren’t and roll our eyes and go “and all of them lie.”

    This is actually possible, though, if in the group surveyed most boys are having sex with the same few girls, while most girls aren’t having sex. Imagine that in a group consisting of Boys # 1-10 and Girls # 1-10, Boys 1-4 are virgins, boys 5-6 are paired up with Girls 8-9, and boys 7-10 are all having sex with Girl 10. In that group 60% of the boys and 30% of the girls are sexually active: it’s just that only 20% of both groups are in exclusive sexual relationships, while none of the boys and 10% of the girls are promiscuous while 40% of the boys and none of the girls are sharing the attentions of a promiscuous partner.

    I have no idea how close this example would be to reality. My point is merely that we shouldn’t make the assumption of a set of one-to-one pairings, simply because that’s the human ideal where sexuality is concerned.

    • Oh, yes. BUT I remember surveys on sex when I was a kid in the schools. Girls always lied. Sometimes they lied in the sense of claiming what they’d never done — if we sensed that was what the researcher wanted — and sometimes in the sense of being pure as driven snow.
      I remember one notable survey of my (all girl) high school that claimed with a straight face 90% of us had lost our virginity at 12, with a bottle.
      SERIOUSLY, this was a magnet, high-academics high school. At eighteen I’d estimate 98% of us were virgins. But when you put that option (yep, twelve, with a bottle) in a multiple choice question, yeah, people will pick it.

    • I don’t know about in city schools, but this does happen in the Navy.

      My first Chief turned very odd colors when he had to explain why one of the female office workers hated him… he’d been the guy who had to take the message from the BM chief to the AT chief to keep her away from the barracks, the crew not sleeping was a health risk. 50 man barracks. And it wasn’t lack of sleep from the noise. (Still not sure which side I think is grossest.)

  11. In the original Pride and Prejudice, Lizzie very clearly knows what Lydia has probably done with Mr. Wickham and why it would be a scandal capable of touching Mr. Darcy as well if he were to marry herself, it’s the hinge of the crisis on which the book’s climax turns. Later, Lizzie snarks that she herself would not get a husband that way, evidently knowing in just what way Lydia got him. Lizzie was every bit as “innocent” as Jane Austen herself (she was practically Jane Austen’s self-insertion character), meaning — probably very much so in the physical sense, not very much so in the intellectual.

    • And in Mansfield Park there’s jokes about homosexuality in the navy…
      My second favorite on the reviews of A Touch of Night are the idiots who think I’m homophobic because the idea of homosexuality up close and personal is off putting to a regency unmarried girl character. I mean, she doesn’t denounce them, but she’d much rather not marry one of them. Uh. Strange thing.

      • (*deadpan*)

        Gee … I can see no reason at all that a girl would prefer not to marry a homosexual man. Can you?

        • No.Idea.Strange.I.Guess.

          • As I recall, Victorian women of literature, the touch of a man’s hand was repellent, repugnant and repulsive. By taking a homosexual husband she could be confident his disgusting attentions need never be feared.

            Because Victorian women found such things icky. It says so in all their books (except the ones that lie.)

      • Seriously, her reason for wanting to avoid a loveless marriage to a man who would view her only as a social connection and possible source of an heir (*close your eyes, sir, and think of England!*) is even greater than that of a modern woman, because once she marries him, all but her explicit dowry and perhaps some small personal possessions become HIS property. He can make almost any and all decisions to control her life. He can quite legally beat her, imprison her, or just ignore her existence. Divorce is almost impossible, and remarriage extremely difficult.

        To marry a man whom one could not manipulate by any ties of romance, sexuality or sentimentality would be a dreadful fate: by contrast, while most upper-class Regency men were unfaithful, they usually at least liked their wives, because they also had some good memories with them, and hopefully a brood of little Regency children running around the nursery and schoolroom. Heck, the “marry a gay man who is utterly cold to all women” plot has been repeatedly done in historical and gothic fiction for exactly the reasons I mentioned.

        • Jordan, if you persist in basing arguments upon facts, logic and historical knowledge you run the risk of no longer being allowed to post on the internet.

          • No, they’re allowed to run around loose because it’s so amusing to see people trying to argue with them.

    • In Sense and Sensibility, a woman does not want to discuss the matter before YOUNG girls, but considers Elinor, unmarried, old enough to hear a man has an illegitimate daughter.

      • Respectable girls had to know such things because otherwise they might not realize the risks awaiting them either in terms of unfaithful future husbands or married men out on the prowl for Sweet Young Things (though they were generally more after bored wives than actual maidens, as bored wives were much safer).

          • Bored wives were less prone to declaring undying love for the paramour, nor reveal the relationship to explain a “sudden” pregnancy. Besides, for some folks the thrill of the forbidden is the sweetest spice.

            • There was a case with one of my mother’s co-workers, where his wife divorced him because she was having an affair, the guy she was sleeping with vanished (having evidently thought a married woman was “safe”), and she then tried to reconcile. . . didn’t get it.

  12. good post with which I totally agree.

  13. If I had a dime for every time an adult informed me during my messed up teen years that if I just had sex I’d be fine, I’d be a very rich woman.

    I’m trying to make sure my kids have the argument-defenses that I didn’t when I was a teen. If I wasn’t a stubborn cuss, I would’ve listened to the folks telling me similar things.

    One comes to mind– a lovely gal. Really gorgeous. Told me how much happier I’d be if I’d just go get drunk and laid. (She was trying to be nice, I think, and was echoing a standard adult view anyways.)

    Take a wild guess who’s happy these days, between the two of us.

    • I think the assumption that you would need/want alcohol as part of the action say’s something.

      • Even today I’m not entirely sure that there’s enough alcohol on earth. I didn’t much care for any of the male classmates that would’ve been interested.

        (I know that’s not where you were going– and I happen to agree with your point, it was just a very strong response that came to mind instantly.)

  14. From the 1968 movie “Yours, Mine, and Ours”.

    Colleen North: Larry says he’ll never speak to me again unless I grow up. He says that I’m being ridiculous and I don’t love him, but I do love him. Am I being ridiculous?
    Frank Beardsley: You’re not being ridiculous.
    Colleen North: Well, do all the other girls, like Larry says? And am I just being old-fashioned?
    Frank Beardsley: The same idiots were passing the same rumors when I was your age, but if all the girls did, how come I always ended up with the ones who didn’t?
    Colleen North: But it’s all different now!
    Frank Beardsley: I don’t know, they wrote Fanny Hill in 1742 and they haven’t found anything new since.
    Veronica Beardsley: Who’s Fanny Hill?
    Frank Beardsley: Go to bed, that’s who Fanny Hill is.

  15. Was recently reading a series of books and the “sexual tension” wasn’t very well written, but the rest of the story was okay … so it was easy to ignore … until about half way through the second book when sex actually took place. Thankfully it wasn’t an attempt at a graphic writing, but was so clumsily handled and poorly written (well, pardon the pun but poorly inserted … into the storyline!!! jeez people … as the writing was almost literally “They took their clothes off and had sex all night long. Then when she tried to leave they did it again.” and not many more sentences than that) I cannot bring myself to finish the book. There is a third in the series, but I haven’t wasted my money on it yet so I guess I’ll hold off.

    • This might not be the writer’s fault. I had one editor demand I put in sexual consummation where neither of the characters was ready for it. that book is waiting revision. Massive revision. It will then come out as “author’s cut.’

      • As an invertebrate punster, I strongly encourage you to eschew “writer’s cut” (which is at risk of being found a little fishy) in favour of “authorized version.”

        In more serious vein, you could have “put in sexual consummation where neither of the characters was ready for it” and allowed the remainder of the novel to revolve around the consequences of such premature sexual familiarity. Sometimes the only way to convince a child that she/he doesn’t actually want what is being demanded is to grant the wish.

      • well, the author lists no publisher, but maybe he is using a freelance editor or feels it just has to be in there to be considered Adult Fiction or something.

    • That is always my advice: don’t waste your time and money; just abstain.

  16. I find it amusing that kids today want to tell the adults how to do it– GEEZ– Amusing in a profane way–

  17. In ’67, a man I was acquainted with told me he’d found a book called “The Pearl” and it was Victorian erotica/porn. He’d bought it at an airport, and was trying to read it on the plane, but he was sitting next to a preacher and decided he ought not. I found a copy and found out why he decided that. And clearly, them old folks knew a lot about sex.