#history of sex

[shitacademicswrite]

Sex and beauty in the Middle Ages

I'm only 3 minutes in and I know I need to watch more of these videos, because these history-of-sex scholars are HYSTERICAL. (...No pun intended.)

[michaelgruberfan]

All of the photos I could find from “History Of Sex” which was at the Golden Nugget in 1998! It was a short show only being about 75 mins and the story "starting with Adam and Eve and ending in an overlong dance sequence as WSEX radio captures the music of the 1970s, '80s and '90s"  Gruber plays the "star/ Narrator" Here are some articles about the show incase you wanted some extra reading: By Jess Cagle - Published August 14, 1998 For Entertainment Weekly “Vegas Stage Reviews: 'Siegfried & Roy'; 'EFX'; 'The History of Sex'” (X) By Joe Delaney - Published July 24, 1998 for The Las Vegas Sun “‘History of Sex’ told by capable cast” (X) Plus one little paragraph about the show from the same as the previous source Published Oct. 30, 1998 (X) Below the cut you can find the full 3 articles

“Vegas Stage Reviews: 'Siegfried & Roy'; 'EFX'; 'The History of Sex'” By Jess Cagle - Published August 14, 1998 For Entertainment Weekly (X)

”There is a very special guest in the audience tonight,” said Siegfried, the blond half of Siegfried and Roy at The Mirage on July 10. ”An Oscar-nominated actress whose performances have moved us…”

Cathy Moriarty, the beautifully blowsy star of Raging Bull (Best Supporting Actress nomination, 1980), Soapdish, and Casper — and who happened to be seated next to this ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY critic that night — slunk deep into the show-room banquette. ”I can’t believe he’s going to do this,” Moriarty growled. ”This is so embarrassing.” Siegfried extended his arms grandiosely in our general direction. Those of us lucky enough to be sitting with Moriarty straightened our posture, preparing to be doused by her spotlight.

Tension at the table mounted, until: ”Ladies and gentlemen,” said Siegfried, ”Miss Gloria Stuart!”

As Moriarty just sat there, either calmed down or let down, the 88-year-old Titanic star took a bow and a microphone and began expressing her appreciation for Siegfried & Roy’s artistry. And then expressing her appreciation for all the people who made it possible. And then expressing God knows what all; the woman can go on, and Siegfried seemed not quite sure how to get her to stop. Stuart was wearing a spangly little heart-shaped beauty mark decal on her cheek, which was enough to give me a giggle fit. Put off by such rudeness, Moriarty punched me in the arm — hard.

This incident, in a metaphorical nutshell, sums up a great deal of the current Vegas entertainment experience: magicians, tourists, quasi-name-brand celebrities, disappointment, a good laugh now and then, and not a little pain. And if the Vegas hotel-casino operators have a say in it, you’ll be having that experience soon. Despite the worried Asian economy, the glut of hotel rooms in Vegas — more than 105,000 by last count — is expected to increase by about 15,000 by the end of the millennium. Vegas wants you, and Vegas’ stages are considered a major untapped resource for keeping you happy. Casino mogul Steve Wynn and Hollywood producer-manager Sandy Gallin are planning to develop Broadway-caliber shows, and Peter Morton’s Hard Rock Hotel and Casino is catering to its young clientele with acts like Sheryl Crow and the Wallflowers. (Take a look at the new breed of Vegas tourist lounging by the Hard Rock pool — nubile hipsters hell-bent on disposing of income.) What, then, does this impending renaissance mean for the old-fashioned Vegas spectacle — the long-running comedy-variety shows installed in hotel show rooms long ago in order to lure gamblers? A quick tour through three shows from different Vegas genres — a spectacle, a star vehicle, and a T&A romp — reveal a very American art form (if you could call it that) at a crossroads.

It costs $89.35 per ticket to get a look at our first genre, represented by the two taut Teutonic titans of magic. I refer, of course, to Siegfried and Roy (The Mirage; 702-792-7777), though if you think you’re buying a magic show, think again. What you’re getting is pure Vegas-style spectacle. Siegfried spends much of the 95 minutes posing and gesturing amid a dense population of dancers; the chorus boys have big leonine hair, the girls are dressed, I think, as some kind of insect. There is much fog and fire, and Roy keeps popping up like a bad penny — from boxes, the back of the show room, etc. But the real star is the glorious parade of rare white tigers, all of whom pose as professionally as Siegfried, and one of whom is hoisted high … and then disappears! Whether this magnificent menagerie is worth the price of admission is up to you and your accountant. Siegfried & Roy are as slick and interesting as Wayne Newton’s hairdo, and they’re just about as hip. The face of Vegas is changing; it’s time Siegfried and Roy changed theirs. From the looks of them, this would not be an alien concept.

Speaking of hair, remember when David Cassidy’s cascaded past his shoulders and you thought Shirley Jones was the coolest mom in the whole world for allowing such a thing? Well, the hair is cut short, Cassidy is 48, and he’s Vegas’ resident former superstar — here to remind us (and this information will cost you at least $45 a ticket) that he’s still kicking, not to mention singing, leaping, and flying through the air in the monolithic, cast-of-thousands $45 million musical-variety show EFX (MGM Grand; 800-929-1111). Cassidy stars energetically as a busboy who takes a journey through his childhood imagination, bounding into the shoes of Houdini (magic tricks!), P.T. Barnum (trapeze artists!), and H.G. Wells (a 3-D time-travel movie! You can keep the glasses!). To call EFX a star vehicle is an understatement. It’s a star battleship; you may never see a live show this extravagant, which makes it somewhat important and a joy for the kids. But the show’s script makes The Partridge Family look like the Brontë sisters, and that makes EFX weirdly pornographic — so much to see, so little to think about, and after you’ve seen enough of it, your own boredom might surprise you. Until Cassidy starts pattering with the audience, shaking us awake with self-deprecating humor and a few topical jokes. The audience roars, free for the moment of empty glitz and common-denominator humor. Under Cassidy’s famous hair lies EFX‘s brain.

Then again, who goes to Vegas for brains? I, for one, was titillated by the town’s promise of south-of-the-neck entertainment. But while the signs on some shows say ”adults only,” they’re largely PG-rated affairs, many of them operating on the premise that audiences are still capable of lip-smacking over two bare breasts, even when their showgirl owner is otherwise covered in gowns by Bob Mackie wannabes and Teletubby headdresses. The T&A arena seems wide open for shows that can appeal to audiences born after 1955, and there is a new show that does just that: The History of Sex (Golden Nugget, 702-386-8100). Starring handsome Broadway vet Michael Gruber (Cats) and gorgeous Candace Davis (she paid her dues singing on Norwegian Cruise Lines, bless her heart), The History of Sex bounces through the titular topic, beginning with a nearly naked Adam and Eve and consistently — cleverly — objectifying with equal opportunity the 12 Fosse-esque whistle-worthy male and female dancers. In a retrofitted version of the Cole Porter ditty ”Let’s Do It, Let’s Fall in Love,” Gruber tells us that ”For cash a girl on the phone does it/George Michael all alone does it.” That’s smart stuff by Vegas standards, making the small-scale, unassuming History of Sex the best adult bet in town at $29.95 a ticket. This is not to say that Siegfried & Roy and David Cassidy should take their clothes off, but even Gloria Stuart might appreciate a good George Michael joke. Siegfried & Roy: B- EFX: B The History of Sex: B+ ---------- “‘History of Sex’ told by capable cast”  By Joe Delaney - Published July 24, 1998 for The Las Vegas Sun (X) 

"History of Sex," new at the Golden Nugget, is an original production with a fine off-Broadway feel. The print and video ad campaign is extremely well done, promising more than the show actually delivers. Ted Pappas does make an auspicious Las Vegas debut as producer-choreographer-director. He has assembled an impressive, very attractive, mostly local company backed by a small but mighty seven-piece orchestra under the direction of Hap Smith.

Michael Gruber, not local, is the star, narrator and an excellent singer-dancer, with fine comedy timing. He takes the audience nicely through the 75-minute series of well-performed vignettes, starting with Adam and Eve and ending in an overlong dance sequence as WSEX radio captures the music of the 1970s, '80s and '90s.

Candace Davis, also a non-local, has a stately presence even when singing "Ten Cents A Dance." Earlier, in her first number, she starts out as a nicely under-stated Lena Horne but soon becomes Barbra "Strident" and remained so for the balance of the show.

Comedian John Padon, a local, an Emmy-Award winner, enters at the 25-minute mark and had a never-miss, today-fresh routine, scoring consistently, and with the entire audience of approximately 300 in the 400-seat Theatre Ballroom. This is quite a feat considering the variety of ages and types present. His turn would work even better at the 40 or 45-minute point in the show.

The song selection is outstanding, as are Ned Ginsburg's orchestrations as performed by Smith and his men, occasionally replaced by taped music also well selected and reproduced. Compliments go to the 14 men and women who sing, dance and go through an athletic dance mini-decathlon, plus an extra nod to Michael DiFonzo as assistant choreographer.

James Noone's set design, David F. Segal's lighting design and David C. Woolard's costume design deserve mention, along with comedy writer Bruce Vilanch's dialogue for Gruber and special topical lyrics for several of the standard songs -- very funny.

It is well worth the trip to Casino Center if you're staying on the Strip, or if you live some distance from there. Would I see it a second time? I think not, but I would go see John Padon again wherever he might be playing.

JOE DELANEY is a Sun entertainment critic.

---------------- (X) "History of Sex" ends its run -- somewhat suddenly -- on Nov. 12, at the Golden Nugget. ... Officially, the story is that, despite heavy advertising expenditure in all the media, the show never achieved satisfactory attendance numbers. ... Unofficially, it may also have been artistic differences between management and the producer-choreographer.

[unapologeticallygay]

“Fuck your gender”

New York City Dyke March, June, 1995, via lesbianherstoryarchives /ig

[trans-axolotl]

one of the reasons it's really hard for a lot of intersex people when intersex topics are on the news cycle is because the public's reaction reveals how little anyone knows or cares about intersex people, including people who call themselves our allies. almost every time intersex topics are trending, the discourse surrounding them is filled with misinformation. people who only learned today what the word intersex means jump into conversations and act like an authority. endosex/dyadic/perisex people get tripped up over things that are basically intersex 101, with tons of endosex people incorrectly arguing about the definition of intersex, who "counts," DSD terminology, and so much more. i've seen multiple endosex people say today that they've been "warning intersex people" and that we should have known that transphobia would catch up with us eventually, which is an absolutely absurd thing to say given the fact that consistently over the past ten years, it has often been intersex people sounding the alarm on sex-testing policies and also the fact that many, many intersex people are also trans, and already are facing the impacts of transphobia. there is an absolute failure from the general public to take intersex identity seriously; people seem not even able to fathom that intersex people have a community, history, and our own political resources. instead, endosex people somehow seem to think they're helping by bringing up half-remembered information from their high school biology class which usually isn't even relevant at all.

and this frustrates me so fucking much. not because i want to deny the impacts of transphobic oppression--i'm a trans intersex person, trust me when i say i am intimately aware of transphobia. this frustrates me because there is no way we can achieve collective liberation if our "allies" fail to even engage with basic intersex topics and are seemingly unaware of the many forms of intersex oppression that we are already facing every fucking day. if you are not aware of compulsory dyadism, if you are not aware of interphobia, if you are not aware of the many different ways that intersex people are directly and often violently targeted--how the fuck do you think we're going to dismantle all of these systems of oppression?

if you were truly an intersex ally, you would already KNOW that this is not new, and would not be surprised--interphobia in sports has been going on for decades. you would know that we do have a community, an identity, a history--you would have already read/listened/watched to intersex resources that give you the background information you need for allyship. you would know that although there is a really distinct lack of resources and political education, that intersex people ARE developing a political understanding of ourselves and our oppression--Cripping Intersex by Celeste Orr and their framework of compulsory dyadism is one example of how we're theorizing our oppression. It's absolutely fucking wild to me how few people I've seen actually use words like "interphobia" "intersexism" "compulsory dyadism" or "intersex oppression"--endosex people are seemingly incapable of recognizing that there is already an entrenched system of oppression towards intersex people that violently reshapes our bodies, restricts our autonomy, and attempts to eradicate intersex through a variety of medical and legal means.

you cannot treat intersex people like an afterthought. not just because we're meaningful parts of your community and deserving of solidarity, but also because intersex oppression impacts everyone!!! especially trans community--trans people will not be free until intersex people are free, so much of transphobia is shaped by compulsory dyadism, the mythical sex binary, all these ideas of enforced "biological sex" that are just as fake as the gender binary.

it makes me absolutely fucking livid every time this shit happens because it becomes so abundantly clear to me how little the average endosex person knows about intersex issues and also how little the average endosex person cares about changing that. i don't know what to say to get you to care, to get you to change that, but we fucking need it to happen and i, personally, am tired of constantly being grateful when i meet an endosex person who knows the bare minimum. i think we have a right to expect better and to demand that if you're going to call yourself our ally, you actually fucking listen to us when we tell you what that means.

okay for endosex people to reblog.

[wouldgaysexfixthem]

would gay sex fix them?

[olisix823]

Happy Disabled Pride month!

[canisalbus]

What if I told you that RoobrickMarine went and wrote an entire novella starring my 16th century dog couple? It's very canon-adjacent, well researched and thoughtfully put together, has inspired me a ton during these past months and it's now publicly available at AO3. I highly recommend it.

✦ Separation ✦

[haggishlyhagging]

In 1847 the stereotypes for male and female writers were very rigid. Critics expected from a male writer strength, passion, and intellect, and from a woman writer they expected tact, refinement, and piety. They depended on these stereotypes so much, in fact, that they really didn't know how to proceed, what to say, or what to look for in a book if they were unsure of the author's sex.

So Jane Eyre created a tremendous sensation, and it was a problem for the Brontës. The name Currer Bell could be that of either a man or a woman and the narrator of Jane Eyre is Jane herself. The book is told as an autobiography. These things suggested that the author might have been a woman. On the other hand, the novel was considered to be excellent, strong, intelligent and, most of all, passionate. And therefore, the critics reasoned, it could not be written by a woman, and if it turned out that it was written by a woman, she had to be unnatural and perverted.

The reason for this is that the Victorians believed that decent women had no sexual feelings whatsoever—that they had sexual anesthesia. Therefore, when Jane says about Rochester that his touch "made her veins run fire, and her heart beat faster than she could count its throbs," the critics assumed this was a man writing about his sexual fantasies. If a woman was the author, then presumably she was writing from her own experience, and that was disgusting. In this case we can clearly see how women were not permitted the authority of their own experience if it happened to contradict the cultural stereotype.

But even more shocking than this to the Victorians was Jane's reply to Rochester, a very famous passage in the novel. He has told her he is going to marry another woman, an heiress, but that she can stay on as a servant. Jane answers him thus:

"I tell you I must go," I retorted, roused to something like passion. "Do you think I can stay to become nothing to you? Do you think I am an automaton, a machine without feeling and can bear to have my morsel of bread snatched from my lips and my drop of living water dashed from my cup? Do you think because I am poor, obscure, plain and little, I'm soulless and heartless? You think wrong. I have as much soul as you and full as much heart. And if God had gifted me with some beauty and much wealth, I should've made it as hard for you to leave me as it is now for me to leave you. I am not talking to you now through the medium of custom, conventionality, nor even of mortal flesh. It is my spirit that addresses your spirit, just as if both had passed through the grave and we stood at God's feet equal—as we are."

This splendid assertion violated not only the standards of sexual submission, which were believed to be women's duty and their punishment for Eve's crime, but it also went against standards of class submission, and obviously against religion. And this sort of rebellion was not feminine at all.

The reviews of Jane Eyre in 1847 and 1848 show how confused the critics were. Some of them said Currer Bell was a man. Some of them, including Thackeray, said a woman. One man, an American critic named Edgar Percy Whipple, said the Bells were a team, that Currer Bell was a woman who did the dainty parts of the book and brother Acton the rough parts. All kinds of circumstantial evidence were adduced to solve this problem, such as the details of housekeeping. Harriet Martineau said the book had to be the work of a woman or an upholsterer. And Lady Eastlake, who was a reviewer for one of the most prestigious journals, said it couldn't be a woman because no woman would dress her heroines in such outlandish clothes.

Eventually Charlotte Brontë revealed her identity, and then these attacks which had been general became personal. People introduced her as the author of a naughty book; they gossiped that she was Thackeray's mistress. They speculated on the causes of what they called "her alien and sour perspective on women." She felt during her entire short life that she was judged always on the basis of what was becoming in femininity and not as an artist.

-Elaine Showalter, ‘Women Writers and the Female Experience’ in Radical Feminism, Koedt et al (eds.)

[lemonsharkgirlfriend]

everyone's joking about a lesbian love triangle being the focus of rhaenyra/alicent/mysaria's stories in hotd s3 but that will literally be what happens when mysaria acts to uphold and support the image of rhaenyra as queen (or rhaenyra's duty) and alicent is kept prisoner (or a hidden but unavoidable reminder of rhaenyra's love). and so the love triangle will serve to represent rhaenyra's internal conflict between love and duty

[wh0-is-lily]

An Early Model of Vivienne Westwood, Jordan 📎

[seenthisepisode]

“jensen wouldn't be able to differentiate between me and cas” misha my dude jensen is not even able to differentiate between dean winchester and himself so

[rrcraft-and-lore]

In addition to my Monkey Man post from earlier, the always kind & sweet Aparna Verma (author of The Phoenix King, check it out) asked that I do a thread on Hijras, & more of the history around them, South Asia, mythology (because that's my thing), & the positive inclusion of them in Monkey Man which I brought up in my gushing review.

Hijra: They are the transgender, eunuch, or intersex people in India who are officially recognized as the third sex throughout most countries in the Indian subcontinent. The trans community and history in India goes back a long way as being documented and officially recognized - far back as 12th century under the Delhi Sultanate in government records, and further back in our stories in Hinduism. The word itself is a Hindi word that's been roughly translated into English as "eunuch" commonly but it's not exactly accurate.

Hijras have been considered the third sex back in our ancient stories, and by 2014 got official recognition to identify as the third gender (neither male or female) legally. Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and India have accepted: eunuch, trans, intersex people & granted them the proper identification options on passports and other government official documents.

But let's get into some of the history surrounding the Hijra community (which for the longest time has been nomadic, and a part of India's long, rich, and sometimes, sadly, troubled history of nomadic tribes/people who have suffered a lot over the ages. Hijras and intersex people are mentioned as far back as in the Kama Sutra, as well as in the early writings of Manu Smriti in the 1st century CE (Common Era), specifically said that a third sex can exist if possessing equal male and female seed.

This concept of balancing male/female energies, seed, and halves is seen in two places in South Asian mythos/culture and connected to the Hijra history.

First, we have Aravan/Iravan (romanized) - who is also the patron deity of the transgender community. He is most commonly seen as a minor/village deity and is depicted in the Indian epic Mahabharata. Aravan is portrayed as having a heroic in the story and his self-sacrifice to the goddess Kali earns him a boon.

He requests to be married before his death. But because he is doomed to die so shortly after marriage, no one wants to marry him.

No one except Krishna, who adopts his female form Mohini (one of the legendary temptresses in mythology I've written about before) and marries him. It is through this union of male, and male presenting as female in the female form of Mohini that the seed of the Hijras is said to begun, and why the transgender community often worships Aravan and, another name for the community is Aravani - of/from Aravan.

But that's not the only place where a gender non conforming divine representation can be seen. Ardhanarishvara is the half female form of lord Shiva, the destroyer god.

Shiva combines with his consort Parvarti and creates a form that represents the balancing/union between male/female energies and physically as a perfectly split down the middle half-male half-female being. This duality in nature has long been part of South Asian culture, spiritual and philosophical beliefs, and it must be noted the sexuality/gender has often been displayed as fluid in South Asian epics and the stories. It's nothing new.

Many celestial or cosmic level beings have expressed this, and defied modern western limiting beliefs on the ideas of these themes/possibilities/forms of existence.

Ardhanarishvara signifies "totality that lies beyond duality", "bi-unity of male and female in God" and "the bisexuality and therefore the non-duality" of the Supreme Being.

Back to the Hijra community.

They have a complex and long history. Throughout time, and as commented on in the movie, Monkey Man, the Hijra community has faced ostracization, but also been incorporated into mainstream society there. During the time of the Dehli Sultanate and then later the Mughal Empire, Hijras actually served in the military and as military commanders in some records, they were also servants for wealthy households, manual laborers, political guardians, and it was seen as wise to put women under the protection of Hijras -- they often specifically served as the bodyguards and overseers of harems. A princess might be appointed a Hijra warrior to guard her.

But by the time of British colonialism, anti-Hijra laws began to come in place folded into laws against the many nomadic tribes of India (also shown in part in Monkey Man with Kid (portrayed by Dev Patel) and his family, who are possibly

one of those nomadic tribes that participated in early theater - sadly by caste often treated horribly and relegated to only the performing arts to make money (this is a guess based on the village play they were performing as no other details were given about his family).

Hijras were criminalized in 1861 by the Indian Penal Code enforced by the British and were labeled specifically as "The Hijra Problem" -- leading to an anti-Hijra campaign across the subcontinent with following laws being enacted: punishing the practices of the Hijra community, and outlawing castration (something many Hijra did to themselves). Though, it should be noted many of the laws were rarely enforced by local Indian officials/officers. But, the British made a point to further the laws against them by later adding the Criminal Tribes Act in 1871, which targeted the Hijra community along with the other nomadic Indian tribes - it subjected them to registration, tracking/monitoring, stripping them of children, and their ability to sequester themselves in their nomadic lifestyle away from the British Colonial Rule.

Today, things have changed and Hijras are being seen once again in a more positive light (though not always and this is something Monkey Man balances by what's happened to the community in a few scenes, and the heroic return/scene with Dev and his warriors). All-hijra communities exist and sort of mirror the western concept of "found families" where they are safe haven/welcoming place trans folks and those identifying as intersex.

These communities also have their own secret language known as Hijra Farsi, which is loosely based on Hindi, but consists of a unique vocabulary of at least 1,000 words.

As noted above, in 2014, the trans community received more legal rights.

Specifically: In April 2014, Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan declared transgender to be the third gender in Indian law in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India.

Hijras, Eunuchs, apart from binary gender, be treated as "third gender" for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. Transgender persons' right to decide their self-identified gender is also upheld and the Centre and State Governments are directed to grant legal recognition of their gender identity such as male, female or as third gender.

I've included some screenshots of (some, not all, and certainly not the only/definitive reads) books people can check out about SOME of the history. Not all again. This goes back ages and even our celestial beings/creatures have/do display gender non conforming ways.

There are also films that touch on Hijra history and life. But in regards to Monkey Man, which is what started this thread particularly and being asked to comment - it is a film that positively portrayed India's third sex and normalized it in its depiction. Kid the protagonist encounters a found family of Hijras at one point in the story (no spoilers for plot) and his interactions/acceptance, living with them is just normal. There's no explaining, justifying, anything to/for the audience. It simply is. And, it's a beautiful arc of the story of Kid finding himself in their care/company.

[youngpettyqueen]

grabbing people and going look at me. listen to me. its not "omg the Doctor is finally gay now!!" the Doctor has been queer this entire goddamn time. 9 kissed Jack on the lips in 2005. 10, 11, and 12 openly discussed being attracted to men. 11 ALSO kissed men on the lips. 13 was in love with Yasmin Khan, and openly expressed attraction to women. 14 openly expressed being attracted to a man. these are just off the top of my head I may be missing things

the point is that 15 is not the first Doctor to be openly queer and he is not the first Doctor to become romantically involved with someone of the same sex. stop believing the headlines from Disney that this is the first time the Doctor has been queer onscreen. we are NOT letting them take credit they dont deserve

[shadystranger]

This is shot like a porno

[wouldgaysexfixthem]

would gay sex fix them?

[mrmousetolliver]

Untitled (1977) illustration for The Joy of Gay Sex drawn by Michael Leonard. Michael Leonard was trained and worked as a commercial illustrator. Desiring to express a more personal vision, in the early 1970's he began exhibiting his paintings and after his first one man show in 1974 he began to leave commercial illustrations behind. Besides illustrating The Joy of Gay Sex, in 1985 he was asked to paint a portrait of Queen Elizabeth II. At first declining, he changed his mind if she would agree to his terms: No regalia, informal dress and with one of her dogs. To his surprise she agreed and the portrait is now in the National Portrait Gallery.