The Emotion of Sex (NSFW)

At what point does sex become, to use that most hated of cliches, making love? Where does one begin and the other end? Is it a question of time with that person? Is it a question of familiarity? Is it emotion? Is it something entirely different? There is a definitive and marked difference between fucking someone and having sex with someone. There's even a difference between that and making love. But, I'll bet if you think about it, you'd say that the method in which the physical act is carried out is completely different in each circumstance. So, therefore, by that logic, it's easy to say that sex and the definition of it is entirely physical.

Sex is, without a shadow of a doubt, the engine of life. If there are any Futurama fans reading this, they'll know about the episode where Fry downloads a Lucy Liu-bot and proceeds to have a completely hollow and empty relationship with her based purely on the physical. In an attempt to show the error of his ways, Fry's subjected to an educational film on the dangers of meaningless sex and how it is the ultimate downfall of humanity. In between laughing at this episode, it got me thinking.

If we, as individuals, simply wanted sex and nothing more, we could all go out right and do it. Provided we had the means and the opportunity. Take escort services. There's dozens of them across the nation, no doubt. For the right price, a man or woman could have utterly meaningless sex with a random stranger and that would sate the physical need for it. Or would it?

In many cases, people will often tell you that sex on its own is nothing. There has to be an emotional core to it. It can be for the right reasons or the wrong reasons. Vengeance, for one. Showing someone how much you miss them, for another. Many reasons. There is always an emotion linked to it. So to remove it is simply to not have sex. It's simply you and some other person engaging in what is essentially a physical act shared. It could be the exact same as shaking their hand. There is contact between two bodies, but nothing is added or gained.

There has to be knowledge of one another and knowledge of self. Consider what it would be like to engage in your wildest sexual fantasy. Remove the intended person. Insert another person who has absolutely nothing to do with the intended person. The thought, I'd wager, doesn't become half as pleasurable as it was initially. We connect sex with people. People we care about. When it is connected to people we don't care about, it is ultimately nothing and is very often a futile exercise.

I'll agree that some people do find pleasure in the physical act, alone. But deep down, if they were truly and completely honest with themselves, it may be a case of them telling themselves and everyone else that they enjoy it. We need the emotion in order for sex to be what we want it to be.

Iron Man 2 - A Review

If you've read other reviews of 'Iron Man 2' and have come here looking for a different opinion, I'm afraid you're wrong. I was naturally skeptical about Empire's and even Culch.ie's review - they weren't able, I thought, to grasp the inner complexities or the textures that a good comic-book film should have. This latest craze of saying "Oh man, I love comic books" is prone to giving films with this heritage an unfair advantage or disadvantage. Reviewers seem to either overly berate or unduly praise a film because of it.

In this case, it didn't do it any favours and it didn't help its case. No pun intended. As a true and avid lover of the entire Marvel universe, I was sold on this from the get-go. I was going to see it, no matter what the reviews said. They are all, by the way, correct in their opinions. Without spoilering the shit out of you, I will say the following -

• Nick Fury has a somewhat big role in the film.
• There is a blink-and-you'll-miss-it piece of film from another Marvel property.
• The infamous Captain America shield makes an appearance. In a comedy scene. No, really.
• There is an after-credits sting. It's worth staying put for.

And that's all I'll say on that front. The film is glorious in its spectacle. There are tons of explosions, over-the-top choreography, zingy one-liners and Scarlett Johansson getting undressed. That alone had me forking over a tenner. Favreau goes out of his way to make sure that there are few dark areas in the film. Too often, the sequel is seen as the 'darker' film - meaning that the third has to be twee as fuck. Look at 'Return Of The Jedi' - it had Ewoks. While this didn't have Ewoks, it did have glitter. But that's half the charm of the Iron Man series. It's a suspension of disbelief, brainless entertainment - there's no hidden messages or even a deep and labyrinthine plot.

It does, however, suffer from crowbarring in too many elements into the plot. I get that Favreau and Theroux - who deserves most of the blame - have a duty to fit in pointers and references to the future Avengers film and so forth. It's frustrating - there are some scenes that are quite brilliant. Sam Rockwell's slimy greaseball character in Justin Hammer pretty much steals the show on the villain front. Mickey Rourke, who I personally hate, doesn't really get up to much. At least in the last one, Jeff Bridges made an effort to glower and roar at people. Here, Mickey looks half-bored and blubbers on in Russian for a few scenes before being offed by Iron Man & War Machine.

Despite all these faults, it's still good. The action scenes are brilliant and ScarJo and Gwyneth Paltrow are both engaging and Favreau's role is beefed up somewhat. What the film needed in order to make it better was a more finely-honed script. Theroux's not exactly a dab hand at this. I'm not saying somebody like Brian Helgeland was needed - but someone with a bit more experience. The overall story just feels like they were trying to fit in too many elements. A veteran screenwriter would have caught this and either excised the bullshit or make a bigger film. As such, Theroux simply puts everything in and doesn't allow you to connect to the story.

Then again, it's not that kind of film. It really is a case of all sizzle and no steak. But that's the charm of it. If you poke at it long enough, it will seem shit. You have to take it at face value for what it is - a big, dumbass summer film. And enjoy it for that.

Feminism - A Discussion

I stumbled upon this interesting Flickr photostream today. Basically, the idea is that people get their picture taken holding a piece of paper. On this piece of paper is their own view of feminism. It ranges from the intriguing to the humourous to the somewhat backward. In sort, what does feminism mean in this day and age?

For me, it was never an issue. My mother was the boss in our house. If I so much as spoke out of turn, my head would be buried in the wall. Now, I'm not saying she was abusive, but you get what I mean. Coupled with the fact I had a big sister, it meant that I was pretty much thought to think of women as equals, or as the case may be, my betters.

I'm older now, and I still think the same. Any relationship I've had with women, be it platonic or romantic, has always been based on mutual respect. "K", for instance, is FAR smarter than me. She's an NUI graduate with a 2.1 degree, ridiculously clever and comes from a family of academics. So there's that. Granted, I could beat the crap out of her when it comes to film trivia, but in everything else, she wins. Hands down.

It amazes me that, in this day and age, discrimination occurs. My own opinion is that it's an age / generation thing. I'm not saying my own generation is completely devoid of discrimination, but it's a lot less prevalent. Older men were brought up to believe that women were frail and delicate. Science has pretty much proved this to be completely false, given the fact they have a higher pain threshold and all the rest of it.

I'm a huge fan of 'Mad Men'. I always wonder how accurate its description of male/female interaction in the office environment. Was the sexism really that blatant? And what, exactly, did it stem from? Misogyny? Upbringing? Pack mentality? And does this still occur today? For me, feminism means women having choice. They have a choice to be mothers and wives or be academics or business women. And being respected for making a choice.

I know one or two feminists who, for lack of a better word, look down on women who have chosen a more "traditional" lifestyle. I've always thought that was wrong. If a woman wants to be a housewife and raise a family, that is entirely her business. If she wants to go on and be successful in her chosen field, she can do that too. It's choice - she can choose to do whatever she wants. And, for me anyway, that's what feminism boils down to - being able to choose and being respected for it.