Hot sluts! - Page 2

THE SEX ISSUE: Our favorite sleazy, easy, and just plain sexy people, places, and things in San Francisco

|
(59)
Kink.com model jessie Cox takes her knocks at Kink's HQ in the Mission Armory
PHOTO BY PAT MAZZERA


SLUTTIEST BOYS

Dan and JD, a.k.a. Two Knotty Boys, are no strangers to the twists and loops of BDSM performance. Native San Franciscans both, they not only create mesmerizing stage shows in which they bind nubile flesh to their will, but also produce end results so visionary that you'd be excused for leaving off the "fetish" and dubbing it merely "fashion." A ever-so-tightly cinched halter top of gleaming white cord, a barely there cobweb bikini that requires an expert hand to remove, overlays of skirts and dresses that hobble the wearer seductively and at the same time, show off the contours of the female body. It's neat, it's adjustable, it's sexily professional work. It's easy to see why the duo has filmed more than 100 video tutorials and taught countless workshops in the Bay and beyond for their eager fans: the Boys have tied up hundreds of women but, unlike some humiliation artists, they have never tied down their subjects' beauty and comfort.

www.twoknottyboys.com

 

SLUTTIEST PARTIERS

Was it written on the rock hard abs of some San Franciscan sex god that all coital gatherings in this city have to be stark and stoic? Thankfully, the colorful gang over at Kinky Salon never got that memo. Creators Polly and Scott have created a swinger's playland party in the pink and purple rooms of Mission Control whose focus is flair: playful costume themes have focused on everything from kitty cats (the upcoming Pussyfest) to undersea adventure and fairy tale characters. You've never lived, it would seem, until your Snow White costume has been peeled off on the couch in the Harem Room by Tinkerbell and Captain Hook. More recently, the team has created a new magazine to celebrate the vast array of sexualities that their partygoers lay claim to: San Fran Sexy. The rag includes erotic history lessons from sexologist Dr. Carol Queen, memoir pieces from Bawdy Storytelling's Dixie De La Tour, photos from recent Kinky Salon soirees, and news of sensual events to come.

www.kinkysalon.com

 

SLUTTIEST ROCKERS

"If the Meat Sluts were a Pink Lady, we'd be Rizzo! We ain't no prudes like Sandy!" says BB Rumproast of rockin' band the Meat Sluts (www.myspace.com/themeatsluts). In a world of vegan dogs, her XXX-chromosomed trash rock-punk explosion is an all-beef foot long. The four women are cookin' on stage — literally. In addition to the occasional back up steak dancing alongside their guitar licks and growls, the Meat Sluts have shared space at shows with a live hot dog-maker and a meat grinder flinging sausage and baloney onto hungry fans. It's messy, carnivorous fun — the perfect expression of the group's embrace of hedonistic appetite that could care less about what's considered "ladylike" at the table of the musical establishment. "We are loose and crazy and not ashamed of it! We love man meat! We love weenies! Beef baloney, Slim Jims, T-bones, bring it ON!" says Rumproast. To quote the Sluts' rager rally cry "Johnny Con Carne," that's what we call makin' bacon.

The Meat Sluts play Dodgyfest 3, Oct 2, 7 p.m., $10. Thee Parkside, 1600 17th St., SF. www.theeparkside.com

 

Comments

I do except Burning Man!

-marc

Posted by marcos on Sep. 27, 2010 @ 12:28 pm

PLEASE reconsider such a cover in your next sex issue or put an "18 and up" cover over the cover! The Guardian is available on every other city block in newspaper vending boxes that are eye-level with toddlers and small children. Up until today, my six year-old had never heard or read the word "Slut." I suppose he might see it scratched on the door of a public restroom or overhear it on a city street, but seeing on the front page of omnipresent city paper makes it harder to dismiss as a silly or bad word. "If it's so silly or bad, why is the newspaper using it?" Moreover, he now associates women with the term sluts thanks to the nude woman on the cover. TO THE EDITORS OF THE GUARDIAN: CHILDREN LIVE IN THIS CITY. HAVE SOME RESPECT FOR THEM AND THEIR PARENTS!!

Posted by Leigh on Sep. 26, 2010 @ 7:57 pm

Especially as the kid dodges the dirty needles left in the street by the junkies, wonders what all of those emaciated women are doing in the doorways in the Tenderloin and what the sad throngs of homeless folks are doing all over Market and Civic Center, let alone the fellows in the Castro with their cheeks hanging out of their chaps, yes?

You wouldn't want to corrupt the child's mind with a "dirty" word after those harmless images, now would you? That's the important thing.

Posted by Guest Johnny Wendell on Sep. 26, 2010 @ 8:47 pm

"If it's so silly or bad, why is the newspaper using it?"
No six year old said that.
And if one had, sorry lady, it's your job to raise your kid.
It is not the responsibility of the rest of society to make itself COMPLETELY child friendly to protect your sensibilities, which, let's face it, were the ones actually offended.
Sex is a part of human existence.
Get over it.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 27, 2010 @ 5:19 pm

Here are some responses to you post above, marc –

You say:

“Women in power does not end sexism just like a black president in power does not end racism.”

We agree on this point.

However, excluding women from power does not end sexism, either.

You say:

“The problem is structures of power-over and how they are abused, not who is driving power-over others.”

The problem is both.

If a group is excluded from the power structure, its needs and rights will be neglected, at best.

You say:

“Patriarchal males don't tend to marry powerful feminist women like Sarah Low Daly…”

Is this the same Sarah Low Daly who moved to Fairfield to get away from her husband?

You say:

“Feminism is the product of women doing the theoretical and practical work of feminism, not of elected bodies, which tend to lag behind on these matters.”

True. But it helps if elected bodies don’t engineer revanchist backslides, as happened in January 2001 with the SF board of supes.

You say:

“My thesis is that if men who would rape had a safe opportunity to get off, through publicly funded prostitution services, that would probably tamp down on their use of sex as power-over women in a violent manner.”

It would help some men. But not those who get their rocks off precisely through committing acts of real violence. Not to mention men who get their rocks off by murdering their sexual partners in the act of sex.

You say:

“the San Francisco Bay Guardian is and has been a bastion of male clubbiness, with the women doing the real work of journalism, Savannah Blackwell, Tali Woodward, Rachel Brahinsky, Sarah Phelan and Rebecca Bowe.”

The women you mention do make contributions. However, the Guardian’s policies and priorities are set by guys. When was the last time The Guardian ran a serious article about male chauvinism in SF politics?

Also, take a look at the ads in The Guardian and the subjects of most articles. The paper is largely aimed at young, single, straight, male stoners and hipsters.

Which is fine. They’re entitled to have a journalist voice just like anybody else.

But what’s progressive about it?

Posted by Arthur Evans on Sep. 27, 2010 @ 8:14 pm

"However, excluding women from power does not end sexism, either."

The presence of women advancing through a patriarchal power structure, if anything, is a function of how well women who see patriarchal power are able to assimilate themselves into the patriarchy. There are rare exceptions.

"If a group is excluded from the power structure, its needs and rights will be neglected, at best."

The control of the power structure over who is able to wield power-over is what neglects needs and rights. It is nearly impossible to use power-over to achieve power-to along with power-with. The only time power-over concedes is when its own reproduction is threatened.

"Is this the same Sarah Low Daly who moved to Fairfield to get away from her husband?"

Are you now clairvoyant? I thought that Daly was to have had sent Sarah away? Their family choices are theirs and theirs alone.

"True. But it helps if elected bodies don’t engineer revanchist backslides, as happened in January 2001 with the SF board of supes."

If anything, government has served the needs of women in need better since 2001 than it had during the female dominated Boards of Supervisors in the 1990s.

"It would help some men. But not those who get their rocks off precisely through committing acts of real violence. Not to mention men who get their rocks off by murdering their sexual partners in the act of sex."

There are always end point extrema that are criminal no matter what, but by the fact that they are at the extremes means that they are not very prevalent at all, indeed rare. But the vast bulk of the bell curve of sexual abuse would be eliminated were such men satisfied through safer means.

"The women you mention do make contributions. However, the Guardian’s policies and priorities are set by guys. When was the last time The Guardian ran a serious article about male chauvinism in SF politics?"

When I used to ask my mom "Why, if there was Mothers Day and Fathers Day, when was Childrens Day?" she would respond "every day is childrens day." So with the SFBG, when the editorial climate is determined by the same men, with their same friends and same political fixations, every day is patriarchy day at the SFBG.

The Guardian is all that we have, and compared to BeyondChron, is a stellar journalistic outlet. We're fucked.

-marc

Posted by marcos on Sep. 28, 2010 @ 10:51 am

In the entire discussion prompted by the Hot Sluts photo, I haven't noticed anyone mentioning the fact that violence implies force. If a man hurts or rapes a woman, or does something to her that she objects to, he is using force. I think that is the issue. However, I don't see how feminism is being set back, or societal violence perpetuated - by a man spanking a woman who likes being spanked (or vice versa). If it's all consensual and everyone is getting what they want, I don't see the problem. To criticize safe, consensual acts performed in private is not progressive, it's Puritanical.

Posted by Shanan O. on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 3:36 pm

Calling a consensual spanking "violence" makes about as much sense as calling consensual borrowing "theft," or calling a boxing match "assault."

You seem to be saying that a certain set of people's sexual preferences are not OK. Spanking might not be sexy to you, but there are many, many people who like to be spanked. I assume you mean well, but it seems to me that when you condemn the celebration of the kind of sex that many women want to have, you're taking an anti-feminist position.

Posted by Guest Noah on Dec. 02, 2010 @ 11:31 pm

reading the phrase 'celibate Jesus lady" made my nuts tingle.

Posted by Guest on Apr. 04, 2011 @ 9:11 pm

Related articles

  • The Guardian Guide to Burning Man

    Our guide leads you to the best art and parties on the playa -- and helps you prepare for the journey of a lifetime

  • Cannabis Club Guide

    Cannabis Issue: Testing the tokes at Bay Area dispensaries

  • GOLDIES 2010

    Spotlights, please! Our 22nd annual Guardian Outstanding Local Discovery Awards celebrate the best and brightest in Bay Area arts and culture

  • Also from this author