COG Carol Rev. Mary gives new life to adolescent sexual freedom

Also, Check out:

Message-ID: <45030asstr$>
Return-Path: <>
X-Originating-Email: []
From: "Carol C" <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Original-Message-ID: <>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Oct 2003 11:48:05.0167 (UTC) FILETIME=[593A43F0:01C39D49]
X-ASSTR-Original-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 06:48:04 -0500
Subject: {ASSM} Rev. Mary gives new life to adolescent sexual freedom
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 22:10:09 -0500
Approved: <>
X-Archived-At: <URL:>
X-Moderator-Contact: ASSTR ASSM moderation <>
X-Story-Submission: <>
X-Moderator-ID: dennyw, gill-bates

 I have discovered, thanks to Mom's Friend, that there is a new generation of sexually-liberal families whose practices, while more structured than those of the women who abandoned the Children of God and other 60s communes and sects, are nonetheless soundly theologically-based and (in my opinion) socially, psychologically and emotionally sound for children and the adults they will become. All that I write is, of course anecdotal and edited with a view to the ASSM audience in a manner that I hope will get across my point. But whereas my earlier writing was pessimistic that sexual liberality could survive in a family-based (as compared with commune-based) environment, I believe that this new religious movement has made the right compromises and that by allowing adolescents to govern themselves fits within the law of so-called child neglect and abuse. Those laws were drafted to impose fundamentalist Christian dogma on everybody in the face of human (and especially of hard-wired child- and adolescent-behavior patterns). But then, hypocrisy and sex meet up often in life and society, don't they? In connection with a research project looking into certain aspects of sex education and on religious attitudes towards sexual realities I ran across a British newspaper report about the conditioning of young girls for the polygamous life by parents who are members of breakaway polygamous Mormon sects in America: (I am a junior researcher of political and economic matters, and occasionally my science and my art and my life do converge.) It occurred to me then that much the same pattern occurs with every religious group, and every cultural group too. When I was last in Our Town, I spoke to Mom's Friend about this, trying to find out more about the Children of God's indoctrination of children of members, and thinking of Miriam Williams's book about Moses David's sect (and that had perfectly defined Mom's relationship to it), "Heaven's Harlots", but she said I would be better off talking to Rev. Mary, who has a church on the West Coast that is very much concerned with bringing up children sexually-aware, and with whom Mom's Friend shares many beliefs. Rev. Mary was ordained by the Universal Life Church (an "open" church, meaning you can believe whatever you want or nothing at all, and they will ordain anybody) founded by the late Rev. Kirby James Hensley, who is said to have been illiterate. There's a newsgroup devoted to it, alt.religion.universal-life, and there's quite a bit of information on-line, but that really has nothing to do with Rev. Mary, who, with her mail-order Bachelor of Divinity degree and her ULC ordination runs her church the way she sees fit, apparently subsidized by a couple of wealthy like-minded matrons. (Readers will remember that Mom's Friend is a trust fund brat, too.) Mom's Friend arranged for me to visit Rev. Mary for a weekend, and I flew out to see her. Rev. Mary's church has a couple of hundred members, mostly single parents and most of those single mothers. Most are college educated, employed professionals. Some come from a background similar to my Mom's; others simply rebelled against religious suppression of their own sexual expression and society's imposition of what are, basically, establishment-Christian precepts of marriage, sex and child-raising. After all, only mainstream Christianity, of all religions, pretends that marriage is the union, for life, of one man and one woman in a holy relationship sanctified and mandated by God. Judaism and Islam consider marriage a private contract, extinguishable at will (subject to a "get" or a "talaq" as the case may be). The only trouble with that explanation is that both religions (well, Christianity too) are male-centered and so the contract is one-sided. But those rules are thousands of years old, and from an obsolete era. I raise them only to prove that Christianity need not have the last word on those with whom we have sex, and at what age. Indeed, all religions, all permutations and varieties of Christianity included, allow and encourage sexual union from the "nubile age", which I take to mean the age of pubescence, of a minimum of hair around genitals (as Sharia says), although some may disagree (to say anything else is a tautology, isn't it, and a circular reasoning designed to justify keeping penises out of vaginas, but let's not get into that). Romeo and Juliet were about 14 and 13, respectively. And I had my first vaginal sex in that tumble on the floor when I was not yet 12. Well, the law ignores reality and most of what I have been writing over the past year, and it gets hysterical in many jurisdictions: Kansas Statutes sec. 21-3522(a) reads: Unlawful voluntary sexual relations is engaging in voluntary: (1) Sexual intercourse; (2) sodomy; or (3) lewd fondling or touching with a child who is 14 years of age but less than 16 years of age and the offender is less than 19 years of age and less than four years of age older than the child and the child and the offender are the only parties involved and are members of the opposite sex."

 But we're not in Kansas, are we?

 Dear reader, you can go back to my October 2002 story on the age of consent,

 and on how we loved to mimic Nat King Cole's 1956 song "They Tried to Tell Us We're Too Young": I arrived at Rev. Mary's on Friday afternoon and stayed through Sunday. She said that virtually all her Church's teen work is managed and supervised by teens themselves, lately led by Rev. Mary's own daughter, who is 16. Previously one of her nieces had the responsibility. But teen work ends at age 18, which is when most of the kids are off to college and of course they are legally emancipated. There are some anomalies: in many places 16-year-olds are free to have sex, but in some places 18-year-olds are at risk in being involved, even indirectly, with the sexual conduct of minors. Anyway, college kids have their own social and self-help groups, and they have exposure outside the closed circuit that would put younger teens at risk of STDs if allowed to consort with them. Rev. Mary's Parsonage is quite a nice place, and it has a pool and hot tub, and meeting facilities. On Saturday mornings the pool is reserved for pre-teens, say 7 to 12 years old, and they swim nude with parental supervision. In traditional naturist fashion, it's "look, don't touch" but unlike the naturists, nobody at Rev. Mary's really stops any of those kids from looking closely, or even staring; in fact I got the feeling that staring at the sex parts that were somewhat bigger than your own, or that belonged to someone of the opposite sex, was positively encouraged. It's just touching that the kids aren't allowed to do below nubile age. The point of the swim sessions, if I understand it correctly, is to promote bodily awareness as well as providing for pure socializing and sport. Among the 11- and 12-year olds there will always be a few pubescent and a couple of fully-developed kids. As most Church families are, in many ways, far more staid and mainstream in the sense that they don't deliberately go around undressed all the time in the family, and probably aren't nearly so sexually open and obvious as we were, this seems to be where kids see the human body in different stages of development. Rev. Mary told me that it was very important for parents to admire their kids' sex organs and to tell their kids as much as they needed to know, at a particular age, about sex and constantly to reassure kids that penis and vagina are going to bring them the most fantastic pleasure as soon as they get bigger, and that nobody should ever be allowed to tell them that sexual pleasure is sinful or bad. A positive word from parents is not the same, however, as seeing and experiencing the stages of human development and seeing the different attitudes of different-aged kids, and especially kids of just a few months or a year older, to sex. Kids take their cues, after all, from those just a bit older. Swimming at the pool and lounging around its perimeter let kids do exactly that. And it got them ready for what would come next: the fun of relating to each other as girls and boys, sexual beings, and constantly admiring each other's differences and each others delights. Rev. Mary would say that whether parents should let their kids watch them at sex is a matter for the parents to decide; I had previously thought the exposure to normal human behavior was a good thing. I suppose that leaving the decision to the parents is appropriate. I also suppose it's not an important issue in this era when any little kid who gets curious can find a picture of sex on the Internet, Net Nanny notwithstanding. I know that in a naturist environment an erection is a source of embarrassment, and girls mainly keep their legs closed. I got the impression that there was no such inhibition at Rev. Mary's. Maybe it was for my benefit, but when a small kid with quite a big penis got an even bigger erection while lying down on a chaise longue near the pool, Rev. Mary used the occasion to give a brief lecture about sex to anybody who cared to listen: how sex is the expression of godly love, how genitals grow and their owners get urges to get close and to touch and to kiss, and how a girl will love to kiss the penis and put it in her mouth and the boy to kiss and lick the girl's vagina, and this is foreplay, and then the penis goes into the vagina and semen comes out, and semen is the godly life fluid and is wonderful to give and wonderful to receive. And that as soon as kids are ready for sex they will know it; their genitals will be bigger and feel so good when touched. And kids masturbate and they have sex, and they should talk to their parents about these things because parents want them to be safe and to have fun and to have sex as soon as they are ready. A lot of the kids obviously got bored and stopped listening after the first 30 seconds; but they'd probably heard it lots of times already anyway. A girl nearby gave a brief lab session of her own when Rev. Mary mentioned vagina; she splayed her legs and, absentmindedly and as if just to deal with an itch, spread her labia wide enough for her clitoris and vagina to come into view. The boy with the erection smiled, and he rubbed his penis with the palm of his hand as if by way of reply. Then the lecture was over, the few kids who had paid attention were back in the pool. Once the boy with the big penis was ignored, he went into the pool too. The parents serving as lifeguards hadn't even turned their heads. All the adults wore bathing costumes, so their penises and other sex parts were anyway out of view. Saturday evenings were for teen club meetings. Here was where Rev. Mary's lifestyle most approaches what Mom's Friend tried to do: leaving kids to themselves to follow their urges. But unlike Mom's Friend's House, there was no nudity, no nude dancing at the start. Not until the kids felt the urge, as I'll describe presently: not until they got terribly excited, terribly aroused, and terribly naked. And terribly sensual. Rev. Mary, in her own way (and I'm not a lawyer so I'm not drawing any conclusions as to whether she is right) tries to reflect current law in matters of so-called child abuse. She refuses to stop children from doing what comes naturally to them, and she wants them to be informed and safe. She also insists that parents know what their kids are up to. These are mostly single parents, they are not naive and they did not get to be single parents by being chaste. All the kids who attend the teen meetings on Saturday, at least those born and raised in her Church will have been initiated. If for Rev. Mary, marriage is the momentary coming together of a male and a female of nubile age by informed consent, Friday evenings are when such kids, who through Rev. Mary's daughter (usually) have made it known that they are ready for sex, do it for the first time. I don't know that such initiations are obligatory, but, as I was told, they are fun: both for the kids and for the kids' parents. Rev. Mary's church is female-driven. She demands that: -- sex be only by consent and never coerced and that a teen have a continuous dialog with his or her parent about sex in general and his or her sexual activity in particular -- the woman be in control and be assured the opportunity for an orgasm every time if she wants one -- sex be safe (no minor may have sex with a nonmember of the church: this is the "closed circuit" regime that Mom's Friend also enforced, apparently after discussion with Rev. Mary) -- parents be aware and interested in their kids' physical and mental development. Nudity should never be a cause for embarrassment, inhibition and shame should be banished. Children should be proud of their genitals and happy for their parents to see them nude and aroused, even masturbating and having sex. Parents should make a fuss over their kids' sex parts and their kids' sex fun. Whether parents should allow their kids to see the parents having sex is undecided. (I might also include two outlaw practices that Rev. Mary railed against: atheism and homosexuality. But in fact she wasn't being discriminatory, or rather condemnatory, of others: rather she was reflecting the hope shared by all her own congregation that their kids would grow up with healthy heterosexual sexual appetites and that they would share, in a broad sense, their church's theological beliefs.) My visit had been scheduled for a Friday when there would be an initiation, kids having vaginal sex for the very first time, with their mothers present to give love and support. This was quite different from the "defloration parties" I have written about, although in the end they come to the same thing. Initiation is directed by the kids' peers; and aside from the boy participant everybody there and everybody watching is female: usually four or five girls, plus the mothers of the boy and girl. If the mother isn't available, or there isn't a mother, then there has to be an adult female proxy: a grandmother, a family friend, etc. What drives this event, it seems to me, is the mystical attachment between mothers and their sons' penises. I have written about this before: It is related to the Oedipus complex, but it's more than that. From the day when a mainstream mother forever loses sight of her son's penis out of his false modesty, his socially-imposed shame, or a fear of inadequacy imposed on him by a dominant father, her mystical relationship with that son is broken. A boy typically discovers shame some time before new hormones bring him his first pubic hairs and his first pubic growth. Without that barrier, family relationships are far different, as I found with the boy and girl who still live with Mom's Friend and who have shared their happy sex life with all of us ever since they first discovered how to make love. My research so far has shown that parent- and peer-led orchestrations of defloration are common, in the United States as in other cultures. The issue may be one of class rather than anything else, I'm not yet sure. Rev. Mary said kids at her church arranged these every few months. They would double up the occasion if possible and have two girls and two boys paired off to have sex one after the other to provide more support for the kids and more confidence for the parents. It reduced the chances for temporary psychological blockage -- impotence -- and embarrassment. If possible and appropriate, she tried to have siblings come out on the same day, It was preferable (and more efficient for reasons of management, I might add) if both boy and girl were virgins, but that wasn't always possible. The Friday that I arrived, a girl of 16 and her brother, 14, were to have sex for the first time: she with a boy of 15 and he with a girl of 13. All had been members of Rev. Mary's church from toddlerhood. A month or so previously the girls had visited the doctor, a church member who was, it seems, formerly a Seventh-Day-Adventist missionary but who had decided there was a better way to bring up his son and had converted to Rev. Mary's church. According to Rev. Mary, the doctor examined the girls, reassured them (as he had to reassure all the young girls who came to see him) that their vaginas were perfectly normal and perfectly capable of receiving a penis and giving intense pleasure, and prescribed them birth control pills. He also lectured them on STDs, and about the health risk of relationships outside the church. He would see the boys, too; but according to Rev. Mary that visit was more as psychologist, to impress on boys the need for care and love, and perhaps to discuss the mechanics of sex. On the day, the four kids spent an hour and a half together bonding before the event; for a half-hour or more just before coming to the room where I was sitting talking to the three mothers and the four girl "witnesses" were chatting together, the two couples were nude and alone together in the hot tub. Rev. Mary's daughter would have spent time with them, and encouraged them to touch and caress and kiss. They would also be reminded to speak up and guide a partner to for their maximum mutual pleasure. When the kids came into the room where we were they had no clothes on, just towels around their necks. They made a beautiful picture of breasts and vulvas and penises. They were so casual, yet so electric. If they had inhibitions before, they had lost them by now. They moved with assurance and poise. The 16-year old was a striking beauty. Her long hair was tied up; her breasts reasonably firm and, somehow, very come-hither looking. Her brother, the 14-year-old, seemed self-assured and (I guess) proud of his penis that he was about to put to first use. The boy was small for his age, but his penis was grand and good-sized, gorgeous in fact, and although his scrotum was contracted after the time spent in the hot tub, it showed promise, but of size and texture, for when they cooled down. He was holding hands with the 13-year-old, who seemed to have no breasts at all until I caught a side view. But her hips and vagina were obviously developed, and she had the cutest of smiles while holding her boy's hand and sort of skipping along, waving to her mother with her free hand. The 15-year-old boy was more reserved, which perhaps explains why he came relatively late to sexual activity by the standards both the church and of society generally in the year 2003. I have often said that penis size is not a major issue, especially with couples who rely on oral sex for foreplay and for their best orgasms. Anyway most men think they're below average in size; I wish they would keep that in mind when oral sex is on the agenda. Anyway, he was within the range of normality and I kept thinking I wouldn't mind having his penis in my mouth: but then I think that of many or most nice men whose penises I see, as you may know. That, however, is just in my imagination. Since the age of 18 I really haven't had sex all that much, compared to my peers, despite my exposure to nudity and the fact that I write about it. "Sex and the City" notwithstanding, long hours at work are tiring, and the mere fact that there are lots of single people in the Capital City does not mean that many of them are potential partners for me. That's because my standards are high, and, as I have written, I won't have sex on the first date or meeting anymore, with few exceptions, mostly accidental. Rev. Mary's daughter told the 16-year-old and her boy to sit on a blanket on the floor, and told the kids to fondle and caress each other for a while, and the girl to familiarize herself with her boy's penis, to kiss it and try to make it hard. The kids did what kids do, the boy touched and licked the girl's breasts, and then moved his penis, hopefully and expectantly, close to her mouth for her to see and touch and feel and kiss if she were willing. Indeed, she put it in her mouth and gradually we could see it get surprisingly big. She would take it out of her mouth, seemingly to measure its stiffness, and her tongue would circle its rim. Meanwhile the boy's hand was at his girl's crotch, exploring inside her labia, and Rev. Mary's daughter told him it would be best to explore it with his tongue instead, that when his girl got close to orgasm she would tell him and then they should make love with penis in vagina; then her hymen could be pierced painlessly. Now the girl spread her legs very wide and pulled her labia apart so we could see inside, and the boy lay down between them with his face at her vulva. Rev. Mary's daughter wasn't quite satisfied with his position, and she pulled him up by his haunches. Now he was kneeling, with his penis very visible. I guessed that was the reason she had lifted him up, so that we could see better. I saw the boy's mother nodding appreciatively when her son's penis came back into our line of sight. In fact, the eyes of all of us were drawn to it. And unlike at the defloration parties that Mom's Friend sponsored, the only nudity was that of the main actors, so nobody's eyes were distracted elsewhere. There were no extraneous men to cause distraction, to get erections and to want sex. We were all watching that one penis and all anxious for it to find its way into that vagina, to make the girl whole, to give her semen. The boy's balls were tight against his body, not the way I like them, and his penis now stuck straight out, which means it wasn't as fully erect as it had been; however that made it fun to watch as it swayed with his movements. (The lovely thing about penis-watching is that if you wait a couple of minutes, a whole new vista presents itself, as the penis and the testicles move with their blood flow, with the forces of gravity and with the wind. I saw this on the beach in Spain earlier this year too, although I have to say that what makes American penises so lovely and so interesting is that most of them are circumcised, and to allow a penis to be hidden away by foreskin is, I think, a travesty of human condition and human sculpture, not to mention female access to its most sensitive part.) Anyway, at this point I could see the 15-year-old boy's tongue and lips working slowly, his tongue caressing his girl's clitoris and then pushing its way into her vagina and then circling its opening. One in a while he would take all his girl's soft parts, her labia, into his mouth and make a light sucking and kissing sound. Somebody, probably either Rev. Mary's daughter or his own mother, had briefed him on what to do. Or perhaps he had seen it in the movies; I wouldn't know. It didn't take all that many minutes before the 16-year-old girl began to sigh and gasp, and Rev. Mary's daughter told him "now" and the girl pulled him down on top of her, and grasped his penis and aimed it into her very wet and very lubricated and very dilated and very beautiful vagina. As always -- and the reader may remember my feeling of near-ecstasy while watching and perhaps guiding that boy's gorgeous and stiff penis on its first entry into the Big-Breasted Girl's vagina at the nude dance so long ago -- the witness, male or female, feels sympathetic anxiety and then ecstasy to watch a penis hovering above an open vagina, and then entering it: one knows and vicariously feels the joy of the moment. In one stroke now the penis was through the 16-year-old girl's hymen and she sighed again. After the briefest of pauses to acknowledge the sigh, her boy caused his wet penis to enter and exit, to rise and fall. Once in a while he would raise his body too far and it would come out of her vagina; she would put it back in. The boy put his hands under his girl's buttocks, which brought the two of them closer. The couple embraced in a loving kiss. And then the boy ejaculated. As it came out of her body, his penis was as stiff as ever, coated now with his semen and her mucus. As if told beforehand (as perhaps she had been) the 16-year-old girl turned over, got to her knees, and sought out her boy's penis for further inspection and love. She hesitated a moment, ran her tongue over a glob of semen that had flowed out of its tip, then put the end of the penis in her mouth just as I would have done, beginning a lovely cycle of oral sex. She went on like this for many minutes, the boy leaning back on his elbows with a wondrous look on his face. His mother had the typical expression of parental pride on her face as she watched her boy's penis. It seems that the boy may have had a second orgasm; anyway he quickly embraced his girl and told her how much he loved her. (Love, as we know, is a relative term when sex is concerned, not least teen sex. But words of appreciation are nice to hear, regardless of sincerity. Anyway, I think he was sincere for the moment.) All this time the 16-year-old girl's 14-year-old brother had been seated just alongside the blanket, watching closely. His lovely penis was fiercely erect, and now his girl stared at it, and then reached over to grasp it tentatively. Just as I would have done, Rev. Mary's daughter told the boy's 13-year-old partner that the drop of seminal fluid she could see at the tip of her boy's penis was a drop of anticipation and delight, and had a lovely taste and she should lick it off. She did that, and the two kids played with each other's bodies. Having seen the other couple, they knew exactly what to do from then on. The boy brought his hands to the girl's vulva and spread its lips apart. He was kneeling, so we could see his penis in firm erection from behind and alongside, and his balls now hanging down somewhat. With his steady facial movement It did not take the girl long to reach climax: she had been aroused by the sight of the other couple and by her own foreplay with her boy. Once she had come, the boy needed no prompting to move up over her and let his body down on top of her. Holding his penis with two fingers, he probed for her open vagina. He lowered his rear end firmly and his penis easily went all the way into the wet vagina without stopping. If the girl's hymen had offered resistance the brute force of his penis against it would have made it give way. If she had felt any pain she said nothing, she just looked dreamingly in his eyes. We now saw mucus mixed with blood on the shaft of the penis as it rose and fell. Virginity is a useless social burden and physical barrier: this girl was now free from its bondage and its nuisance. Indeed, in at least one sense, of its shame. One is well rid of virginity, and I had to mouth a silent welcome to this lovely couple, and the first one too, to their new life of humanity and human delight and sexual joy. When the couple finished, both couples joined their mothers for an embrace. The three mothers must have felt as I did when the 12-year-old kids showed me in the garden how they had mutual oral sex, and then vaginal sex, and were so proud as they approached me, her vagina wet and his penis sticky. I have written how I so much hope that children of mine will want me there when they first have sex, for support and to admire their beauty and to feel their joy. The mothers stared approvingly at their offsprings' bodies. The mother of the siblings turned her kids in such a way that the three of them formed a triangle, and her eyes moved up and down darting from her boy's penis and his balls to her daughter's vagina, then to her daughter's breasts and to the faces of both of them. I wondered if she often saw them naked, or if this was a rare opportunity for her to verify the beauty of their bodies and their sexual capacity and competence. Looking at them in the nude, with traces of semen on their genitals and grins on their faces she couldn't ignore their new condition and status and freedom, and she hugged and kissed them repeatedly. A few minutes later the kids had showered and dressed, and walked hand in hand with their mothers to the parking lot, and went to their respective homes. But a new private life had opened for them: a life marked by desire, anticipation, ecstasy and semen. Saturday evening, these four kids would be at the teen club. I spent some time there too. I was given an escort: the doctor's son who, since he was over 18 was no longer able to attend alone since he couldn't have casual sex with minors under church rules (the operative word is "casual"). For a long time everybody remained clothed, and it was just a normal teen get-together with music and some drinks and snacks. The doctor's son and I just sat in a corner, sharing a bottle of wine, but when the kids started holding each other's body parts we did likewise. There are more girls than boys at the church, although not, apparently very many more, but enough so that girls outnumber boys at these events, a fact which yields management advantages too. While girls are assured, in Rev. Mary's regime, the right to try for a climax, one must not pretend that girls' and boys' sexual needs and wants are identical. Unlike our dances at Mom's Friend's House and at similar places in Our Town, couples here were not brought together at the door or in advance; they just paired off at will and as in musical chairs, the last one or two or three girls, not selected, had managerial duties. They would have sex another day. The boys and girls from the day before had new partners but their sex followed the pattern of the previous day, as far as I could tell. When it comes down to it, there are fewer usable varieties of sex positions than the authors of books on the subject would have you think. I saw the brother and the sister, each with a partner, embracing and then having oral sex right next to each other. I guessed they still needed mutual support. I saw the 14-year-old boy whose penis I had so admired the day before, offering it up to a pretty girl to take in her mouth and I saw her gaze dreamily into his eyes as she ran her tongue over it and into its slit seeking traces of seminal fluid and then moved her head ever so slowly back and forth to bring him to ejaculate in her mouth; so much semen spurted into her mouth that it began to leak out and I could see her struggle to swallow and to keep up. (It may be that, objectively, most girls spit out semen, but I have seen girls do that only rarely so perhaps I travel in an unrepresentative crowd.) I watched other couples at random and what I did notice was very important. Every time a boy presented his penis, it was with just a nanosecond's hesitation, to await consent, a smile, loving anticipation. One does not, in a day, learn how to deal with the opportunity for loving pleasure that the penis represents; and one also has to be fond of the boy behind it. Still, coupled with their childhood family and poolside and Sunday school experiences and conditioning, these kids coped well. The rule was that a girl was assured her climax. I watched to see if the new recruit, the 14-year-old, would reciprocate after his date swallowed his semen. He did: she sat in a chair and he kissed and licked her vagina, her clitoris, and all the area inside and around, until she cried out, and then, still standing between her legs as she sat, he put his penis inside her vagina and the two of them moved back and forth in a reciprocating way, making love and making pleasure. Their joy was palpable. I don't want to draw firm conclusions from isolated anecdotal incidents, but as far as I am concerned the above incident shows that boys -- and girls too -- have sexual capacity and capability beyond what they are credited with, right from the first time they try it. A clever kid will have stored up a lot of knowledge from listening and observing -- something that Rev. Mary provided opportunity and encouragement for. This is why the nude boy at the pool, quietly playing with his erect big penis, and the nude girl at the pool with breasts and hips and vagina beyond her years offering the boys and girls a peek inside, performed a real service: they allowed "the innocents" to observe and learn, while pretending not to notice, while saving face. The fact is that the little kids should have felt free to comment and to ask, but that little game of clandestine watching and plausible denial is, after all, harmless. The girl who secretly watches her brother masturbating is usually not harmed by the sight, although I think I was better off for not having been afraid of that boy doing the same thing, and having helped him along a bit and made that semen spurt out of its tip. In retrospect, years later, it remains one of the highlights of my life. Mostly seeing a boy masturbate is not at all exciting or arousing for a girl, just derisory. But to see a naive small boy doing so, or a confused boy as in my case, is somehow different. It's like the difference between seeing a man yawn and a baby doing so. The first is catching, the second is not. But as for the things boys do with their penises, the issue is attitude and intent: if it's to share love and beauty and to be respectful and generous, then all is well. If it's out of selfish lust, then the boy is useless clod. I may write of simple sexual gratification and mutual physical joy, but the reader should understand that my meaning is soulful sharing and romantic (if realistically temporary) love. There is nothing wrong with that: one may prefer and one may try for permanence, especially when child rearing and the family are in prospect. But for learning about sexual joy, about physical (and even about romantic) love and about choosing a partner, to wait for permanence is to lose opportunity and, most probably, to lose love itself, which comes only by accident and from shared experience. Furthermore, the risk of STDs is so great in the wider world, that sex is virtually wasted on the old. Let's not allow youth to be wasted on the young: not any longer. Sex games are the same everywhere and in every era, I think. Only the trappings differ. Kids will grope and fondle, and tops will come off, and then bottoms. I guess there was a custom in force that I didn't know; anyway suddenly one girl and then many girls and then all girls were topless, and embraces were everywhere. I watched, to understand. Girls are, of course, slower to arouse, and these boys knew what to do: this was the purpose of the initiations, as it is of the defloration parties, although the latter have more of a celebratory than a mere rite of passage appearance since there are couples and parents there and everybody is nude and all will be having sex. But it was apparent that girls, and only girls, were giving the cues: some girls need oral sex for orgasm and their boys were glad to perform for them. Others seemed happy with vaginal sex. A few wanted mutual oral sex. There seemed a lack of posturing and posing: people were concerned with their own business at hand and while pleasure might be enhanced by the proximity to others having sex too, it didn't seem to me that anyone was keeping score or that anyone was engaging in one-upmanship. There had been too much of that, I think, at Mom's Friend's House in the old days. Perhaps I assumed too much; maybe there was just greater subtlety in showing off their delight at orgasm and at giving and receiving semen. Like us, these kids had come to see semen as signal of joy, of love force and as delightful measure of shared ecstasy and not as dirty, demeaning or unpleasant. A girl had only reason for pride and delight to show off a tongue coated with semen. As we did, so did they come to extend their sexual fun by playing with the semen and lubricant and trace of blood coating a penis or leaking from a vagina, by licking and kissing and sucking a penis. They, as we, came to love to kiss and to taste each other after orgasm. I am told that most men hesitate to taste their own semen. That should not be, and was not with boys I loved, the case when the semen has first flowed into his girl and become a focus of their mutual joy. After sex, the couples would dance again, nude and bodies close. Then they would have sex again. It became irresistible: although I was there on a research mission I felt I had to see the penis of the doctor's son. I took off my top. I took off his bottoms. He took off the rest of our clothes and we exchanged bodily fluids. They were delicious. His penis vibrated in my mouth as semen spurted out and he smiled at me deliriously. He seemed so happy to watch me swallow his semen, and I was happy to be doing it. I felt his bits of DNA were becoming part of me, and just then, just for that day, this was important for me to feel. When all the energy in his lovely penis was spent, we turned around and for a quarter of an hour he made his tongue dance on my clitoris and excite my vagina. Then we danced together naked with his erect penis close against my body and my breasts pressing against his chest. We scarcely noticed the others, although later I was told that we'd been watched and appreciated, and others thought they could learn from us: from our "sincerity" and our "sensuality", Rev. Mary's daughter quoted somebody as having said. It's true that the image of a penis entering a girl's mouth is meaningless unless the girl is seen to be loving the experience and to be welcoming the semen. If her eyes aren't open and sharing love, as her mouth is sharing fluids, with her boy then the moment is lost and the boy's sexual joy is empty. Sunday was more typically church-religious than were Friday and Saturday's social and sexual teaching and sharing sessions. There was a short Sunday school to help out at: basically as intellectual an approach to religious thought and social welfare as the age of the pupils and the capacity of the volunteer teachers permitted. I have to say that there was, beneath the surface, a bit of social propagandizing against religious meddling in matters of sex and in favor of liberality; but this was subtle enough that it might be missed even by someone seeking out "false Christians" for denunciation. There was a blessedly short service in her private chapel (and notwithstanding its privacy and closure to the public, it was a generic form of service, with sex never mentioned). Blessedly short because I have come to be skeptical of the intentions of organized religion since I learned of Moses David's constant meddling and late perversions. To the extent that people want the social aspects of religion and need some stable, if not excessively firm, norms and beliefs, Rev. Mary's church provides them. Her real vocation, as you, Dear Reader, will have noted, is her social experiment and the theoretical and practical basis she has provided for brining up kids in a sexually liberated manner free of repression, suppression and oppression. I measure this, for want of any other measure, by the concern her boys show for a female partner's well-being and for her orgasm. And I measure it, too, by the way her girls relate to boys, and especially the way her girls approach boys' penises and boys' pleasure. In both cases, I find selflessness and understanding of difference, combined (notwithstanding the obvious inconsistency here) with respect for the vulnerability of girls and women in the matter. I spent the afternoon and evening at home with Rev. Mary. There were several callers, and then in the evening we watched TV with her daughter. We expected some friends over for a light supper: two divorced fathers, one of whom brought over his "weekend son", who was a friend of Rev. Mary's daughter, one of many boyfriends I am sure. We were watching a film and I didn't notice until they were half undressed that the two teens were having sex fun together. She was on his lap, topless, and he was sitting in his underpants. His hands were first over her breasts and then tickling her vagina; then the couple were kissing, then her hands were under his waistband stroking his penis and making it erect. None of the adults paid much heed at first, and in a way it reminded me of Mom's Friend's house, except that few girls except me violated the protocol by having sex, i.e., oral sex, in the TV room instead of going downstairs or outdoors with their partner when they felt the urge. Anyway, their lovemaking confirmed the point I have been making: the default practice was for the boy to offer the girl oral sex, and by now Rev. Mary's daughter was completely nude on one of the sofas, and her boy was kneeling in front of her with his mouth over her vagina and she was first giggling and bouncing about, her breasts jiggling in unison in a funny but lovely sort of dance, and then she was calmer as if realizing a need for concentration to achieve climax. A moment after that she was faraway-ecstatic, as orgasm approached from the distance; then as joy consumed her one saw her breasts heave and her eyes roll as that joy consumed her body and made her very, very happy. The boy dropped his underpants to the floor and stripped off his T-shirt. Now he was leaning over her, his hands on the back of the sofa, his penis sticking out, his balls hanging below, his demeanor anxious and begging. The tip of his penis glistened. He panted. Rev. Mary's daughter teased her boy only for brief seconds. I thought her more vibrant than ever in her joy and just as at the Friday initiations one longed to see the hovering penis enter the open vagina, here again kissing and licking had made the girl's vagina so very ready and eager that it rather hurt me to see the boy's penis still outside. Anyway, in a lot less time than it has taken me to describe the event, the girl grasped her boy's penis in two hands and brought it to her vaginal opening and she, her mother, the boy's father, the other man and I watched it enter and then we watched her face. In her demeanor we could see, insofar as anyone can, the meaning of life. She was performing the greatest act that two people can perform, creating joy out of energy and friction. We saw too the face of love and as his penis entered and exited she moved, and her breasts moved, and we smiled. I have left this rather exorbitant description of what was really a brief event -- oral vaginal sex followed by penis in vagina -- because it really was a remarkable sexual encounter. Also, the positions of the two lovers was such that even in the semi-darkness we could see everything that went on, as indeed we were intended to. To watch the exit of a penis from a girl's vagina inevitably gives rise to regret: one wants to see it go back in, and quickly. Love is the joinder of two bodies and souls, not their separation. The joy is in the down-stroke, and the up-stroke is the tease for the sexual sensation that the next down-stroke will bring. At one point it seemed that his penis might come out too far: to see the head of the penis is lovely, but for it to come out of the vagina completely and for the boy and girl to lose cadence interrupts the rush to orgasm and interrupts our vicarious pleasure. The boy's father was watching too, and I felt his arm around me as Rev. Mary's daughter moved her hands downward to catch the penis and guide it home. And then we saw, in the flickering light of the TV and a couple of table lamps a change in the boy's posture. He ejaculated, the girl moved her hands away, there was a slurping noise, a dripping of semen, and the delightful vision was over. The two kids collapsed in a heap and they stayed that way for ages. We adults could only look at each other and marvel. Normally I would have been driven to want sex from the electricity of the two kids' orgasms. Somehow it didn't happen; either because of my general rule not to have sex on first date, or because Rev. Mary and her partner were more discreet and waited until they went to bed, or because my liaison the day before with the doctor's son had been such fun and so satisfying and I thought this older man could not match it. I did take the father of Rev. Mary's daughter's sex partner to bed with me that night in the guest room. I felt a bit guilty that he seemed to have an erection and I wasn't doing anything about it. I felt his penis, but avoided touching it. To touch it would be an invitation to sex. In the morning, after he'd got up to use the bathroom, I regretted his disappointment and our shared loss. I undressed and when he returned to bed I got close to him, put my arm over his hips and gently squeezed his penis with my hand and pushed my breast against his back. I grasped his penis shaft and massaged the tip with my fingers. I moistened my fingers with my saliva and rubbed. After his penis started responding, I moved completely over his body so my head was at his crotch and my bare vulva was near his face. We kissed each other's sex parts deeply. Then he took off his night clothes and we finished our delightful oral sex. He was older than most men I consort with, but he wasn't ancient and his penis was still lovely. I did play with it for a very long time, and then we chatted. (I'm happy to say that most of my sex partners, other than the 16-Year-Old-Boy turned 25-Year-Old refrigeration salesman, have turned out to be intellectually interesting as well as sexually stimulating.) My weekend was both great fun and professionally rewarding. I found that a discreet pro-sex family and religious lifestyle can indeed be kept up in a way that is consistent with mainstream life. Rev. Mary is right to insist that kids themselves manage the most contentious aspects, kids actually having sex. As I learned from my evening with the doctor's son and my morning with that boy's father in Rev. Mary's house, those cute little boys in the swimming pool grow up to be those stunning young adolescents wanting their first sex, and they, in turn, become solicitous boyfriends and sex partners who make women feel good. Of course they, boys, adolescents and men, and girls too, are lucky not to live in Kansas or in another state where consensual heterosexual sex by same-age teens is criminalized. I assume that, even in Kansas, kids do have sex and have fun anyway, but because I hate stupid and oppressive laws, and because I want kids to have sex early and often, I think I shall always live elsewhere. I spent some time with Mom, who is increasingly infirm, after my visit with Rev. Mary. She was very excited about the prospects that her life's work her life's philosophy may live on and have meaning. Of course Rev. Mary's congregation may be sui generis, but I now suspect that there are, in fact lots of social, religious, child and family workers out there who share her views about infant sexual growth and teen sexual needs and who can work together to combat the social engineers who want to go back to the 7th Century and worse. Even if most of the members of her congregation are single parents, not all are and she's also proven that liberal child rearing and adolescent sexual liberation is consistent with the modern nuclear family. I've yet to find anything like it in the Capital City, but time will tell. The future is, after all, in the future. Love, Carol _________________________________________________________________ Cheer a special someone with a fun Halloween eCard from American Greetings! Go to -- Pursuant to the Berne Convention, this work is copyright with all rights reserved by its author unless explicitly indicated. +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | ------ send stories to: <>| | FAQ: <> Moderators: <> | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |ASSM Archive at <> Hosted by <> | |Discuss this story and others in; look for subject {ASSD}| +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
© 2018 • Powered by BasicPages