When I pay for a PSP, there are a couple of things I expect. I know that some people will say that I have to “understand her situation,” “be sensitive and sympathetic,” and “remember that we are dealing with a human being.” But I am not asking for any fringe or unconventional fetish. Sex is something that is natural and can be fun. I obtained the services of a PSP for my personal—and hopefully, mutual—satisfaction, and there is a certain kind of experience that I am hoping for.

So here are five things that I hate to experience from a PSP.

1. No hygiene

I hate it when PSPs don’t pay attention to their own hygiene. I can be forgiving if it’s an escort who had to take a bus from her house kilometers away, but I expect them to take at least take a shower before the deed. I for one pay particular attention if she brought her own “feminine wash.”

2. Cold, Mediocre Performance

If all that I wanted was an orgasm, I would have stayed home and masturbated.

3. Shyness

I paid to have a mind-blowing, eye-popping experience. While I do try to spice up the conversation to break the ice, I don’t need to make a serious effort to woo and entertain the PSP to have sex with me.

4. Not even faking it

I mean, How hard is it to fake some moans, writhe a bit, dig deep into my back, and scream nasty obscenities? If she doesn’t know how to fake it, I suggest she watch this.

5. Hurrying the deed

I paid good money for an experience. I intend to get it. It doesn’t mean that I will fit as many orgasms in the allotted time. It doesn’t mean that we will be humping for hours. I just want to take my own time and to last as long as I want.

When Katrina Halili tearfully decries that she was “treated like a pig”—binaboy, as she claimed—I wonder exactly at what point did she consider herself “swined.” She was obviously with Hayden with full knowledge of what will transpire. There was no ripping of clothing. There was no struggle. There was no resistance. I am not saying that I 100% condone with what Hayden Kho, but what exactly are we rallying against here?

The lawyer of Hayden Kho raised a good point. We should separate three things: the sex itself, the act of video-taping the sex act, and the act of distributing the video.

First, I have no doubt that the participants in the video were enjoying themselves. There was lots of moaning and groaning. There was no sign of resistance. Heck, there was a scene where the woman herself was unwrapping the condom herself impaling herself with the man’s joystick. And the way she was grinding her hips, the way the bed rocked and creaked, there is no doubt that she was wild and wanton with desire.

Now before the conservatives out there throw their potshots at me (I doubt though if there are conservatives reading this post, anyway), what’s wrong with enjoying sex? Yes it can be described as “sacred” and “intimate” and “private,” but it is also damn pleasurable. Their sex act is actually quite “mainstream.” There was no BDSM, no weird out-of-this-world fetish.

Next, it can be debatable that none of these women knew that they were being video-taped, especially if the the camera was in full view. And this leads me to my next question: What is wrong with video-taping a sex act?

I noticed that women who have no qualms watching an x-rated film have similarly no qualms in having themselves video-taped. I suppose that when watching a commercial x-rated sex film, they have a conscious or subconscious desire to see themselves in that video. So seeing themselves in an actual sex video is just carrying that desire to the next logical step. But few user-generated sex videos are meant for public consumption. As I wrote in my site, mutual consent is important as well as the efforts to ensure that the video remains private. I admit as well that I have a number of videos with me and my partners. We do enjoy watching it together. It is our very own x-rated porn movie. And it makes our sex more enjoyable. But I extend every effort to keep it private. My videos do not reside in memory cards or in mobile phones. They are stored in password-protected, encrypted files with discreet file names.

But I know some don’t bother to ask permission. Their stance is probably this: “what she doesn’t know won’t hurt her.” So they don’t bother to tell that there is a video camera lurking around somewhere. I really don’t blame the guy for taking this stance in the same way that I don’t blame the gal for not telling her parents, friends, or boyfriend that she is out impaling herself with someone’s man-tool.

But the unauthorized distribution of the material is where I now draw the line. What is private has now become public. But does it deserve the attention that it is getting? If you strip away all the moralistic saber-rattling, it all boils down to invasion of privacy. It is embarrassing, yes, but did we really expect the sexy starlet to be a virgin?

People are now quick to label Hayden as a sex addict. I could label him as a coward for not bothering to ask permission or label him as reckless for having the balls to video-tape the sex act without permission; but at best I would label him as just careless.

If there is one thing to learn from the Daniel Smith case, it is on how to successfully prosecute a rape case.

Taken from the Court of Appeals document:

In rape cases, the following principles have been formulated to guide the courts in the decision of these cases: (1) it is difficult to prove rape, but even more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove it; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant is scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence of prosecution stands or falls on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the defense.In a prosecution of Rape, the credibility of the private complainant becomes the single, most important issue considering that her testimony alone “if credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things” is sufficient for conviction.

In my mind, Nicole has become the poster child of how NOT to cry wolf. Or in this situation, how NOT to cry RAPE.

This Court finds it deceptively posturing Nicole’s portrayal of herself as a demure provinciana lass . . . Her going to Subic from far away Zamboanga with her step-sister, allowing two American friends whom they met only three months earlier, and accepting their offer of free hotel accommodations and other things as well, in her words—”to enjoy”—do not coincide with the demure provinciana lass we are talking about. She testified that she drank a shot of Vodka Sprite and B-52, bottoms up, which already made her feel giddy. And yet she still took Singaporean Sling, B-53, Long Island Iced Tea, and to top it all, half a pitcher of Bullfrog, making her really drunk but in the same breath, tells the court that she danced with a man whom she thought was “Gerard” but was later identified as [Daniel] Smith, through several disco beats, lasting fifteen minutes or so.

Accusation is not synonymous to guilt—so crying wolf does not magically cause a wolf to appear.

Oh and by the way, Filipino Voices blogger Manuel Buencamino writes that Daniel Smith was acquitted by Manangs. He should know better. Daniel Smith was acquitted because of a fundamental rule of law. It’s called Presumption of Innocence. He should read more about it.

Twitter, the micro-blogging platform that is popular in the technology blogosphere, is now gaining mainstream attention. Barack Obama is on Twitter. So are pop figures like Brittney Spears, Demi Moore, and Ashton Kutcher. I have spotted notable Filipino personalities in Twitter like Mike Abundo (follow) and Manuel L Quezon III (follow).

Twitter is straight-forward. Registration does not need any personal or confidential information. Registration just requires an email address. Once you are setup, you can send any message (up to 140 characters), which are called “tweets,” which will be visible to everyone. If you “follow” someone, then that someone’s tweets will be visible in your homepage. Think of Twitter as a chat room for the world. And Filipinos love those “chat boxes” in forums. With Twitter, the entire internet is your chat box.

But what does this mean for the adult entertainment scene? What does this mean to PSPs or the their customers?

Unlike Facebook or Friendster, which seem to be geared in establishing contacts with friends and colleagues, Twitter is now shaping up to be the tool for networking. And PSPs also need to “network.” How else will they get their clients?

A PSP can “tweet” her availability. And if she has “followers” (who are potential clients), they will immediately know and can contact her. If she has a mobile phone, the PSP can also tweet using SMS or, if she can access the internet through Wi-fi or 3G, can also tweet using a mobile web browser. She can tweet her whereabouts, whether she is in trouble, or, for the kinky, whatever is going on inside the motel room.

If you are still wondering what you can do with Twitter, simply Google “Twitter.” I found some useful tips like this and this.

I, for one, would like to see more and more PSPs in Twitter. It would be interesting to find out what they do in their spare time, what their interests are, if they are free, if they are in need, if they are in trouble. Forums are, in my opinion, passe and subject to the whims of the administrators. Why create personas in different forums when you can be contacted with one persona in Twitter?

For those willing to try, you can follow me at Twitter.

I wrote about my experiences with a spa therapist, thinking that it was too good to be true. And yes there are some quirks. I described it in another post as the “fly in the ointment.”

A number of readers have emailed me and were able to determine the identity of the spa therapist and her place of work, simply by describing her modus operandi. Apparently she plays the same song for other clients. Some have indeed fallen for her—one had even began supporting her financially.

But I have to admit one thing: Her performance is quite riveting. She truly can give a “porn-star experience.”

It just comes with several caveats:

- She had been, at one time, stricken with STD. She may have an STD now. Some have complained about foul odor in the genital area.

- She appears to be a pathological liar. She will say sweet words to you. “I love you” or “I miss you” are quite common. She promises abstinence from other clients but obviously she is not living up to her word. In my opinion, she does this so that clients will flock towards her and not toward the other therapists.

- One informant claimed that she used to service jeepney drivers around Lemery at P500 a pop.

But, as I said, she gives BBBJs, she allows CIM, even facials, she shows no hesitation for whatever sexual position, she talks dirty, and she allegedly allows anal sex.

So the question, dear readers: Would you still avail of her service?

I recently attended an alumni reunion. I had a grand time, reliving old high school and college memories with friends, sharing a beer, the occasional weed through rolled paper or pipe. And I realized that, while age and children have taken their toll on a few college beauties, there were a great number of them who still looked hot.

One of them was a gal named Janine. She is now a single mother with a daughter in her teens. Age has been kind to Janine. Her eyes had sunk a bit, wrinkles were evident, and her cheeks were slightly gaunt. But there was still color in her gaze. And her lips were still full and petulant. And her skin was still pearly clear. She was still slim though she had a bit of paunch on the sides of her waist and her hips were a bit wider than when she was younger, but she was no means obese or pear-shaped.

We ended up having coffee at after the reunion bash, where we reminisced about your days long past and how we arrived at our current state. The reasons for her being a single mother are vague. I purposely did not pry as it seemed to be a sensitive matter. There apparently was some abuse. And there is some restraining order. But she loves her daughter with a passion.

We left the coffee shop at about 3 am. And no, we did not have sex after.

But we did meet up again for lunch a few days later. And yes we did end up in a motel afterward.

The conversation prior to the romp was straight-forward. I admitted having a crush on her when I was younger and I praised her appearance. “You look good,” I said. We had red wine that day, which I insisted to be poured in a decanter. I guess the alcohol loosened our inhibitions because the topic gravitated to sex. I think the way it started was when I commented that sex and virginity were such a much ballyhooed topic in our college days, which she readily agreed. She admitted being uptight then.

“And look what it got me into,” she laughed.

So I flirted. We toasted our wine goblets. “To sex,” I said. “May we have more of that.”

We traded experiences. We exchanged tales of wanton abandon, of recklessness, and of disastrous encounters. We talked about female orgasms, about fellatio and cunnilingus, about the advantages of length, of long-lasting evenings. So it was quite obvious how one thing led to another.

While some men yearn for the younger women, I for one praise the older ones. They come with an intoxicating confidence. They carry no pretensions about sex. They have experience. They know men. They care less for meaningful or long-term relationships.

We both enjoyed the tryst. The love-making was sweaty and feral. And there was no guilt afterward. We both knew that we wanted to enjoy each other. And our relationship will probably not go beyond the physical. I called her this morning, and she laughed at yesterday’s experience. She divulged that she came twice. I admitted that I could have gone beyond one round but the alcohol had dulled my senses. She laughed again and added that she will take me up on that and that she will make sure that I was sober and that I would drink an energy drink. The last line of the classic movie “Casablanca” came to my mind.

One reason I still lurk or paticipate in several internet forums is to discover the ridiculous situations that some naive pubescent juveniles get themselves into. Naive doesn’t even begin to describe it.

Here’s one . . .

Guy named Steve invites a girl named Ayee to a motel for some drinks. Ayee has some boyfriend issues and Steve wants to offer some advice. “I can be trusted,” he says. “We’ll just drink and talk.” Ayee agrees. Whether she hesitatingly agrees or she wholeheartedly believes him is unclear. So they buy cheap liquor, some Coke as chasers, and junk food. They proceed to a motel. This is at 3 pm. Inside, they drink. They exchange shots straight-up. Steve, probably with alcohol coursing through his veins and with the atmosphere of being alone with a girl in a room with a bed, makes a move. He starts with an innocent kiss. There is no mention on whether she reciprocates but no resistance was offered. Alcohol has taken its course (so she says) and she lies down. He begins to unbutton her blouse. She still offers no resistance so he does the deed on her. They do it all over the room. “Inikot ako sa buong kwarto while fina-fuck nya ako,” she describes it.

Then an intermission She goes to the toilet, urinates, then proceeds to have a heated discussion with her boyfriend. Steve consoles her again. They go back to bed, where they start drinking again. She takes a nap, and she later wakes up to find Steve nuzzling between her legs, licking her. Again, no resistance (she claims she was dizzy). And they proceed with the deed for two more rounds.

They eventually checkout where Steve drops Ayee at SM Megamall, just a few kilometers away from the motel, where she will meet up with another friend. It was 9 pm. All in all, the whole episode lasted for 6 hours.

Now she posts the entire episode on the forum, complete with a grievance that she did not come, that her vagina had been scuffed due to lack of lubrication, and that Steve had taken advantage of her. As a result, Steve is riddled with ridicule, condescension, and ostracism.

People are tagging Steve as “ungentlemanly.” And that he should have acted with the “highest code of conduct.” Phrases like “betrayal of trust” are tossed. Which I find totally ridiculous. And this coming from an adult-oriented forum that brandishes PSPs and that holds a contest for the “horniest sex maniac.”

Some have even gone as far as claiming rape, blaming Steve for getting her so drunk that she was in no position to give consent. Whenever I read that story (which was coming for her point of view, not Steve’s), I find it hard to believe that she was smashed beyond all comprehension. She was still able to make a phone call, she was still able to get home on her two feet, she was still able to remember some details. I, on the other hand, have gotten so smashed that I could barely walk, read street signs, or have a decent conversation without a slur. Besides, she could have refused imbibing alcohol.

Okay, maybe there is such a thing as a gentleman sex maniac. And, for me, the gentleman way is to take each step to sex one step at a time. For me, it is definitely uncouth to go up to a gal and declare with full honesty that he would like to take her to a motel and fuck her. It may work, but I have had more success with the subtler approach. Which is to invite her to a motel, promise nothing, start with drinks to loosen up, maybe allow for some light physical contact, maybe give her a peck on the cheek, and then eventually graduating to a peck on lips, and then moving on to an open-mouth kiss with a slight bit of sucking and a tease of the tongue. If one step fails, I don’t pursue. If the girl responds positively, then we move forward.

After all, men, even gentlemen, can also change our minds. I have always believed that “no” means “no.” And even if the girl is butt naked, on bed, under the sheets, with a guy on top who has yet to insert his manhood into her, she can still say “no” and the guy has to back off. I have always given the girl that leeway. So why can’t we also have that option to change our minds? I don’t mean that we should go ahead and force ourselves. If we promise that we will be good boys, and we make an attempt, and the girl refuses, then the girl can chastise us, slap us, walk out of on us, and broadcast to the world that we are scum and untrustworthy.

But if the girl reciprocates, then that is construed as a go-signal to take it up to the next level. I, for one, see nothing wrong with that.

The Couples for Christ (CFC) has posted an questionnaire/advertisement on the controversial RH 5043, with the position that if one answered “NO” to one of the questions, then he or she should lobby against the controversial bill.

It was clear that CFC has a slant against sex education. They probably believe that sex education promotes promiscuity. I have a different belief: sex education and promiscuity are not related in a cause-and-effect way. At least, not in the way CFC thinks. If there is ever a cause-and-effect relationship, it may be the other way—promiscuity may, in reality, require sex education. That we will all become aware of our sexuality and become sexually active is a given. Sex education is as natural and inevitable as toilet training.

Which leads me to the next question: If sex education is a given, then who is the best person to teach our youth? The knee-jerk reaction is that our parents should hold that responsibility. I tend to agree, except that these parents, lacking the necessary tools, may not be knowledgeable of the best teaching methods. They also may not have the time. We may all know basic math, but do we all know how to teach it? Do we know how to explain basic principles like the Law of Transitivity? Or demonstrate a keen understanding of Geometry? Do we know when a child is ready for two-digit multiplication? Or when a child is capable of understanding what two minus seven is?

Those who know me know that I am for sex education and family planning. I am for condoms. I am for responsible sexuality. So those who know me can already guess what I will answer.

But to those who may wish to debate and discuss and argue, here are the questions and my answers….

1. Do you agree that our children be given Sex Education for 7 years starting from grade 5?

Yes I do. What’s wrong with teaching our children on how babies are made? It does not have to be graphic erotica. A straight-forward, unemotional, objective, rational approach could be used. Children that age (if not earlier) are already conscious of their sexual organs. Why not explain what they are used for?

2. Do you agree that the Population Commission develop the modules to form our children’s attitudes, beliefs, and values about sex, sexual identity, sexual behavior, sexual health ad gender roles?

Yes I do. Bear in mind that, according to Section 3, letter n, the Board of Commissioners of POPCOM shall consist of the heads of the following agencies:

1. National Economic DevelopmentAuthority (VEDA)

2. Department of Health (DOH)

3. Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

4. Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)

5. Department of Agriculture (DA)

6. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

7. Department of Education (DepEd)

8. Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

9. Commission on Higher Education (CHED)

10. University of the Philippines Population Institute (UPPI)

11. Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAFI)

12. National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPQ)

13. National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women (NCRFW)

14. National Youth Commission (NYC)

Plus, there shall be three private sector representatives to the Board of Commissioners of POPCOM who shall come from NGOs. There shall be one (1) representative each from women, youth and health sectors who have a proven track record of involvement in the promotion of reproductive health.

My main worry with this is that the group, with its size, could get unwieldy.

3. Do you agree that the Population Commission teach our children the distinction between facts and myths regarding sex and sexuality?

Definitely yes. But this question is a strange one. Is this question focusing on the POPCOM or on whether or not we should teach about facts and myths regarding sex and sexuality?

If it is the former, then is CFC questioning the capability of the POPCOM? Check the composition of POPCOM in my aforementioned answer. It may not be the best composition, but it represents a lot of sectors and should be more knowledgeable than, say, the Church or even a lot of poor parents who have not obtained a decent education.

If it is the latter, then is the CFC basically promoting ignorance?

4. Do you agree that our children be taught Sex Education as a class, notwithstanding the different stages and readiness each child has to receive such sensitive information?

Yes. The issue is not whether or not it should be taught as a group, but rather the quality of the teaching and communication materials. A team of child psychologists should be able to develop the appropriate materials.

5. Do you agree that our children, from 10 to their adolescent years, be taught that it is their right to have a satisfying and “safe” sex life?

Yes. Reading through section 12, I don’t see that the bill is promoting a promiscuous lifestyle. What will be in the list of sex-education concepts include abstinence before marriage, hazards of abortion, responsible parenthood, and responsible sexuality. It appears to me that the bill is promoting choice rather than dogma. If a teen-ager wishes to remain a virgin until marriage, that is his or her choice.

6. Do you agree that our children, from 10 to their adolescent years, learn the use and application of family planning methods?

Yes. Some youths are already having sex as early as age 10.

7. Do you agree that our children’s moral and religious beliefs regarding sensitive issues like abortion be challenged and discussed in the classroom apart from the guidance of parents?

Yes. First of all, I don’t think the parents are left out in this process. Section 12 does specify that “in support of the natural, and primary right of parents in the rearing of the youth, the POPCOM shall provide concerned parents with adequate and relevant scientific materials on the age-appropriate topics and manner of teaching reproductive health education to their children.”

Second, I am of the opinion that beliefs should always be challenged and discussed. Religious beliefs are not exempt from discussion and debate. Take one example, albeit extreme just to emphasize a point, of a religion that advocates terrorism. Wouldn’t you make an effort to dissuade its flock? Or would you argue that we should respect their beliefs and remain silent?

If you disagree with my points, feel free to leave comments. I promise I will not resort to any ad hominem attacks.

In describing the type of experience one expects from a “personal service provier (PSP),” I often come upon the acronyms GFE (Girlfriend experience) and PSE (Porn star experience). I wonder: What exactly does this mean? What does it connote? Why make the distinction? For example, standard fare for a porn star is to give fellatio; thus, girlfriends are not expected to give blowjobs?

And do those that claim PSE actually perform like a porn star? I know that porn stars perform a wide range of services–fisting and anal, for example–does that mean that PSPs who make such a claim will actually do these? Ok, maybe anal and fisting are a bit extreme (some however, may disagree, but please allow me that leeway), but what about facials and come-in-mouth?

Okay, in reality, I have (or, at least I think I had) experienced a PSE. I don’t think it has to do with the range of services; it’s in the way the PSP performs even the most basic sexual act. A GFE will be a more sweet, demure, conversational episode. A PSE will be more wanton and beastly.

Take the simple and trite missionary position: a PSP claiming GFE will probably give you sugary encouragement as you are mounting her. It is like enjoying fine wine with soft jazz piping through the speakers. A PSP with the PSE on her curriculum vitae will probably groan out all sorts of profanities, will stare at you with fiery hot passion, will purse her lips and bite her lips, and will show you a “come-and-fuck-me” expression on her face, akin to gulping down hard liquor with acid rock blaring.

There are popular urban tales about the size of a man’s member. And I found an interesting article on several studies that debunk (or confirm) these urban tales.

If you are lazy to read through the article, here are a few items that I found fascinating.

According to a 2002 study conducted at the University College London, there is no scientific support for the relationship between the shoe size and length of penis.

Researchers at University of Alberta found that body height and foot length were only “weakly” correlated with the size of their penis and that “height and foot size would not serve as practical estimators of penis length.” However, there are two studies (a 2001 Italian study, conducted among 3,300 young men; and a 2007 International Journal of Impotence Research in 2007 among 1,500 men) that found a correlation between height and penis dimensions.

And another: In 2002, a group of Greek researchers found that age and body characteristics were not associated with size of penis except for the “index finger length, which correlated significantly with the dimensions of the flaccid, maximally stretched penis.” Another study involving 1,500 men also found that found that length of index finger was significantly correlated with penis dimensions.