Size of the Boat, Motion in the Ocean, Or Neither?

By Sowhatiff Jenkins

Don’t get all coy on me.  I don’t know how conversations about sex goes down between dudes, if at all.  Pause. But I can assure you that this question almost always comes up between women in one form or another.  There is some almost automatic curiosity that surfaces when one finds out that her homegirl has got down with the get down with a new man.  Or even with established relationships, we just “need” to know how ol’ dude is betwixt the sheets.  This then leads to questions about whether a good lay is determined more so by the actions and/or size of the boat, or does it have more to do with a woman’s connection to the captain of the ship.

In this age of the “progressive” woman, it would not be surprising to come across a woman that holds firm to the idea that sex is purely physical for her.  Somehow she has found the formula that women have been looking for years, that allows her to keep pumps from getting all mixed up in emotions.

While I believe that this can be done, I wonder how long this can last.  For example, a woman and man have developed a working “thronxing” relationship.  They call each other up when there’s an itch to be scratched, handle business, and chuck the deuces.  For the man in this situation, it is expected that he can keep it at sex.  For the woman though, can she maintain this detachment for the duration of the sexual relationship?  Or does she develop feelings for him at some point?  Or if not him, does she search for an emotional connection else where?

When talking about this with my homies, it is the general consensus that woman enjoy sex more when they are emotionally bonded the to man.  This is not to say that pumps sans love and all that can’t be head board breaking fulfilling.  But can it be totally fulfilling?  Do women, in the backs of their minds, say “Damn, that was good, but something was missing?”

Of course this is a very individual thing, but there is a lot of good anecdotal evidence to support the idea that women, while they can talk the talk, can’t walk that same sex-is-just-as-good-without-emotions-walk as men.

Or do men walk this walk all the time?  Is it just that you can get your rocks off nice and good when you don’t really care about a broad woman, but enjoy sex even more with your boo-boo?  Let’s hear it.


34 responses to “Size of the Boat, Motion in the Ocean, Or Neither?

  1. Vanessa aka Miss V

    i don’t think i can do the do with someone i didn’t care about…. like, i tried, and it didn’t happen. for me, there def has to be some emotional connection in order for me to enjoy it. plus, we all know that it takes much more (aside from the emotional stuff) for a women to reach that big O…. it’s def a mental (and a foreplay) sort of situation.

    even though some women say they can have sex with anyone without any feelings attached, i don’t think it’s completely true. while they may not be in love or even like dude, deep down they may be suffering from low self-esteem due to some sort of abuse, an absent father, and/or previous lack of attention from men… all emotional issues.

    so no, for most women, i don’t think it’s easy to separate the physical from the emotional… and I may even go as far as to say the same is true for a lot of guys.

    oh and for the record, Miss V says size AND the motion in the ocean matters =).

  2. Alright, I’m just gonna put myself out there.

    I can and have had emotionless sex. (Not because my daddy didn’t love me. But because I wanted it.) Pretty good sex. But here’s the kicker. I could only do it with a guy that I had no desire to want to be with emotionally. Like this younger cat that still lived at home with his momma, had a deadbeat job (no career), and was content with going nowhere fast. But he had a pot of gold (or rather a bar of gold if I’m trying to give phallic imagery) in his lap.

    The only way that I could remain emotionally detached was to sex a dude who didn’t “measure up to my standards.” Yeah, y’all are gonna rip me a new one for this. But it’s MY truth.

    Unfortunately, I’ve found that sex with no emotions leaves me just a wee tiny bit unsatisfied. Why? Because I find my lover eventually become selfish. He doesn’t go the extra mile or give extra effort, if he actually cared for me. “Oh, you didn’t reach your peak? Sorry boo, I’ll hit you next time. I was too tired.”

    So while I can definitely have sex with no feelings attached, I no longer want to.

    Oh, and I used to be a size queen. But ouch. Got tired of walking sideways. Give me an average sized tally whacker and a captain that knows how to rock my boat.

  3. I have thoughts on this topic…but I wanna let the comments grow a bit before I dive deep into it (Not even gonna say pause). Too many peeps on here know who I am in real life, so I need to tread lightly on this

  4. As a dude, its better with a jawn you like but not MUCH better. A jawn you like tends to know what you like and because she likes you more she enjoys it more and thus you enjoy it more. S.e.x. is much better when both ppl enjoy it.

  5. Sowhatiff Jenkins

    Smh @ “jawn”

    Interesting perspective Toy. Are you saying that if the guy you are getting down with meets your standards, an emotional connection (or the want for one) is likely to happen? And a cut buddy can stay at that if he doesn’t look like he can be your man?

    And selfish lovers are the worst.

  6. I am going to agree with ToySoldier, and say I can and have had emotionless sex. Sometimes it has been great and sometimes not. I have also have sex with people I’ve been deeply emotionally attached to. Sometimes it was great, sometimes not so much. At the end of the day I believe it comes down to the women’s expectation. I do disagree with the notion that the person must be below your standards. However, lets be real, there must be something lacking or the emotional element would probably be there.

    I find what happens all to often is that women settle for a physical sex only relationship with a person with whom they truly want an emotional relationship. This path leads nowhere good. Actually it almost always leads to heartbreak and disappointment. You cannot use sex to make someone fall in love with you. I’ve seen it happen, where the girl will state over and over that she is okay with the a purely physical relationship, and then start getting upset when the emotional aspect is not there or never returned. To this I say: IT IS YOUR FAULT. Don’t do what you cannot handle. Oh yeah, additionally, SEX ≠ LOVE. Woman must embrace this. I know it goes against everything we are taught as girls, but it is the truth. That misconception is where I believe most women get turned off of purely physical relationships.

    I also blame old society notions on sex and sexuality for why more women are not open to the notion of a purely physical interaction. Society has taught girls from an early age that sex is something special to only be shared with one individual after marriage. Girls grow up with this fear and amazement at their own sexuality. Not to mention society’s harsh criticisms and degradation of woman who are comfortable with sexuality. Woman who do have healthy (as in using protection and getting regular checks, etc) sexual lives, are deemed to have been abused or have low self-esteem, as Miss V seems to apply. I ask why? Is it so hard to believe a mostly physical activity, can be truly ruled, by I don’t know, physically attraction? We’ve all seen that male specimen that has made us go “ummmmmm, he could get it” so what is wrong with him getting it? If he turns out to be your future husband, your best friend, great! If he was only a one shot, maybe two shot deal, why is this so bad? In my opinion society says yes. I am very open about my sexual activities, I don’t believe I have anything to hide, although I know I am judge harshly for that, even by those I would call my friends.

    As to the size of the boat or the motion of the ocean, in my opinion it depends on the needs and expectation of the woman. In short, if you care about the person, truly love the person, the size of the boat doesn’t matter. Its all about the motion of the ocean, because then the woman is in tuned with her man’s body and vice versa, you will make it work so that both are satisfied at the end of the night. However, if you are just out to scratch an itch or satisfy a hunger (whatever you want to call it) chances are an appetizer won’t work. You want the full entrée! As such, the size of the boat matters!

    ~ 6 cents
    (sorry for the long response)

  7. First I concur with Toy…I talked to someone who was missing some pieces of the “total package” for me and it was very easy to keep it physical…he was great but it was what it was…I didn’t have a desire to invest my emotions with him because I didn’t see him as a valuable investment.

    I think that “formula” of emotional detachment has been passed down for ages, it’s our choice whether we want to stir it up and who we choose to use it on. I saw the detachment formula first in the form of mother-daughter relationships, which is complex in its own right but the strength of the formula is visible when a mother can emotionally detach from her own child. We also see it in “Escorts” who have regulars (if you know what I mean)…

    It is better with someone you have feelings for no doubt. One pro is that you are more likely to get pleasure from giving pleasure. Although it is better, at times we don’t feel like investing the time, energy, & patience… we just want we want NOW!

  8. Vanessa aka Miss V

    ok, let me clarify my statement above.

    when we talk about having sex with someone with no emotional attachment, I immediately think of either a prostitute, or someone engaging in a one night stand with a stranger… and although they may be fulfulling in one way or another, neither of which is really healthy (no matter how many safety measures you take, there is no guarantee that your partner has done the same… the prostitution part is a whole other story). but, don’t get me wrong, i’m not hating on those who choose any of these paths ;).

    the relations that Toy and IDK describe seem to have some sort of emotional component to it, albeit minor. yes, the dude does not meet your “boyfriend-type” standards, however, I think there is some form of “liking” there since a decision was made to mess with that dude on a regular basis (ie. you think he’s cool, he may be a good friend, or you just like company)… you could always hold out until you meet the “right” dude, but apparently, mr. right now is good enough, too.

    and 6 cents, i totally agree with you that society has governed what is right and wrong for women and sex… and yes, it’s unfortunate. i’m all about the girl power! nothing is wrong with having multiple partners, some more (or less) important than others. but as you said, protection/safety is the key, and i hope that when it comes to our health and well-being, there is some emotional investment…. anything else would be a little reckless.

    spread the sauce all you want, but be smart about it!

  9. Seattle Washington

    You know what, I’m going to walk this tight rope…

    Yes, sex is better when you have an emotional connection. The J.O. and wifey, or the current player vying for wifey status, definitely provide different feelings. Physically and emotionally. Yeah, the fact that they’ll go the extra mile is probably a big part of that. But also, and maybe this is just a personal thing, I have a business mentality about things when it’s not wifey.

    When it comes to a J.O., it’s like the Olympics. I’m going to go out there, give my best performance, rep my homeland and go for the gold. Then I’m going home. And like the Olympics, neither of us is going to care that what actually went down the week afterwards.

  10. “Woman who do have healthy (as in using protection and getting regular checks, etc) sexual lives, are deemed to have been abused or have low self-esteem, as Miss V seems to apply. I ask why?”

    I couldnt have said this any better to which I will add: I still feel most women flip flip on monogamy. Its really a form of control: “He wont need (or shouldnt) need any other woman after he’s had this good stuff”. You know like “Sunshine” in Harlem Nights (I feel lots of women at some point think their cooch is just like that characters just throw it up and the air and watch the sun shine-rainbows appear and birds chirp) any man in love that fast JUST after sex is a wimp-point blank and if you want make him your man then thats the foundation of your relationship.

    I had a woman last yr-35 yr old knowing it was casual sex ask me “are we a couple?”…I told her NO.

    Even though she wanted to use her neighbors relationship as an example telling me they “sexed quickly” and still became “a couple”

    Now how (and why) am I to verify such a statement? I dont take most mens anecdotal advice on sex into the bedroom but I ought to take her neighbors anecdotal advice..why cause we having sex? Mind you at the time she just made a year on the block and since then has moved.

    I still think all of this is about CONTROL…not love-human beings are EGO driven-women are no different. And can we please stop suggesting that the women that do have no strings attached sex have ALL been abused. Again how to vet such a line?

    If you are not pursuing a PHD in psych stop it (personally if this wasnt your major you took a C and K.I.M. and that was in your FRESHMAN yr).

    Whatever happen to women doing things better than men?

    For me I wanted be in a relationship back in 02. She said when she gets to NYC “we’ll see”. Well by 04 it wasnt goin anywhere and by 05 she made her choice to be with the next man…since then I dont want or care for a GF. I do love her but I aint wasting my life chasing her. Now out of school I dont want to hear I’m a “catch” and ought to “settle down” well again as a man I was ready at 27 now 32-fcuk it life goes on.

    But I guess I am now a “commitment -phobe…BUPKUS!!!!

  11. “i hope that when it comes to our health and well-being, there is some emotional investment…. anything else would be a little reckless.”

    Why does the sense of having an emotional investment in the person make it safer? Will the person you love not also burn you? Can’t emotional attachment or investment be as dangerous as not having an emotional investment?

    I do not understand this blind belief that having some emotional attachment to another person means you are going to be safer or better off.

    I am not denying that sex is better when there is an emotional connection and I agree with Seattle Washington, it usually because there is more incentive to please and go the extra mile.

  12. Miss V,

    “spread the sauce all you want, but be smart about it!”

    How exactly is one smarter about “spreading their penisina colada sauce? Perhaps it is smartest not to spread it at all?

  13. Sowhatiff Jenkins

    6 Cents,

    I think the idea that an emotional investment makes it safer comes from the idea that you are supposed to be able to trust that person you emotionally invest in….especially if the investment is mutual. Of course your boyfriend, girlfriend, husband or wife can burn you, but the belief is that they wont, hence the trust you have in them that you don’t have in I’m-just-boning-Tyrone. You are just messing around, so there is no incentive in theory, for either of you to look out for the best interest of the other.

  14. Vanessa aka Miss V

    ok, i think my comment got lost in cyberspace, so my apologies if the same thing comes up twice.

    so yeah… thanks Tiff, that’s exactly where I was going. 6 cents, by no means am i saying that an emotional investment guarantees no burn. however, i would hope that if you are emotionally involved with someone (and hopefully they feel the same way about you), both of you can have an honest discussion about your health status. plus, if you do get burned, at least you would know who burned your ass, so you can let them know whats up, and hopefully they would take care of that/stop spreading the disease. if you effed some stranger, how do you inform them of what happened? they may not know they have something, and they’re going around and giving it to others. We all know what HIV/AIDS is doing to our brothers and sisters.

    also, i said that SOME women who say they can have sex without any emotion have some sort of self-esteem issues… perfect example, Karrine Steffans. i don’t believe that it is IMPOSSIBLE to have emotionless sex, but in many cases, I think to say that is a stretch.

    slim, you’re right. abstinence is definitely the best protection. however, we both know that abstinence may not be an option for everyone. when i say spread the sauce but be smart about it, I mean know who you’re dealing with for reasons I stated in the first paragraph. “thronxing” with strangers is kinda of reckless, and can def put your health/life in danger.

  15. Now that I’ve made a couple silly comments, I can kinda respond to this post.

    I’d venture to say that there is a key difference for a dude just pumping a chick down without emotion and a dude pumping a chick he is dating or will potentially date. The difference is Expectations.

    When a man is deliver sausage to a chick for a one night stand or on the casual no strings attached, he needs to knock it out the park. The dude is aware. His performance each time must be off the wall, since all that him and shorty have in common is the desire to blast off. If he doesn’t get it pizzlin, even though we always win as long as we skeet, the word gets back to her girls and his ego is a bit deflated.

    If dude is dating the chick, or they got something more, there’s really not as much performance anxiety or pressure or whatever you wanna call it. Bare in mind, I’m talking about the average fellow and not the dudes we see in adult films. Sometimes we false start. Sometimes we hit a grand slam. The patient wifey type doesn’t mind if we occasionally hit a blooper just over first base.

    Expectations aside, it’s kinda easy for us to get it in and just go to sleep or go home. I actually know a lot of guys who’d say they don’t even need to smash cakes. They’d be happy to have a seat and be gratified in other ways just to avoid the possible emotional connect from a chick.

    **The views expressed above do not necessarily represent any happenings or past occurrences in the life of Slim Jackson.**

  16. Vanessa aka Miss V

    LMAO smash cakes? what?

  17. Better late than never, right?

    It’s easier to reign my emotions in if dude is “undesirable.” I can do him without much care of who he is as a person when he isn’t attractive in other ways.

    It’s jacked up. And as I mature, I don’t care to splinter myself anymore and sex a dude I don’t really care about.

  18. RightCoastLexSteele aka the Wang Slanging Living Legend

    Ok…seriously. Let’s get some things in perspective. Ladies, can you really be seriously emotionally attached to someone long term that doesnt have the whole package? (To include the golden pot in his pants) Yea, ok…blah blah blah, size doesnt matter if our bodies are in tune…sure. But there are just some nooks and crannies of the love tunnel that can only be touched by a steamboat. I mean, if you aint never had your sh*t rocked I guess that’s cool…but if you’ve been watching HDTV for an extended period of time, going back to regular tv kinda sucks…I would think. I know if I happen to messing with a chick who doesnt enjoy giving a mouth hug, it’s really going to be hard for to mentally come to grips with it when I’ve had the life force sucked out of me in the past.

  19. LMFAO. One of the greatest comments in this blog’s history.

  20. Wow, that is pretty hilarious!!

    I don’t know the answer to that question…but I know girls who have stayed w/ a guy even though they claim he’s not that good in bed b/c they felt like they cared about the guy a lot so they’d give him time to get his shit together.

    Come to think of it those relationships didn’t last…lol

    I would have to think you’re right, you can’t be in the long term emotionally attached relationship without the “whole” package…UNLESS you don’t know what you’re missing.

  21. first of all… lol to “mouth hug”.

    secondly, i gotta disagree with you Slim.

    if shorty’s a jump off, i think dudes generally don’t really care (as much). u just treat em like boxing, stick and move, stick and move. get ur rocks off, beat it up, but don’t make love.

    once, me and my boys threw a party.. and there was this random guy there nobody knew. Let’s all him Town E. Jefferson. He snuck into the bathroom with his bunny companion and started to give her good lovin’ deep strokin’. We were appalled… we taped it (from the outside ledge).. and at the end of the day we hoped it was his wifey because putting THAT type of effort for some party slore was a lil unacceptable. especially in our bathroom.
    and we didn’t know dude… so he’s lucky he didn’t get stomped out.

    – guns

  22. Gunz,

    Even if shorty is a jump, dudes still don’t wanna fizzle. When you lure her away from friends into your lair, which very well may be a bathroom, you don’t wanna just slip and slip out too quickly. When the boys see you come out the bathroom in a couple minutes instead of 15-20, you better just say you got the most amazing sloppy floppy of your life. Definitely shouldn’t make love to a jump. You gotta smash like you hate her. Let the disgust come out (umm, pun?) in every pump. She’ll love you for it.

  23. RightCoastLexSteele:

    Let’s get some things in perspective. Not everyman has “the golden pot in his pants”. It is nature, let’s accept it and move on. In order to answer your question, I must ask one in return. What is the the “whole package”?

    The answer to that question is what I believe to be a fundamental difference between women and men. In my opinion a woman is more likely to give up a man who has the “golden pot in his pants” for a man with whom she feels she has found her best friend. A person with whom she can share all of her self with emotionally. It might be hard for you to imagine not getting that life shattering “mouth hug”, but I dare say for a wonderful conversation over an extended period of time, a woman might learn to accept the average pot in the pants. Well she would need a little more than just wonderful conversation, but you get the gist.

  24. I wasn’t gonna comment, but I actually agree with Señor Steele on this one: The package is not whole if there’s no golden pot. Women have needs, too. I need emotional, mental, aaaaand…wait for it…physical stimulation in order to consider you the catch. So even if you can overwhelmingly please me with your stellar personality and heightened intellectual capacity, I refuse to co-star with a Razzie-nominated dude (look up Razzie Awards) in the sexual story of my life when I’m bringing in Oscar’s and ish.

  25. Senor RightCoastLexSteele bka God's Gift to Humanity

    Indeed. Not every man has a pot of gold. Some men have no gold at all. Some men just have pot. That being said, what exactly can be considered gold is in the eye of the beholder. My pot is actually lined and filled with platinum. I can provide you with my resume and references if necessary.

    The whole package is whatever may tickle your fancy. Everything that you desire from your partner who will eventually be your lawfully wedded or common law spouse. And the whole package usually includes a nice package. Now all that “he’s my best friend” nar is all well and good, but the same way you really cant pay the bills with love, LOVE-an emotional feeling, can not be a substitute for PHYSICAL satisfaction. If he cant f*ck now, what makes you think he’s going to get better @ 50? Ok, yea…you can introduce toys and hang from chandeliers and all that other spice up crap, but sometimes a woman just wants her hair pulled, booty smacked and her body rocked until her body can no longer legitimately sustain having orgasms. If you can find someone that can please you physically and emotionally as well, why settle for just one? I’m not saying that I would be with or marry someone simply because she had phenomenal mouth to member skills, but I will definitely not be with someone who doesnt or isnt any good at it, because shoot….they are naming the next 5 hurricanes after me. (A tropical storm will wet you, a hurricane will soak ya 😉

  26. This blog has been upgraded from PG-13 to NC-17. Fantastic!

    By the way, I think I’d rather be an F5 tornado leaving behind a trail of discriminate destruction. The nice house on the right side of the street is obliterated and the decrepit poorly maintained house is left untouched.

  27. Senor RightCoastLexSteele bka God's Gift to Humanity

    I have a penchant for destruction so I want to affect the whole state. Downed power lines, flash flooding, sand bags, the Red Cross, the whole nine. I understand the discriminate theory, but there’s a difference between flooding a basement and causing a flood in one house that’s so powerful they gotta shut the whole hood down.

  28. We’re all missing a very important point here…CAN HE LICK IT?! Lol..ok…that was a little graphic…but for me…size is great but there’s nothing like some good cunnilingus…cuz that just makes everything better. I’m also a fan of emotional connection…for me it just works better 🙂

  29. LMFAO!!! hahahahaha! Brownskin, you hit it right on the head. ::pause::

  30. Vanessa aka Miss V

    oh…. he def has to have a convo with my…. yeah.

  31. Sowhatiff Jenkins

    I love this blog. That is all.

  32. Brownskin you have me crackin up… it does in fact make things better… lolololol!

    A friend of mine (male friend) once said that a real man can make a woman cum (I’m assuming I can say that after Mr. Steele’s last few rants) without using his tongue or unsheathing his sword…

    … I’m of the opinion that the total package is a man who can do all three 🙂

  33. RightCoastLexSteele aka the Wang Slanging Living Legend

    I am not a role model.

  34. “If he cant f*ck now, what makes you think he’s going to get better @ 50?”

    This is THE paradox for the modern women, not so much in that she couldnt say this back in the day but back then-she could just not outloud or part of talk with the “ladies of the community”. Also it was seen as a low blow to NOT marry someone based on them not being good in bed todays women INSIST on this to perhaps a fault. Old school would say isnt this “where loves coquers all”?

    Could you be in love yet he was ok in the bed?

    Todays women has the assumption of “having it all”-which includes a great lover who can and does so regularly fckus the $hit out of her

    …the other paradox is to have such a man he most likey slept with a mulitple women as of the TIME you meet him not way off in his juinor high days. Sex is excercise and to stay good one must be repetitive so either he is having sex with one woman on the reg-and if that aint “You” oh well…or he has sex with multiples and runs into in the midst of one of those affairs. This to me is like men wanting to know the “number” from a chick-I dont know if I really want that answer no more than a woman wants to hear their boo before meeting (and marrying her yes its true) her use to bang strippers from

    Anyway I always wanted to know how women feel about this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s