With Bill Gates's recent foray into looking for ways to build a better condom, it looks like one company may be taking a novel approach to safer sexual practices.

Origami Condoms is looking to create a condom specifically designed for use in anal sex. In this case, it is the person on the receiving end who wears the condom.

As the NSFW video above demonstrates, the condom is inserted into the rectum, in a similar fashion as female condoms are used. One of the issues with regular condoms is that they can break more easily than during vaginal or oral intercourse, and durability, comfort and sensitivity all come into play. According to the website, the "insertive partner does not need to wear a condom, thus creating an experience closer to ‘sex without a condom.’" The condom is also made from silicone, rather than latex. The condom is scheduled to be available by 2015.

The company is also looking to fund its production through Indiegogo, starting tomorrow. So stay tuned.

Although readers of this column will note that I've already posted about the best bits of yesterday's election (hint: it's not the politics) there were still a few doozies I wanted to share with you before they got stale.  Although in the case of the political stories, the subjects themselves are beyond stale.

Example 1: Donald Trump.

Upon discovering that Obama had won the election, Trump took to Twitter to kvetch that the election was "a total sham and a travesty" and that "the world is laughing at us." No, the world is laughing with Obama for his election and laughing at you, Donald, for being such a whiney sad sack. 

Another person laughing at you, Mr Trump? Brian Williams, who thinks that Trump has "driven well past the last exit to relevance."

 

Why do I feel like this just happened?

Oh, and then Trump deleted a bunch of his tweets. Whatever happened to standing by your words? Hmm. Maybe Mr Trump should learn to censor himself before he presses "send." 

Oh well.

Example 2: Victoria Jackson's Twitter Feed.

Read her meltdown on Twitter. Go ahead.

***

In other bits of celebrity craziness, Kirstie Alley has joined John Travolta in spouting out to the tops of the mountains that he's not gay. Okay then. Sure.

Doesn't anyone remember the fact that Alley is also a Scientologist, just like Mr Travolta? I think Alley should read Kate Bornstein's A Queer and Pleasant Danger. Oh yeah, I forgot. She can't. Because Bornstein is viewed as a Suppressive Person.

***

And last but not least, Los Angeles County voted that all performers in porn films have to wear condoms. Even though the industry has threatened to move due to the passing of the new statute. 

***

 

We've all been there. You get on a plane, sit down and listen to the announcements. Please wear your seatbelts, no smoking, an oxygen mask, inflate this, blah blah.

But what you don't expect to hear is, "Here's how to put on a condom."

In a time when advertising dollars are being pushed into new and more interactive ways, Durex Poland found a way to make their skies perhaps a bit more friendly. They shot the advertisement on a commercial flight in Poland, planting condoms in the airplane for everyone to try out and learn how to put on, with wryly smiling stewardesses educating the masses.

Guerilla/viral marketing at its smartest and sexiest.

The Atlantic recently posted a story by Andy Isaacson on their website and their Tumblr entitled, "Can a Better Vibrator Inspire an Age of Great American Sex?"

I think it can.

There is often a great irony that happens in most discussions around sex. We, as humans in the 21st century, have greater and more access to information about sex and human sexuality than perhaps any other society. Thanks to studies, discussions and dissertations, as well as pop culture and pornography, we are more prone to discuss sex openly.

But how are we talking about sex, and sex toys?

We're still tittering and giggling while we do it.

Remember the episode of Sex in the City where Carrie and the girls discover the Rabbit?

Sure, the episode brought a certain degree of honesty in the discussion around sex toys -- they're fun, they're sexy, they make you feel good -- but by the end of the episode, the vibrator becomes a joke/crutch for Charlotte, who can't seem to stop using it.

Sex toys are called toys because they are fun. Why do we chastise people who want to have fun, and do it in creative ways? Because maybe they know something the rest of you don't: how to respond to their own bodies and the bodies of their partners in imaginative ways. Sex toys aren't a crutch for the lonely and horny; they are a way of opening one's sexual realm and possibilities.

The key here -- and in the previously stated article -- is in discussing what works and what doesn't work when it comes to sex and sex toys. Designers look into how bodies respond to various stimuli and build better sex toys. Conversely, we, as people who have sex (and consumers of these products), can have discussions as to what we like and what we want. When we can do that, we will all have better sex lives.

 

On Monday's episode of Anderson Cooper's eponymously titled talk show, the CNN and occasional 60 Minutes reporter interviewed Cyrus Sullivan.

Sullivan operates a site called STD Carriers (note: since his appearance on Anderson, I have had some difficulty accessing the site, no doubt due to bandwith issues on their end), which is a user-generated site/forum where people can post names and images of individuals they claim have various STIs, from herpes to HIV. Sullivan uses himself as an example of someone who has been victimized by someone who did not disclose the full extent of their sexual health, as he once dated a girl who had herpes. He has been quoted as saying:

It was based on a personal experience. I was dating some chick during college who didn't disclose to me that she had herpes. I was kind of upset about that, and I kind of created the site and put her on there as kind of like, the first person. It kind of made me look like I was looking for revenge, but I actually wasn't doing it for revenge.

I don't know Sullivan, or the person who purportedly gave him herpes. I don't know the extent of his relationship with this individual. But this all just feels a little bit like the "Burn Book" from Mean Girls.

As for Sullivan, he simply passes the buck, saying that he is not responsible for the content placed on his site, since he didn't put it there. However, he does offer to remove the information, with proof of negative test results. And for $1,000, he will also help you, using his other business, "clean up" your online search results. However, this may not help, because we all know that the internet is kinda forever (Google Cache, anyone?) but he defends himself from this by saying, "If somebody's on it, and I remove it, it's going to disappear eventually — unless some other people decide to search engine copy and post links to it."

Oh, and did I mention he also sells T-shirts on his site? Or the fact that he uses a biohazard sign when you use his search engine while you wait to see search results?

When I was single, I would treat any sexual partner as a possible risk. As a cisgendered gay male living in the 21st century, there are a number of sexually transmitted infections a person can get from various acts. You can minimize (not eliminate) those risks by choosing to do or not do certain sexual acts. You can wear condoms to lower the risk of HIV transmission, but that doesn't eliminate the risk of infections that are obtained through skin-on-skin contact. Or you can choose to only have oral sex, but you can still contract various STIs in your throat if you choose to do so without a condom. I accepted those risks every time I had sexual contact with another person.

Disclosure, especially when it comes to one's sexual health, is a very difficult thing to do. It's also a touchy subject in Canada, when nondisclosure can even be viewed as a criminal activity. To come out and say that you are HIV-positive, or have herpes or HPV or hep C, can affect a person's life in all sorts of ways. I can't speak to those effects on a personal level, as I have not had to deal with those things. But I have received calls and had conversations with individuals who disclosed to me that they had tested positive for various STIs, and I have had those conversations with other people as well. But these conversations are private matters.

We as a society shame individuals who have STIs. Sullivan's site is nothing more than a sexual witch hunt, all in the name of "protecting" people and "providing a service." It seeks to shame people who have next to no way to defend themselves. And on top of it, Sullivan is profiting from the shaming of the individuals who are listed on his site.

There's only one person here who should be ashamed, and that's Cyrus Sullivan.

 

Justin Huang apparently owes Jeremy Lin a bit of thanks, or at the very least, a high-five.

It seems that with the recent surge in Linsanity, this particular blogger feels that interest in the 6'3" player has fostered a certain type of interest in gay men. Sexual interest.

In a recent post on his I Am Yellow Peril blog, Huang tells how his social life seems to have gained a boost in recent times. Why? Because as Huang writes, "Linsanity could very well redefine the Asian American man as a sexually acknowledged being." People tend to notice tall, handsome, athletically gifted men. Whether that is your particular cup of tea or not is a different thing, but it's hard to deny that it is noticeable. And arguably very sexy. Huang writes:

We’re hardwired to desire the likeness of success; it’s a remnant of our primordial survival skills mixed with pop culture. It’s why I have a huge crush on my neighbor who looks just like Ewan McGregor, because I associate his face with that of my favorite movie star. And it’s why Tim (the aforementioned pretty boy) suddenly was made aware of my sexual potential as a mate. He’s now been given context in the muscled form of an NBA superstar.

In this sense, Linsanity applies not just to me, but to all Asian men, regardless on where they fall on the sexual orientation spectrum. You see, blonde twinks have David Beckham, and we have Jeremy Lin.

Does that mean that potbellied, bearded white guys have Zach Galifianakis?

Glad I'm not single, or I don't think I'd get laid very much.

 

If you read this blog, then you know I have a great love for the website/blog Gawker. I’m not here to write an open letter telling them how much I love them, but if I did, it would probably be directed to Brian Moylan.

Why? Because of this:

Image via Gawker

It all started about a week ago when news that Grindr, the social networking/cruising app for men who have sex with men had been hacked in Australia. People worried about their personal information being leaked, including conversations and pics that had been distributed via the app. (On a side note, looks like the person who hacked the app will not be prosecuted, or at least not at the time of this posting.)

Meanwhile, in a less sexually explicit realm of the internet (does such a thing exist?), Google has announced that it is getting rid of all its individual privacy policies for the various services that it maintains and will soon institute one umbrella policy for all. What does this mean? That Google can use the information you post in any of its various sites, programs, etc and use that to create ads that will be specific to you. Oh, and if you live under an online rock, Facebook is making its Timeline feature a permanent and non-negotiable part of your browsing experience, making all those stupid things you and your friends said on your wall in the past few years easily available for all to see.

In other words, people are starting to realize the permanence and permeability of online life. Just because what you said isn’t directly in front of your screen doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist somewhere, or that someone can stumble across it pretty easily. Christ, I once found stuff I had written on a listserv back in 1995 (don’t bother looking; it was under an alias). Things don’t disappear into the ether.

Five days after the Grindr story broke, writer Brian Moylan did something I don’t believe any other journalist or blogger has done before. He posted his Grindr profile on the web, for all to see. Comments on the story were generally positive, with the occasional doubt cast on the veracity of his stats – “All true”, he laughs. Opinions ranged from, “Wow, you're hot. Like, I would literally drag my dick through a mile of broken glass just to beat off to your shadow,” to “Dude - 6'2" and 150 lbs. I hope you get some hits on Grindr - you really need some protein.”

In the text accompanying it, Moylan jokingly admits to “whoring himself out” for viewing hits – he and his co-workers are having a contest to see who can get the most hits – but then he goes on to say something very telling:

“I'd like to say that putting the little ad I use to advertise myself on Grindr, a popular iPhone app that ranks gay men looking to meet other men for encounters of all sorts based on their proximity to the user, is some sort of comment about transparency. Since I would totally swipe a famous gay person's Grindr photo and put it on the Internet, I should make my own available.”

So I emailed Moylan and asked him for an interview. He said yes but that his schedule was busy. After missed phone calls and a few back-and-forth emails, I got him on the phone as he was waking up. “It’s raining in New York, and I’m still in bed,” he says as he stretches. When I asked him about the post in question and his reasons for posting it, he said, “I thought it would be fun and funny. And you know, I totally would, if I found George Michael on Grindr, I would totally take a screenshot of it and put it on the internet for everyone to see. If I would do it, why should my profile be off-limits?”

And there it is. Although Moylan considers himself to be more of a writer than a journalist – although he has worked in journalism, notably for the gay newspaper The Washington Blade – he’s simply pointing out that the online world is a very public one. Just because you’re alone on your computer doesn’t mean you’re not in a public sphere. If Facebook can log all your chats and Google can send you ads based on the content of your emails, then putting your photo and having conversations on smartphone-based applications is just another dimension of the public realm.

Moylan is realistic about what his online presence means in terms of his own private life. “There are some things that I will show on the internet and some things that are just for people who are close to me. I don’t talk about my family online, just 'cause. That’s not my place to share it.” He jokes that his father often reads his work, and in this particular instance, explaining what Grindr is and how it works was “a little bit of an uncomfortable conversation to have, but in the great realm of things, it wasn’t too bad.”

Moylan himself admits to having people occasionally recognize him from his work on Gawker when he uses the app. But he likens it to being seen in any public arena. “It’s like going to a department store,” he says. “If someone sees you in a department store, you can’t be like, 'Oh, yeah, I don’t go to this department store,' because you’re there! It’s like going to a gay bar; just as many people can see you. And yeah, I go to gay bars all the time and I go to Grindr all the time.”

When discussing the issues around media personalities putting their personal, social or even artistic lives online – Sook Yin Lee almost losing her job comes to mind - Moylan isn’t concerned. “There are things I have said about people in the media industry that I think have probably been far more damaging to my career prospects,” he says. “I’ve probably pissed off a number of people who may have hired me in the future. I feel like that is more dangerous to my future employment prospects than the fact that people may or may not know I go on Grindr.”

We’ve all done it. We’ve all put our faces, personal information (and possibly more) on everything from personal ads to blogs to Tumblr posts to Facebook pages. Although we as a society are often kvetching about the lack of online privacy, I think we are arguably more suspect than those we seek to blame. Besides, who’s the one posting all this information? Really, we’re just giving it away. We treat our personal information like trash on the side of the road. We shouldn’t be surprised when someone enacts the “finders keepers” rule. But within that same frame, I think it’s time we give each other a bit more of a break when we are open about ourselves and our lives online. It's hard to fault someone for doing something that we also do, have done or would do. So I applaud Brian Moylan for posting his Grindr profile on Gawker. Now, if only a certain silver fox anchor would do so . . .

Maybe during sweeps week.