You know, I’ve been reading comments on the forums that are puzzled/annoyed/disbelieving that Claire told Jamie she enjoyed their first time together and/or that she had an orgasm the second time around and told him he was a good lover. There is seriously no pleasing some people. WTF!
With the first complaint, the implication seems to be that you cannot have a good time in bed unless you orgasm and that how could Claire be satisfied by anything so quick and hurried and without much finesse as their first encounter? Ugh. First of all, it’s pretty realistic that a dude losing his virginity is not going to be sexing you up in all the approved kama sutra positions for an hour. So props for realism. Second of all, you can have a lovely, sexy, fun time in bed without orgasming. It’s better if you do (duh!) but you can still feel happy and close and turned on and lovely. There isn’t some sort of ‘if you don’t climax, your sex time sucked’ thing.
This brings me to complaint 2. People are griping that Claire came the second time they had sex. WTF! Why? Once again, their complaint seems that while it took longer and had more preliminaries, it wasn’t some sort of extended and complicated sexathon. Seriously? I did not realize that if your sexual hijinks took less than a specific amount of time and involved less than 50 tips from one of Cosmo’s ‘how to make out’ articles, you were not allowed to orgasm. It all depends on people and circumstances - sometimes you could be going for an hour and trying every trick in the book and nothing happens. Other times - well, the word ‘quickie’ was invented for a reason. Claire has had god knows how much alcohol, which lowers inhibitions. Before this night, she hasn’t had any sex for months. She is having sex with a gorgeous, fit guy who is clearly smitten with her and with the added frisson of novelty because before this night they never did anything at all. Oh, and she is attracted as hell to him. Under these circumstances, it wouldn’t be surprising if she came the first time they had sex that night, let alone the second, after more wine and more foreplay. And then why all the grudging about the fact that Claire calls him a good lover? I don’t care if he is tying cherry stems with his tongue or they are doing it meat-and-potato style, any dude that gets you off qualifies as a good lover in my book. Sometimes I wonder if people ever had sex, honest.
Don’t even get me started on the gripes about a show having a woman come from p-in-v sex as opposed to some other method. First of all, this show is about the most positive portrayal of female sexuality I’ve seen on cable (minus some couples in Spartacus, but you knew I was going to say that) so that sort of griping seems like nitpicking. Second, vaginal orgasms are not unicorns. I hate the prevailing narrative in some feminist circles (a weird mirror of male-gaze centric porny stuff that thinks a woman can get off every time on a dude coming on her face or anal and nothing but or similar) that traditional penetrative sex is second best and that women who say they enjoy and come from it often are deluded or in such small minority as not to count. In general, there is no one-size-fits-all. If you are vanilla (not that I am saying that the Outlander protagonists are because it’s way too early in their relationship to opine on that), your best partner is equally vanilla. A kinky connoisseur of whips would make you run away screaming even if he/she is someone else’s ideal partner. What matters most is not an abstract ideal but compatibility.
OK, I can’t believe I just wrote a long rant about sex mechanics in Outlander. Heeeeeelp.
It amazes me this post was even necessary.