The Dictionary of Sexual Slang
by Alan Richter (1992)

You gotta love a professor who would write a book like this, but nowadays, can he talk about his research without being charged with harassment? Richter, a two-time United Kingdom Scrabble champion (I wonder why), writes in the introduction: "Many languages could probably support a whole book about their sexual phrases. But no other language can rival the variety, color, or sheer number of sexual terms to be found in English." This is a dictionary where looking up dirty words like fuck or shit is about as exciting as turning to "the" or "and" in Webster's. Who cares when you've got kwela, the African Nguni tribe's term meaning "to mount," or patha-patha, the South African equivalent? Why bother when you can choose between sugar stick, a 19th century British term for penis, or Shakespeare's reference to the vagina as a "peculiar river"? And finally, who knew that gism (semen) is the preferred form of jism? All these years I've been spelling it wrong.

Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices
by Brenda Love (1994)

This thorough and fascinating guide to fetishes will either reassure you that you're normal or confirm that you're weird, or maybe both. Includes an incredible glossary of scientific terms. Turned on by insects? There's a name for it. The encyclopedia includes information about many unusual practices, including concubinage, mock marriages, power tools (including a list of those suitable for sex games), sadism, suturing, frottage and inunction.

The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Sex
by Dr. A. Willy, Dr. L. Vander, and Dr. O. Fisher (1967)

The best parts of this book — and the ones the publishers brag about in the introduction — are the 176 illustrations, many in color. One connects "a dinner of exciting foods" with a man later having "erotic dreams in which unsatisfied desires are fulfilled"; I've added beef stroganoff to my menu lately with no results to report. There also is an unappetizing cross section of the penis, with various red and blue veins. The text itself is academic and dry, so you know Cadillac Publishing was like, this book needs pictures!

Is Sex Necessary? or Why You Feel the Way You Do
by James Thurber and E.B. White (1929)

I picked this book up for 50 cents a while back, then read entire chapters aloud to my favorite girl. It can only be described as brilliant and funny. Here, for instance, is a smidgen from one chapter entitled The Sexual Revolution: Being a Rather Complete Survey of the Entire Sexual Scene: "The sexual revolution began with Man's discovery that he was not attractive to Woman.... His masculine appearance not only failed to excite Woman, but in many cases it only served to bore her. The result was that man found it necessary to develop attractive personal traits to offset his dull appearance. He learned to say funny things. He learned to smoke, and blow smoke rings. He learned to earn money. This would have been a solution to his difficulty, but in the course of making himself attractive to Woman by developing himself mentally, he inadvertently became so intelligent an animal that he saw how comical the whole situation was." Charlotte's Web has nothing on this. Thurber did the illustrations throughout. They make no sense whatsoever but neither does sex, I suppose.

The Male Nude in Contemporary Photography
by Melody D. Davis (1994)

The naked guy who adorns the cover of this book has a stump arm and a terrific penis. Davis explains that "frontal male nudity means that one cannot avoid the penis," and that hiding or disguising it makes it even more noticeable by its absence. Some judges have ruled that the penis is automatically obscene (and therefore illegal) if displayed, because it by default "signifies sexual acts." Besides the cover, it isn't until page 53 of the hardcover edition (the book has since come out in paperback) that you actually see a penis, and even then, many of the photos are dull, artsy-fartsy "What is Masculinity?" emotional dramas. The penises on page 53 belong to three elderly men. Then you see a lot of hairy butts and the next penis is by Robert Mapplethorpe, on page 77. The penises start picking up, mostly because Davis reprints a lot of Mapplethorpe, including that one of Bob Love sitting on a pedestal with his schmeckel resting peacefully between his legs. Then we get into the amputees, which include a reprint of the cover shot, a guy with one leg, a guy with one arm, another guy with one leg, and a guy with no legs wearing an American flag as a diaper. The photos become more odd. It's hard to ignore Testicle Stretch with Possibility of a Crushed Face, or the hairy Australian drag queen, or the masturbator covered with entrails and wearing a Quasimodo mask. And geez, another guy without legs — were these the only photos the publisher could afford? Then more writing about the power of the phallus, and an index that has 26 entries for penis, 10 for castration and 31 for mother, but none for amputees.

X-Rated Bible: An Irreverant Survey
of Sex in the Scriptures
by Ben Edward Akerley (1989)

A former college professor, Akerley starts out by noting the irony of fundamentalist Christians who want everyone to follow the Good Book literally. "They hold to a narrow moral code," he writes, "yet they stand on shaky ground indeed, since by their own standards much of the Bible might be considered obscene." Akerley proceeds to pick out and describe the juicy parts for us, offering a rather dry chronicle of every act of incest, venereal disease, homosexuality, rape, adultery, group sex, indecent exposure, nudity, prostitution, abortion, husband swapping, sexism, bestiality and incident of witchcraft. On close examination, however, most of his conclusions could be described as a stretch. He calls Abraham and Isaac pimps, argues that King David was revived with that sin of sins, "female body friction," and labels Paul "the compulsive celibate" (a guy can't win). You quickly realize that Akerley also takes the Bible too literally. Two years ago, Akerley expanded and revised the book; I'm surprised more fundamentalists haven't posted negative comments on Amazon.

What Makes Pornography "Sexy"?
by John Stoltenberg (1994)

John Stoltenberg is the cofounder of a group called Men Against Pornography and holds degrees in divinity and fine arts. This thin paperback describes an exercise he invented that combines his interest in religion and theatrics. After hearing a presentation ten years ago by Women Against Pornography, Stoltenberg decided to create The Pose Workshop for men attending Christian retreats. As he describes the workshop, he introduces the topic of why erotica is evil, selects five or six men from the audience, then asks them to duplicate the pose of a model from Playboy, Penthouse or Hustler. The poses, of course, are ridiculous and uncomfortable. The (clothed) men are "coached" by others in the room to get the pose perfect, including what Stoltenberg considers the obligatory "distance look" in the eyes. After the poses are completed, the guys all discuss how they felt, how they feel about porn, what they learned, etc. Notably, Stoltenberg does not pay the men for posing, which is certainly the main motivation for most of the women who do it. He also doesn't include anything in the book to indicate how the men described the experience. Besides giving instructions about how to conduct pose workshop (the word "pornography" is banned, for instance, since it might dilute the discussion with discussion of what the word actually means), Stoltenberg describes some of the problems that arise, including "mirror imaging" (the poser reflects the photograph to the group, instead of matching it), "loners" (men who exhibit "private anger or distress") and, worst of all, "panderers" (men who enjoy the posing and take a "First Amendment fundamentalism" or "gay-lib chauvinism" stance in discussions). The point, Stoltenberg writes, is to rise above "intellectual and argumentative defenses about pornography" (in some circles, this is known as zealotry) and "understand that pornography exploits women's sexuality and manipulates men's." Call me jaded, but all I see here is a call for better erotica, where the women pose more naturally. Also, I see six unsuspecting men being pressured to humiliate themselves and feel ashamed about their sexuality. If you need a definition of pornography, that's mine.