This week, something occured to me. All of the sex product designs I’ve seen have two things in common:
They are designed by men.
The products are designed to be used by women.
How pompous is that? I have to say, I’ve had hundreds of sexual encounters. I have to say, I think that I probably have as much to learn about what women want as I have found out. Probably I have a great deal more to learn. Yet, other male designers feel they have just what every woman wants. Ugh.
The second thing is, why don’t they design something they can use themselves? I mean, that’s something they have a more intimate knowledge of, isn’t it?
I’ve spoken with some female students who have done adult novelties as projects, and talk about research suggesting a need for toys that focus less on penetration.
I didn’t say I’ve been with that many partners, but just that I’ve had hundreds of encounters with those that I’ve had. I’m actually a lot closer to Al Franken than Wilt Chamberlain.
The cone: That’s interesting. It looks completely non-male designed. However, it does look functional. On another level, I remember in psychology classes talking about phallic symbols and the triangle, or cone, is the simplest. It’s like a modernist toy.
the cone and such product are a very interestiing topic. toys are exactly that, toys. i think the citical component to a good design in this arena is its ability to attract the user. if the design does not draw the consumer to it comfortably, it will repel and be ultimately useless (or good for a door stop).
