I can see the issue one might have with the "virgin" part of this, but other than that I don't see what you're saying. I've never used this sort of thing, but I can't see why I would judge couples who do. Am I hating my genitals as well if I use lubricant?

Also, was it Jessica who made fun of sexually submissive males that one time, or am I thinking of another staff member?

In all fairness, I don't think that products like this are always used because women hate their genitals. I speak from experience. I dated a great guy a while back who turned out to be really, erm, "small." To some extent, size does matter. So, since there wasn't really a way of making him bigger, we used a product like this. It increased pleasure for both of us.

Granted, I didn't use a product called "liquid virgin," but it was the same thing, really.

Who named this product? Seriously.

Am I supposed to be ashamed of the fact that I'm not a virgin anymore and poison my vagina so it tightens up like a cartoon cat's lips after drinking lemon juice?

Jessica: Alice, I certainly have never made fun of sexually submissive males nor do I remember anyone on Feministing doing so.

Funny, I didn't actually remember what the post in question was about, just the impression it gave me. But after some searching of the site and my memory, I found it: http://www.feministing.com/archives/008877.html

Apparently it was a bit more specific than merely submissive males, but the point remains. Also, the poster was Samhita, not Jessica.

But I think that the idea behind a product like this is woman-hating.

So, even having an example in which the product improved sexual pleasure for both partners, you think this product is woman-hating? You've lost me.

Alice, I remember that well. I'm certainly the most vocal male bottom (using the term inclusively) around here. I actually sent Samhita an email that I was not offended. Most of the readership jumped on her about it, and I have always been glad to see that BDSMers are welcome here. But first, what she said was a throw-away update after she realized that she had totally misunderstood the product; and second, as a male, and a het male, and a cis-male, I have to recognize that all my sexual expression is privileged in relation to women, and to queer folks, and to trans folks. So to the extent that one takes Samhita's comment that men get to play at having their sexuality controlled while for women it's everyday experience at face value, well, I have to recognize that it's true. That's part of what needs to be fixed, of course.

I've never seen anything that I thought was anti-BDSM sentiment from any of the bloggers here and rarely in comments.

Alice: The idea behind the product, like Jessica said, is that a woman needs to be 'tight' to give her partner pleasure. Futhermore, it implies that women have to be virgins to achieve the maximum sexual pleasure for their partner (not for themselves, even). Everyone knows that the most prized conquest of a man is a nice, tight little virgin, right? Gag.

In regards to the other post by Samhita, I think it was blown out of proportion.

This shit has been around forever. When I worked at The Pink Pussycat (classy ass sex store in the West Village), it was one of three things I refused to sell people (Anal Eaze and poppers were the other two). It's also known as China Shrink Cream.

That being said, I don't necessarily think the product itself is woman-hating (unless the ingredients are found to be harmful or dangerous). The packaging, name, execution, and marketing? Sure. But wanting a tighter vag (and while we're on it, it's "vag" and not "vadge," k?) isn't necessarily "hating your body." Vaginal tightness and increased sensation benefit both partners, and I don't see nobody talking shit on Kegals.

Also, the problems with this product are not lublication and sexual pleasure. The problems are virginity fetishization and safety.

I'm all for people wanting to make orifices tighter or looser, to make their sexual activities more mutually fun. But the product doesn't just advertise tighness, it markets virginity as a sexual fetish. That whole cultural trope, together with the abstinence movement and all of its sex negativity and the prevalence of statutory rape and child abuse, are really bad things IMO. That's not to say people shouldn't play with those ideas with partners; it's just that the marketing links up so strongly with a whole load of messages that women who are sexual beings are lessened and used up in the process; a notion that is pervasive and that I despise.

Also, companies are putting out chemicals that may not be safe at all. Numbing creams for anal sex, for example, are no substitute for the proper way (lots of lube, lots of warm-up, lots of communication). They can lead to damage. Penis creams can cause erectile problems. Now this; alum in the vagina? I'm no doctor, but I worry that this is unsafe. It must interfere with blood flow and probably natural lubrication. Can it lead to infection? Nerve damage? I have no idea, nor am I confident that the manufacturer does.

(There's a larger rant here about the conservative deregulation agenda and the return to the Gilded Age when food and medicine purchases were buyer-beware.)

The bloggers here got Samhita a big Good Vibrations gift basket for her last B-day, IIRC. They are not a sex-phobic bunch, and I'm confident in saying that's not where Jessica's reaction to the product (which I share) comes from.

Alum can cause skin irritations, can induce vomiting if ingested, and can even kill you if ingested in a large enough dose. At least, that's what I read. It can also cause vaginal dryness, so it's use as a lube is questionable at best. Ick-factor is high as well...

At a glance, 3 of the product's ingredients (phenoxyethanol, methylparaben, and propylparaben) appear problematic (due to their being linked to pesky problems like endocrine disruption, reproductive disruption, and sense organ toxicity). The Environmental Working Group keeps a database I like on personal care and cosmetic products and the potentially harmful substances in them. Liquid Virgin is not listed yet.

Regulation is loose for cosmetics and hygiene products and even looser for sex products (which are not even listed in the database above). Personally, I'm more concerned about the looseness of our regulation standards than that of my vag.

Oops. Here's the database http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/index.php

That's really sad that someone would name a product something as demeaning as liquid virgin. I hate that it implies that women who are not virgins cannot have pleasurable sex with their partner and need to use some disgustingly-named product like this.

If it is a woman's choice to use a similar product I see no problem, but I could see some men bringing this home to their partner to use and their partner feeling like less of a woman or like they are not good enough provide pleasure without some kind of product like this.

It's all in all a bad situation.

Do they have "Liquid Slut," by any chance? My boyfriend's a bit on the large side and I could use some help, you know? I'm not going to google it, though, since I value my eyes:)

So it seems that for a lot of people the name is at least a factor to any problem they have with the product, moreso than what the product actually claims to do (tighten the vaginal passage).

I would probably have named it "Vice Grip", both for the joy of a good ol double entendre and because it's about as descriptive as the use of virginity to imply tightness. Any other suggestions? Remember they are trying to sell this stuff with as little effort as possible, so it has to be catchy and somewhat self-explanatory.

Jessica: RE: Virginity fetish(izing). Really? Would it be causing the fetish or exploiting the fetish? If it is the latter, how is this genuinely harmful? Please explain this to me, in small words because I guess I'm dumb as I've been trying to figure out how exploiting an existing fetish is actually causative in regards to harming (other than exploting for commercial sake, but then money doth make the world go round).

CATB: Re: Former lover with a small penis, do I know you? Because according to the email I keep getting I may be your former lover.

atwining: You owe me a new keyboard. the amalgam visual I got whilst thinking of a vagina and the cat-lips thing made me spit coffee all over the place.

anna: People come in all shapes and sizes, and while we are all certainly under pressure to change our shape and whatnot in accordance with fashion, certainly some people do benefit from making physical accommodations for their partner and themselves when it comes to lovemaking. Some women, for whatever reason, do have vaginas which are larger than those of other women just as some men have vaginas which are smaller. Invert the matter, if a friend of yours had an unusually small vagina and found sex to be uncomfortable or even painful, but she could get a surgery to make it more pleasurable, would you discourage her from doing this? If so what would be your reasoning? The fact is, up to a point, tighter is usually better. I've engaged in certain kinds of play which temporarily leave the vagina very loose relative to it's normal state, regular sex at that point is essentially futile for both partners.

TheSoyMilkConspiracy: Anyone disses the all-mighty Kegal in my presence shall feel the wrath of my mockery.

Thomas: While I completely agree with your philosophy regarding anal play I just can't agree with you that this product has a causative effect regarding fetishizing virginity, and certainly not sexualizing children. Correlation =/= causation. This is, in essence, the same argument made by the anti-porn crowd when they try to say that porn causes rape, even though every serious study indicates no causative relationship. I believe you when you say you're pro-sex; but you do seem to be using the rhetoric of the anti-sex crowd.

Halo; Peepers: Best reason I've read to avoid the product. Alum = unhealthy. thanks for reading up on it!

Oops, I just said some men have vaginas. I hope everyone knows I meant to type "penises" and this does not cause anyone confusion.

Logrus, correlation and causation in longstanding social structure are hard to parse. However, I think that marketing based on the fetishization of virginity reinforces it, and we already have so many problems that revolve around that idea. I would venture to guess that most folks here would also object to marketing of sex products that played to racial stereotypes, and for the same reasons: while the stereotype necessarily predates the marketing, that isn't the end of the causation analysis, as the marketing reinforces it by reiterating the imagery.

This is not just a sex toy/aid, folks.

The larger issue is the more common use for this abroad: women in other countries often use this lubricant (maybe not the same brand but the same basic product) on their wedding nights to ensure that their new husbands believe they're honorable virgins and therefore don't return them to fathers who might have them killed. SO to say that there's no negative implication behind this product is to ignore the underlying implication - that a) worth is equated to sexuality and b) sexual value is equated to lack of use, be that chastity, virginity or just infrequency. While we in the U.S. may equate this with a good time in the sack, it's still supporting notions of wanting a fresh vag that hasn't been "stretched out" -- a concept that desexualizes mothers who've had vaginal delivery, women of a certain age, women who've experienced different physical traumas. Further -- who's to judge tightness? -- the MAN, which places the assessment of a woman's sexuality/sexual organ in the hand's of a man.

I'm all for sex toys, fantasy, yada yada, and I DO think this product can be used for purposes of sexual pleasure by a woman who enjoys it, but that doesn't mean it isn't equally used in ways that support horrible systems we don't agree with.

I'm all for increasing sexual pleasure, but I agree that the packaging and the whole "virgin" message are pretty gross.

The biggest problem that I have with this product, however, is the dubious list of ingredients. As far as I know (and can tell from the interwebs), potassium alum contains aluminum sulfate, a highly soluble form of aluminum. That means that you can probably absorb it through your mucous membranes, and there's some evidence that high levels of aluminum in your system can make you sick. Also, potassium alum is mostly used as a component of deodorant because of its antimicrobial properties. That might sound good, but I think most women can tell you that you get more yeast infections when you're on antibiotics because you've screwed up your natural fauna down there.

This seems to be another dangerous and/or untested product that preys on women's insecurities about their vag. Not cool.

Thomas: I guess I see this as no different than pretty much any product that exploits something that is a fetish or a specific turn-on. Pornography is pretty much inherently exploitive of something, or it's not doing it's job, be it big breasts big penises or little people. I don't think you can make a moral ruling on what it being exploited w/o also making the moral ruling on the predilection of the target. If a person likes boobs, then it's morally neutral. If a person likes tight vaginas then it is also morally neutral. I see the use of the word "virgin" as a semantic shortcut to convey meaning through association. "dumbing down" product names in order to reach and entice the broadest possible market is a necessary byproduct of capitalism and the fact that certain words and images excite the purchaser. "Virgin" is one of those words.

Also comparing it to racism, I feel, is a false step in judging the product's impact. For one this is being marketed in very specific environments to adults. I cannot see any way in which the purchase or notice of this product is going to empower someone to force virginity on another person, which leads me to a lesser, but I feel valid, point:

Not only is your argument making a moral judgment on the person who wants whatever is associated with virginity, it is also making a moral judgment on virginity. Consider for a moment that if we are making the statement that marketing something which uses virginity and it's associated ideas as a bad thing then how are we not saying that that which it tries to emulate is not a bad thing?

Certainly, like all things, this could be used as a tool of oppression but those who would do so would oppress regardless. Look to the "dry-sex" practices somewhat common to certain regions of Africa.

Tara. K: Further -- who's to judge tightness? -- the MAN, which places the assessment of a woman's sexuality/sexual organ in the hand's of a man.

Like all matters regarding sexual exchange the person judging the prowess or fitness of is always going to be the "other" party. The only thing that makes this particular product male-centric is the inherent nature of most male/female sexual relations being vaginal/penis/penetrative. Do you think that lesbian female couples don't judge the physical attributes or skills of their partners?

Sex should be a co-operative effort. If I can do something to make my partner happy at no cost to my self then it's not only my obligation to do so but it should be my desire to do so, would you not agree?

Now this is, to some degree, a moot point because as some have pointed out the product at hand may actually be harmful and so I would not ever ask my lover to use it (also I'm frigging huge, I swear it. I don't care what you've heard, it's all lies), but because I honor open communication as an absolute must then just as I would want input in my own technique or fitness from a lover I would also suggest Kegels or some such if I thought it would be beneficial.

I just noticed something else on the package: "Strawberry scented."

I doubt it's coincidental that strawberry is pretty much the textbook scent/flavor for anything associated with little girls (infantilizing much?), but the main issue here is that anything scented or flavored really shouldn't go anywhere near your vagina.

Lubes, massage oils, and other sex products that are scented and/or flavored either contain saccharin, aspartame, or straight up sugar, all of which will cause a raging yeast infection in the majority of women.

It's the same reason most food shouldn't be used as internal sex toys. Even some non-flavored lubes (like Astroglide) contain glycerin, which is also a sugar and can have the same effect.

Interestingly enough, flavored lubes are really designed to make performing oral sex on MEN more enjoyable and really aren't meant to be used in the vagina, but the only people who ever attempted to purchase flavored lube in my sex shop were dudes who think vagina tastes nasty au natural and/or women who are self conscious about their own flavor and smell. The men got a stern lecture and the women only needed to hear two words ("yeast infection") before they went running for the hills.

My flavored lube sales were pretty low.

So yeah, this Liquid Virgin stuff sucks for multiple reasons. There was a reason I refused to sell it. And stick with silicone or glycerin-free water based lubes.

TheSoyMilkConspiracy: You are awesome with the knowledge on this stuff. Can you tell my your thoughts on some of the silicon lubricants, such as "Wet: Platinum"?

As you noted the FDA is basically useless when it comes to informing consumers about this stuff, and what information is out there on the web is either suspect (looks like spam from the manufacturer) or so poorly written that I mistrust the intellect of the person doing the product review.

Logrus, I basically just disagree with you. The exploitive aspects of porn are not something I'm just willing to shrug my shoulders at; I don't think our sexual tastes arise from the ether with no cultural influences and I don't think that racist stereotypes are a bad lense to use to examine sexist stereotypes. In fact, there's a ton of racist porn out there, and it's not as simple as "if a person likes boobs ..." Tending to be attracted to black partners or east asian partners is not the same as porn that mines the worst racist stereotypes; and I don't think that the body types in porn or the activity in porn ought to be free of examination just because it gets people off. We don't give advertising or other entertainment media some kind of free pass just because people like it; why should porn have some kind of moral-vacuum exception?

Thomas: I'm cool with not agreeing on this, I don't think you're a dick or anything just because we don't agree. I can clearly see that you're not making any effort to be overly judgmental about people, and I hope you can see that I'm not trying to be a dick either just because I disagree.

Tara K.: I doubt these gels would pass muster in traditional cultures abroad. Usually there's a blood-stained sheet displayed after the wedding night. Typically, "revirginized" young women are rich and they get surgery. Deplorable, but these are the facts.

"Vaginal tightness and increased sensation benefit both partners, and I don't see nobody talking shit on Kegals."

I think the reason that no one's talking shit on Kegals, is because that is a safe, healthy way to exercise the PVC muscles to get long-term enhanced pleasure for both partners. My big qualm here is the idea of putting something potentially dangerous in my vag for a possible (and temporary) good time. Likewise, I don't think guys should be expected to put any cream on their penises to make them swollen and appear bigger. I'm against potentially harmful quick-fixes.

Cecilieaux commented at July 16, 2008 2:27 PM: "Tara K.: I doubt these gels would pass muster in traditional cultures abroad. Usually there's a blood-stained sheet displayed after the wedding night. Typically, 'revirginized' young women are rich and they get surgery. Deplorable, but these are the facts."

Meanwhile, could using "tightening" chemicals in her vagina increase the odds of tearing and bleeding during intercourse?

I don't think this product actually contributes to women hating their genitals. A product that tightens the genitals is neutral and with a neutral name I have no problem with it -- whoever had the idea of calling it Vice Grip is a genius. However, this product definitely does fetishize virginity as a desirable, ideal condition. We're all working against the idea that a woman is defined by her genitals and their condition, as opposed to by her mind and what she can contribute to society. Implying that a product will return a woman to a state of virginity -- complete with little icky hearts on the box and the infantile strawberry scent -- reaffirms the idea that being a virgin is the best and most desirable state.

I don't think this product actually contributes to women hating their genitals. A product that tightens the genitals is neutral and with a neutral name I have no problem with it -- whoever had the idea of calling it Vice Grip is a genius. However, this product definitely does fetishize virginity as a desirable, ideal condition. We're all working against the idea that a woman is defined by her genitals and their condition, as opposed to by her mind and what she can contribute to society. Implying that a product will return a woman to a state of virginity -- complete with little icky hearts on the box and the infantile strawberry scent -- reaffirms the idea that being a virgin is the best and most desirable state.

"I DO think this product can be used for purposes of sexual pleasure by a woman who enjoys it"

Please don't bite my head off for asking this, but wouldn't tightening the inner walls of your vagina make sex hurt even more?

Lilly, it might make sex hurt if you don't need the product -- i.e., you don't feel that your vag is too loose or your partner's penis/object of sex play is too small for you. It might make sex hurt in the way that a massive dildo or butt plug might not feel awesome for everyone, but for others it could be just what the doctor ordered. For a man with a penis on the smaller size who is dating a woman with a larger/looser vagina, it could be a godsend for the two of them.

Apparently the jury's still out on the safety, though.

"For a man with a penis on the smaller size who is dating a woman with a larger/looser vagina, it could be a godsend for the two of them."

Ok. That actually makes sense.

I don't know if I'd trust this product enough to use it. The pinkness and the hearts gave me the impression that the creators of "liquid virgin" were making fun of themselves.

I thought it looked like some sort of candy at first glance

Danyell: I totally agree. I was merely responding to the idea that vaginal tightness is something that only men desire or benefit from. As I have already said twice - this was a product that I refused to sell when I worked in a store that stocked it.

Logrus:
Oh, I could wax poetic about lube all day long. Ready to be hit over the head with the knowledge stick?

The difference between silicone and water-based lubes is that WB ones absorb into your body (which is why you need to spit/reapply so often), but silicone molecules cannot be absorbed into the skin, and are spherical so they basically roll over each other like ball bearings and provide cushioning and slickness. Silicone lube is completely safe - there are no topical reactions, irritations, or allergens and it won't harbor or grow bacteria.

As long as there are no additional additives (all silicone lube is basically made of three silicone liquids that form lube when combined: dimethicone, dimethiconal and cyclomenthicone) all silicone lubes are the same in terms of health and safety, but the thickness changes from brand to brand. Dimethicone is denser and more expensive than the other two silicones, so "premium" (read: thicker and pricier) silicone lubes use more dimethicone and therefore it will be listed first on the ingredient label.

If you're looking for a thicker, more luxurious silicone lube, check out the brands targeted towards gay men/anal sex. Because anal sex is a more, ahem, strenuous sexual activity that needs constant and thicker lubrication than say, jerking off and vaginal intercourse, lubes marketed for gay men are a good bet. Price is another indicator, but again, you can always check the label and many sex shops will have samples out so you can do a feel test. I've heard good things about Eros Pjur and ID Velvet if what you're looking for is thickness and tenacity.

Wet:Platinum and ID Millennium (probably the most common silicone lubes) are relatively middle of the spectrum when it comes to viscosity, but if you like them, then great - most people are not connoisseurs and some people actually prefer a thinner, less noticeable, more natural lube.

Silicone lube also wears many hats. These same ingredients are found in hair products (hello Biosilk!) and silicone lube can be used as massage oil, moisturizer, even lip gloss and shave gel.

Now the downside: silicone lube is not water-soluble, so it won't wash off sheets or clothes easily. It also won't wash off you easily, although as I said you can just kind of massage it into your hands/body for moisturization or run it through your hair for shine. Also, silicone lube cannot be used with silicone or cyberskin sex toys. Liquid silicone bonds with solid silicone and basically dissolves everything into a big, gummy mess. Because more and more toys these days are being made with silicone (it's much, much safer and better than latex/rubber/jelly), this could present a problem. It's important to note that silicone lube IS condom safe.

When it comes to MY preference? I don't have a brand I'm loyal to. I use both water-based and silicone lubes all the time, and I prefer silicone hands down because it feels better, lasts longer, and isn't all sticky and gloppy. Water based is cheaper, but I think silicone is definitely worth the extra dough - no lube out there is inexpensive period.

That being said, I'm cheap as fuck so I usually just get whatever silicone lube is the least expensive, which can affect the viscosity, as noted above, but that doesn't bother me at all. The biggest factors in picking a lube are your personal preference and what you plan on using it for. If you're going to be doing a lot of rough and tumble buttfucking, you should go for the thicker "luxury" lubes, but for the simpler sexual tasks it's just really based on your preference. Try 'em all out!

Hope this helps!

Sorry to derail the thread with this off-topic and mad lengthy post, but I never shy away from a sex question. Ask and ye shall receive.

They're using ALUM? Oh God...it's a dye mordant. It's also using for home canning if one wants to make pickles. And it's VERY sour. The mere thought of using it on my genitals - !

SOYMILK-have you ever heard of the lube "PINK" my friend's gynecologist recommended it to her and she loves it. I usually just use water based lube but I have been curious to try this out. Is it all it's cracked up to be?

Sorry for the dethread guys, I've just been wondering about this forever! (or like three weeks)

To stay on topic: I do agree that my putting the word "virgin" right there in the title the product is presenting certain themes. It does not strike me as a product that is meant to be viewed as mutually beneficial. I dont know about anyone else but I my first time was not fun and I was pretty damn drunk in preparation. I do not ever want to bring my vagina back down to the virgin state again.

Not so harmless, courtesy of Salon (warning! do not read while eating)

http://www.popline.org/docs/144869

Title: Recto-vaginal fistula following coitus: an aftermath of vaginal douching with aluminium potassium sulphate dodecahydrate (potassium alum).

Abstract: This report delineates an incident of coital injury following douching of vagina with aluminum potassium sulfate dodecahydrate (potassium alum), which is believed to promote greater sexual stimulation of the husband during sexual intercourse. A 28-year-old woman was admitted to the gynecological ward complaining of vaginal pain, bleeding, and passage of fecal matter through the vagina after douching it with potassium alum prior to coitus. Vaginal examination showed a lot of fecal matter with a septic edematous wound 2.5 cm at the fourchette, a fistula about 5 cm in length. Treatment included daily perineal toileting, a low residue diet, antibiotics, and advice against vaginal douching with potassium alum.

What crap! I cant believe anyone would market this shit! Its horrible that certain business channels in the U.S. feel uninhibited about selling this type of product to a female demographic. All this does is generate hypersensitive anxiety by women concerning their relationships with their own bodies.

I’m just really sick of women being referred to as “loose” if they have had multiple partners. Just the fact that people take the old insult of “loose women,” and immediately assume that it is referring to the vagina is just a great example stupid concrete thinking. Not the mention that there is this idea out there that if a women is considered promiscuous then her virgin is somehow going to get all loose and stretched out; however, monogamous sex (even tons of it) doesn’t have the same effect. I also find it hilarious that there are a lot of men out there that think that their penises have the ability to significantly stretch out something that is designed to accommodate the head and body of a baby. This product just perpetuates those myths, and I sort of see it as a slut shaming thing. Above all else, I’m sick of women being made to feel inadequate. If being completely self conscious about nearly every other aspect of my body wasn’t enough, now even my vagina has been pulled into the mix. And it is fetishizing young girls. Judging by the popularity of waxing and labiaplasty it seems that a “tight”, hairless vagina with small labia is what is considered desirable. You know, the way most women’s vaginas are before they go through puberty.

I'm personally not insulted by the purpose of the product (if you ignore safety concerns), because in the hypothetical scenario of boyfriend on the smaller side and girlfriend on the looser side-- it's a godsend for them both and pleasures them both equally.

But then, the way this product is packaged and marketed does irk me because while some other posters say that fetishing virgin = fetishizing little girls is taking it too far, I wouldn't say that is the case with this packaging. Seriously, this package looks like it's candy sitting on the toy store's impulse buy shelf by the checkout line. I know interpreting packaging is pretty subjective, but I personally think that the kind of pink used in the box is more of a little girl my-little-pony/barbie pink, and less like a brighter womanly pink more commonly found in products marketed towards women. I know, it does sound like a stretch, but I think that this has subtle implications in terms of what the product is supposed to be doing for the user. Instead of making vagina-tightening to be age-neutral, activity-neutral, martial-status-neutral, whatever, it makes it vagina-tightening = lolita.

And also, it seems like the product is suggesting that it is only worthwhile to have sex with virgins. I would not make any complaints about this product at all (again, putting scary health problems aside) if it was named ViceGrip and was instead packaged in a way that didn't look like little girls were supposed to eat it or something.

Just my two cents.

This product is atrocious and I appreciate Jessica bringing this to our attention. This product caters to idea that virgins are the best partners and are most pleasurable. That group mostly includes young girls.

NO thank you. If I want to tighten my vag - for my own pleasure needs - I'll use my vaginal muscles. It can be quite fun.

The sex shop I used to work at sold this stuff. Some women thought it would be a hilarious addition to a bachelorette party gift bag; I was always careful to relay the negative feedback I'd heard about it, namely that sex could be painful if you used more than a teeny tiny dose.

Bethmario-

Any way you would buy 'loose' being a reference to morality, contrasted with someone with a ridged morality, instead of vaginal...consistency....$*&+ no, thats not the right word...

damn

"I'm personally not insulted by the purpose of the product (if you ignore safety concerns), because in the hypothetical scenario of boyfriend on the smaller side and girlfriend on the looser side-- it's a godsend for them both and pleasures them both equally."

If her vagina is 'loose' then she should do kegels. If his penis is too small then its him that should be dealt with, not the woman. These types of products are meant for the male. A woman that wants her vagina tightened should do kegels which should fix any displeasure she was having during sexual activity. Kegels are related to her vaginal muscle so she experiences pleasure during sexual activity unlike these sham creams which only pander to male sensation. A product like this could only treat the superficial issue which would simply be pandering to the guy rather than her doing it for her own pleasure. Its impossible to have these types of products bring sexual pleasure and "loose" solution to the woman, so she would only be doing it at his beck and call and not for her own sexual fulfillment.

OK. We're talking about endangering the vag flora with potassium alum, the potentially problematic "Strawberry" fragrence, and for the love of all things decent "Recto-vaginal fistula following coitus?!"

This is clearly an unhealthful tool of the patriarchy marketed by means of one (vag inadequacy) or more (slut-shaming) belittling messages aimed at women.

I deem this product an unhealthful, vagina-defaming icon of the patriarchy and hereby vow to add "Liquid Virgin" to my vocabulary as a synonym for "douchebag."

(ScienceAndTheCity, TheSoyMilkConspiracy, and tellner, that is a lot of really interesting information. You 3 rock the looking stuff up. Thanks for that -- and the lube advice. Cheers.)

Oh and yeah, bethmar10 I am so with you on being pissed off at the obvious, but persistent bullshit that the supercool elastic vagina could be OH NO RUINED by penises.

RE: Cecilieaux: Tara K.: I doubt these gels would pass muster in traditional cultures abroad. Usually there's a blood-stained sheet displayed after the wedding night. Typically, "revirginized" young women are rich and they get surgery. Deplorable, but these are the facts.

I wasn't speculating -- I've heard about this first-hand from my friends from Saudi. Not all international women are wealthy enough to have their hymens reconstructed, and sometimes it's used in cases where they are still virgins but are afraid that their new hubby won't be "satisfied" with their natural tightness -- that super-tightness is like back-up insurance.

RE: Lilly: As for whether tightening would make sex more painful, I think that depends on the individual. For some women, sex is often painful, for others never. Depends on size of partner, amount of lube, etc. But nonetheless, a good point.

Thanks for the lube primer SMC. I've tried just about all the water-solubles (I have a lot of silicone toys) and some silicones, but mostly the thinner ones. I never realized that premium dimethicone-rich lubes were all that much thicker and the thin silicones just lack the buffering effect of KY (cut with a few drops of Astroglide when needed) provides for heavy assplay. Maybe I'll give the high-end silicones a shot.

There's a footnote to the bar on silicone lubes with silicone toys. Square Pegs, which makes high-end toys marketed to gay men, says their silicone toys are usable with silicone lubes, though I'm not sure the salesdude's explanation that the silicone is higher-grade is correct. Leatherman on Christopher in Manhattan distributes them, and I'm sure Babeland could order them, but they are not everyone's bag, tending to run really, really big.

Thomas: yes, some of the high-grade silicone lubes now advertise as being silicone-toy-safe: Eros Pjur and Erostratus Titanium are the two I know of. You'd still be well-advised to test it on a small part of the toy first.

Also, there are some silicone lubes that have a thick, almost hair-gel-like consistency; almost like KY-jelly, but won't dry out or get gloppy.

ShifterCat, I've asked some folks for KY-like silicone lubes before, and come up with nothing. What's out there?

bethmar10-
HELL YES!
"I also find it hilarious that there are a lot of men out there that think that their penises have the ability to significantly stretch out something that is designed to accommodate the head and body of a baby." Hahahaha! >sniff
Exactly! This "too loose" shit has GOT to go. The vagina is made of muscle, and when muscles are worked, they get tighter and stronger, not wider and saggier.
No offense fellas, but if you think your woman's too loose, blame it on nature, not all the giant, baby head-sized penises we've enjoyed. Did I really just say that? Oh yes I did.

Not that I agree with this product at all...
but shouldn't "Liquid Virgin" have cherry fragrance?

Thomas: heh. I've been out of the business for some months now. Let's see, I know there was a really thick variety of Erostratus, but I can't seem to find it online. I found the cream variety of Eros Pjur, though. I think I mentioned ForPlay Gel before (that one's water-based), but I don't recall if you were familiar with it or not. There's also a cream version of that one.

HBSweet: Hee. :D

"Likewise, I don't think guys should be expected to put any cream on their penises to make them swollen and appear bigger. I'm against potentially harmful quick-fixes."

I thank you for your view. A woman may choose to use Kegels or positioning to increase friction. They may even go so far as to use chemical products as these, or surgery. A man cannot simply "make" himself larger for his own or his partner's pleasure, as they are often urged to do in myriad television or print ads for Xtenze, Maxoderm, or a host of other products just for men. I have seen the "no cocks under seven inches" type comments on this site (and others), and even as a joke, I consider those extremely hurtful. I am no minority proportion of US males who falls below average in any physical measure of size. I am an average Asian male, who as typical of others, gets little respect in US society when it comes to matters of physical proportions, or desirability.

How is a man supposed to deal with having a "small" penis, to attract females or maintain relationships, by the way? And by the same measure as this product, why is one with an orifice that can allow passage of a baby, but not "loose", the judge that a man is "small"?

"No offense fellas, but if you think your woman's too loose, blame it on nature, not all the giant, baby head-sized penises we've enjoyed. Did I really just say that? Oh yes I did."

Can men tell women this when they have difficulty finding clothes, when they previously did not?