I Believe Sex is How People are Controlled Which Puts it at the Heart of Politics

Thu, 10/12/2017 - 08:34
Submitted by Betty Dodson
Betty self-portrait

One of the most challenging aspects of my life has been going public with what I believe to be true based on observation, experience and information from sources I trust. I’m not sure when living out loud became my passion. Perhaps the biggest influence was my mother who always said, “Betty Anne, never hesitate to speak your mind.” She was an example of doing just that. Often I’d be embarrassed when she’d say the unspeakable, like the time she told our overly religious neighbor Mrs. Wright the Bible was just a bunch of stories written by a lot of different men.

Once I mastered drawing the classical nude, I wanted to communicate what I believed through my art. I painted religious themes based on the every day nuclear family followed by mythology that flirted with sexual content, but it was always the nude body that held my fascination. In the late 50’s and early 60’s every nude I’d drawn or painted represented SEX to my friends and viewers. Each time, I’d argue vehemently to explain a nude was an abstract symbol to express my concepts. Most were convinced I was hiding my obsession with sex behind this rationale. In hindsight I would agree today.

When the sexy sixties arrived, I was in my element. My lover and I jumped into group sex to experience every possible erotic adventure we came across. We were both divorced aging Hippies. I was 38 and he was 44. When we embraced marijuana, we discovered it was a perfect aphrodisiac. It became obvious that sexual freedom and the magic herb allowed people to be more politically liberal. We could see how government was hiding important truths. It was obvious how the Vietnam War made a few men and their corporations rich while killing and maiming young men and women, including millions of innocent Vietnamese people, destroying their villages, animals and crops. Sound familiar?

My first rude awakening was when President Kennedy was killed. Shortly after, my politically informed friends invited me to a lecture on West 34th Street given by Jim Garrison, the DA of New Orleans who denounced the “Magic Bullet Theory.” A notion so bizarre it was actually embarrassing to think people could accept such an obvious lie. As we came out of the theater, bright lights were set up so we could all be photographed.

The same as today, the military/industrial complex was raking in way too much money with no intention of allowing Kennedy to end the Vietnam War. Bobby Kennedy was murdered because he was going to replace JFK. Next to be gunned down was Martin Luther King followed by Malcolm X to quiet unrest in the black community. When Harvey Milk was elected mayor in San Francisco and killed by a former cop, many of us believed the fear of gay political power was a factor in his death. It was also rumored the CIA had backed Ms Magazine to throw feminists a bone. The radical feminist group Red Stockings claimed Gloria Steinem was employed by the CIA which Google confirms today.

In the eighties when I attended a conference for WAP, Women against Pornography, It was obvious to me the CIA had financed this group to stall the Women’s movement with the old “Divide and conquer” tactic. It worked beautifully. The Porn Wars successfully ended our momentum toward women’s liberation. All we ended up with was the title Ms. instead of Miss or Mrs., nothing like what most women wanted. While it’s true we did legalize abortion, as you can see, we are still fighting that same battle today.

When it came to sexual liberation, Feminism only succeeded in legitimizing “serial monogamy” which meant women could have several lovers but only one at a time. This didn’t come close to sexual liberation. Those of us who were called “sex positive” wanted to choose from an abundance of lifestyles. For instance we could be sexually active with several lovers as a happily single woman just like a bachelor. Or how about married with one standard for sex? Or couples could enjoy open relationships with multiple sex partners and group sex would be available for those who were interested.

As it turned out, the puritanical elements in feminism and our government saw to it that women would never enjoy alternate lifestyles other than a monogamous affairs and marriage. Thanks to our thriving sexual double standard, men can still have sneaky extra marital sex with “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” When caught, it’s a brief trip to rehab and all is forgiven.

In the mid eighties, a wealthy oil man I went to High School with back in Wichita came to NYC to check out buying the World Trade Buildings. Once he learned they were riddled with asbestos with an astronomical price for the clean-up process, he decided they were a bad investment. At the time this held no interest for me. I just wanted George to buy one of my paintings for his extensive art collection. Instead we just had dinner and sex.

Years later when I watched the second tower come down on television; I said out loud to my roommate, “That’s controlled demolition!” Later on, when I recalled George telling me about the asbestos problem, I had an “Ah Ha!” moment. I’ve always been fascinated with the Italian family that sets explosives inside a building to bring it down in its footprint. I’d seen them many times on The Learning Channel. Remember, due to years as an artist, I am a trained observer. At that fateful moment I wondered who had done this and why, because it sure as hell wasn’t a plane.

The effectiveness of the shock doctrine succeeded as the world bought the government’s biggest conspiracy theory to date: That 19 fundamentalist uneducated Muslim men with box cutters as weapons managed to fly huge commercial jets into both buildings with one headed for the Pentagon. The hole in the Pentagon was so small it was outlandish to think people believed a large commercial airliner had made it without a trace of any wreckage, including huge jet engines. But a missile would fit just fine. That’s when I got that 911 was America’s New Pearl Harbor before I ever read the book.

Our Government now had an excuse to invade oil rich Iraq. Once again, the tail was wagging the dog! I stand with Occupy Wall Street. “911 was an inside job” chanted OWS.” How quickly Police in riot gear shut us down— dare I say, “Martial Law” in 2015? In the sixties we knew being called “paranoid” meant we were getting close to the truth. That’s why I embrace the label “conspiracy theorist” today.

Most politically aware people would agree that the master of Conspiracy Theories is the US Government! Matter of fact, I’m a proud “Conspiracy Theorist” because it means I have the courage to look at the truth. Meanwhile the faint of heart succumb to cognitive dissonance, a discomfort from holding two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. My cognitive dissonance kicks in when I consider the glaring omission of human sexuality in political discussions. Besides fear, I believe sex is how people are controlled which puts it at the heart of politics. All authoritarian societies where a few control many have always used religious restrictions to determine how people can have sex. Since most of us fail, we become easier to manipulate because we are all guilty sinners.

Sexual repression begins with the prohibition of childhood masturbation, an activity that establishes the nerve pathways from our sex organs to the pleasure center in our brains. Disrupt this basic healthy activity and we end up with an adult who will have some degree of sexual dysfunction! The omission of masturbation especially affects women who believe they are broken or incomplete because they can’t experience orgasm alone or during intercourse. Vaginal penetration by a penis is the procreative model that’s primarily supported by religions as well as governments. Female orgasm is not necessary for pregnancy and giving birth, and once a man ejaculates inside a vagina he has fulfilled his sexual role. However, women remain unfulfilled and therefore failures, because husbands and lovers need her to come to prove they’re a good lovers.

Society has yet to establish a recreational model of sex that is mutually orgasmic for both partners. So called “female sexual dysfunction” benefits business as couples search for some form of sexual healing from therapy, creams, toys, medications, etc., yet women’s orgasms remain a mystery. It’s also a way to keep women more docile when we are sexually unfulfilled.

I’m half way through my eighties with a stellar reputation of being an accomplished PhD sexologist. I hold the record on teaching women about independent orgasms so they have something to share with a partner. My business partner Carlin Ross is a lawyer who worked on Wall Street and knows the money game. She also understands the Internet. We have over a million page views with our weekly You Tube where we both discuss sex from a women’s perspective with over ten million viewers.

I have answered sex questions via the internet since 1998 and continue today without charging money. We believe information needs to be free and easily accessible. There is a desperate need for sex education and information that deals with girls and women’s pleasure and orgasms. To answer this need, we recently set up the Betty A. Dodson Foundation which gets shortened to the BAD Foundation. This gets smiles from everyone. Michael Jackson said it: “You gotta be bad to be good.” Given our Puritan beginnings, this is so true when it come to sex!

After living through the sixties and seventies where I witnessed America’s outbreak of sexual freedom, I saw how enjoying an abundance of orgasms in a group setting changed people’s lives. In our Bodysex workshops with all women, sharing independent orgasms during group masturbation just might be the most radical and successful sex therapy ever encountered. We are now certifying women to facilitate these workshops world wide. Here comes an army of orgasmic women to spread the good news: orgasmic pleasure alone, with lovers and in groups belongs to us all.

So take pride in being called a “Conspiracy Theorist.” It just means you are tuned in and wide awake. Pay us a visit and become a member of our thriving sex positive community.

Liberating women one orgasm at a time

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I am in so much agreement

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 12:50
rebtorres (not verified)

I am in so much agreement with everything you said. As someone who has in an ntesnse desire to continue your work I see the challenges ahead of me and they are looming large because of everything you said, namely the political tone of the present day. It can be daunting. Still I am going to go forth no matter the obstacles. I am 24 years younger than you so on the tail end of the revolution or what we had hoped it was going to be. It can be so discouraging to look at the wreckage before us and the closed minds that that has created. I went to a sex educaion workshop last night and it was fun and interesting What I noticed though is when folks were invited to strip down to their underwear, not even nude, so few did this. Especially women. The fear that predominates in the culture is paralyzing and repressive. To be authentic, speak our truth and shed the put upon shame and expose our naked bodies to each other is our greatest challenge. 

Male circumcision

Thu, 05/28/2015 - 18:43
CH (not verified)

Excellent article! I might suggest that sexual repression begins not with prohibition of masturbation in childhood, but with routine infant circumcision. Male circumcision is a feminist issue and a sexual freedom issue as well. Sex with a circumcised man is most definitely not as nature intended it ... physically, emotionally, and spiritually. 

oh, Betty!

Fri, 05/29/2015 - 20:03
More, Please (not verified)

Your vision that sexual freedom is essential to freedom, in general, is so needed and so true!
Born in 1975, I came of age in the midst of panic- and shame-based rhetoric around AIDS. At least compulsive condom use kept me from accidental preganacy! But the overall atmosphere of fear was not a plus. At least the Riot Grrrls gave us a way to have fun and some righteous female anger! Feminism accomplished a lot for me compared to my mom's generation (b. 1949) -- they had to sign a petition to be allows to wear pantsuits to work! But, I am sad that the 80s saw a backslide in the sexual revolution. Now almost 40, I've been settled long enough to see how repressive and hypocritical our ideology of monogamy -- and the taboo of anything else -- can be. I might be almost 40 but I'm not dead yet, in fact a libido as strong as ever as I unlearn my the insecurities implanted by sexist socialization. I consider you a visionary and I know many of us among the so-called "Gen X" and "Millenials" want to join and continue your life's work! 

Milk, Monogamy, and MacKinnon.

Sat, 05/30/2015 - 14:12
Vince C. (not verified)

Harvey Milk and Kennedy were assainated by Democrats. Just to let you know, Betty. Talk about revisionist history, and talk about the revolution eating its own.
I will concede that the 'Porn Wars' of the Dworkin-MacKinnon kind absolutely poisoned the feminist movement. I do not think feminism has still reconciled with that, as we now have more Puritan resurgence with Gail Dines, et cetera.
Upon reading the comments on the page, isn't it reactionary to demean monogamy? Aren't you just practicing the same demoralization of sex positivity by switching it to a demoralization of a classical monogamous relationship?
I would think true progressive politics (or a progressive feminist, for that matter) would be to let women decide for themselves which relationship model works best for them - rather than assume they're pathologically 'socialized' if they don't want to strip, or have an abortion, or have sex parties, et cetera.

Not a conspiracy theorist

Sat, 05/30/2015 - 18:52

I am not a conspiracy theorist but I like this article a lot.

I agree....

Sun, 05/31/2015 - 09:39
Anonymous46 (not verified)

"Upon reading the comments on the page, isn't it reactionary to demean monogamy? Aren't you just practicing the same demoralization of sex positivity by switching it to a demoralization of a classical monogamous relationship?
I would think true progressive politics (or a progressive feminist, for that matter) would be to let women decide for themselves which relationship model works best for them - rather than assume they're pathologically 'socialized' if they don't want to strip, or have an abortion, or have sex parties, et cetera."

I so agree.  While I admire the information disseminated through Betty's work, especially concerning female biology as it pertains to women's sexuality, I think lumping how one expresses sexuality (i.e. hetero-monogamy, etc.) as a serious component of one's sexual pathos is potentially dangerous (except for the obvious, such as pedophilia).  It is akin to heteros condemning homosexuals as truly suffering from a mental disorder rather than as having an authentically and inherently encoded sexual orientation.  I can appreciate that monogamy does not work for everyone, but I can also appreciate that it does work for some.  Most people fall into the trap of normalizing or standardizing their own preferences and then project outward such that anyone not following the same pattern is "repressed," "dysfunctional," or "prudish."  While complaining about "slut-shaming," a new "prude-shaming" becomes the trend.  

Great Article

Sun, 05/31/2015 - 10:00

Also not a conspiracy theorist but thought the article was great, though my take on things would be a little different
- truly great sex, and personal intimacy is impossible to control, and makes the individuals involved difficult to control politically. It's easier to gain power over the discontent and unhappy.

Political power is maintained by dividing the population rather than uniting it, by playing one group against another, different religions, races, and fundamentally women versus men. It requires losers and winners, bribes and best interests.

Women and women's sexuality are the ultimate trade-off, the loser in a long series of political bargains struck over the generations.

And it's time for all of us to reclaim the great sex and intimacy that we are all capable of sharing, no matter the gender, the orientation, the creed or the colour.


Mon, 06/01/2015 - 13:41
MarcC (not verified)

Great article tying together some key events and dynamics in human history! What Betty realized right away about the 911 attacks has been scientifically proven and is supported by thousands of architects, engineers, and other building professionals. This site does a great job of organizing the massive quantity of research conducted:
Thanks, Betty, for your insights and for your courage to speak up!

Thanks for all your comments

Betty Dodson's picture
Mon, 06/01/2015 - 14:27
Betty Dodson

I always learn so much from how people respond to me and our other bloggers. Seems my take on the issue of monogamy was confusing to several. Yes, it would be nice if we could all choose the sex style that fits us. BUT that would require a degree of sexual freedom few people have ever experienced, especially women. And given the profound influence of organized religions on us all, monogamy is too often a given. It isn't like growing up where my next door neighbor Mrs Smith was married but also had a lover. Or that Ms Olson down the street was openly having affairs with several different men.
So I'm goiing to write another essay on thie subject of monogamy. Thanks for the inspiration.

Sexual Liberation.

Thu, 06/04/2015 - 02:10
Vince C. (not verified)

I re-read the essay, and I do think sexual liberation is crucial - but sexual liberation sometimes comes at a price. The most glaring example being the AIDS epidemic of the eighties which Betty did not mention. That should have been a rude awakening - an awakening to see what a utopian sexual society can lead to.

I firmly agree with feminist philosopher Camille Paglia who stated, and I'm paraphrasing here, that anyone that preached 'free love' in the sixities is directly responsible for the AIDS outbreak.

It's a disservice logically to think that overtly promiscuous behavior, perhaps on a more cultural scale, won't have it's drawbacks. I wish it were all orgasms and good vibes, but Nature won't allow just that.

I would stress personal responsibility of one's own orgasm, their sexual behavior, and of the consequences should any arise whilst not blaming anyone else. It's a staunch libertarian position, I know. I will conclude that I am not condemning promiscuity or having multiple lovers. I certainly cannot pass moral judgement on that because I've had my share of men. I just want both sides to be recognized.

Safe Informed Choices

Thu, 06/04/2015 - 10:14

I don't subscribe to the rather catholic view that sex must come at a price, and certainly not that HIV/AIDs is the price humanity has paid for the rather limited sexual liberation most people experience. I choose to live in a monogamous relationship but respect the rights of other people to make different choices. There's a cost paid, a consequence if you like, to making any choices in life but with good information we can all live safe sex lives.

It seems very harsh to place responsbility for the AIDS epidemic on the people practising free love in the 60s for a number of reasons, not least the fact that the "epidemic" is generally thought to have hit the developed world some 20 years later (yes, I know there were isolated cases in the US earlier).

Maybe there wouldn't have been an epidemic at all if the governments of the 1960s and 70s had been less interested in shaming minority groups and more committed to the sexual good health of all of their citizens, if they had committed money and resources both to research and to informing the public in a more timely manner.

Attributing disease to "Nature" and in particular sexual promiscuity is a bit of a red-herring. You could just as easily attribute HIV to being African, or living close to nature since the disease is thought to have transferred from sooty mangabey monkeys. You could probably use HIV as an argument for sticking to less adventurous food stuffs since one theory suggests people were eating the infected monkeys.

& ofcourse any sexual utopia worth having surely involves birth control at least for the women involved.sadly, the rather strange campaigns in the US against the reproductive rights of women seems pretty clear evidence that utopia is nowhere near.

Politics, Responses.

Sun, 06/14/2015 - 16:09
Vince C. (not verified)

"There's a cost paid, a consequence if you like, to making any choices in life but with good information we can all live safe sex lives."

I agree. But the very premises set up in Betty's essay seem tenuous to me; liberalism / conspiratorial thinking does not equal sexual emancipation, nor should Betty subordinate such an important facet of a person's being into a political agenda. That's authoritarian in itself.

"A wealthy oil man... I just wanted George to buy one of my paintings for his extensive art collection. Instead we just had dinner and sex."

I just want to point out that Betty admitted to sucking up (literally) to Big Money / Capitalism to try and get her painting sold. Ms. Dodson seems to loathe corporations and wealth till hunger comes rat-tat-tat on the window.

Vince, you sound like a miserable pissy old Queen.

Betty Dodson's picture
Tue, 06/16/2015 - 11:28
Betty Dodson

I primised myself not to respond to your shitty jabs at me, but this time I can't resist. It seems my honest past struggle and now sucess really rubs you the wrong way. So please tell me why you feel so compelled to attack me every chance you get? If you want my attention you now have it. Tell me more about yourself so we might become friends.


I am an old Queen.

Tue, 06/16/2015 - 15:17
Vince C. (not verified)

I will concede on your point of my being an old Queen, with a capital Q trapped inside the body of a millennial.

Being an open homosexual that's against gay marriage, supportive of capitalism, respectful of all world religions, and not resentful toward conservatism and Republicans, chances are I will have disagreements with your philosophies in the articles and essays you write.

And, I am not attacking you for your past struggles and successes. I am more commenting on (rather bitingly, I admit) that you're using your success to attack others (i.e. religion, conservatives, the wealthy, et cetera.)

It has always been your politics that I disagree with, never the sex advice you and Carlin share on the website.

Gay Marriage?

Wed, 06/17/2015 - 15:57

I'd be interested in hearing what your objections are with regard to gay marriage. Whether they are specific to the term marriage ie. would a civil partnership which has the same legal rights and obligations as marriage be acceptable to you instead of marriage? We have both in the UK, with identical legal rights and tax benefits. Or maybe you just don't believe in long term formalised gay relationships?

Rather ironically the civil partnership agreement in the UK is limited to same sex partners. Heterosexual couples are unable to enter into  a civil partnership with each other.

Because we have an established church linked to the state, the drafting of legislation for same-sex marriage was made very complicated, in order to allow individual religious groups including the Anglicans the right to opt out. The legislation was sponsored through government by the UK Conservatives.

And obviously neither Anglican nor Roman Catholic churches were very keen
but neither were Orthodox Jews (90% British Jews are Orthodox)  nor

Quakers and Reform Judaism came firmly down on the side of the pro- same sex marriage side of the debate

There's a court case currently underway whereby an Anglican priest who has now married his male partner has been refused a licence to act as chaplain representing the Anglican church and has decided to take the church to court for discrimination. Who decides whether or not the definition of marriage is a matter of doctrine, the church or the court?

I regard extending marriage to same-sex relationships as a generally positive step, though wish civil partnerships could also be extended to heterosexual couples. The word marriage is quite "loaded" emotionally and historically and not everyone wants that added to their relationship.

But I do find the attempt to force a religious organisation to change it's own doctrine from outside a bit wrong headed, assuming everyone is free to join the religion or not which is obviously true in the UK.


Betty Dodson's picture
Wed, 06/17/2015 - 20:03
Betty Dodson

Well Vince, I nailed that one on instinct (and experience). Except you are a young pissy Queen cause millennials are in their early Thirties, right? For the record, what you call an attack is simply me expressing my opinion.

IMO, (does that help?) when I first heard there was such a thing as a Gay Republican I actually laughed out loud cause I thought it was a joke. So here you are. I bet I can guess that one source of your “biting” words is a way for you to unload some of your anger. Being a young gay man is soooo demanding. You must look good, and be super sexy if you’re in the single scene.

At first I also laughed at the idea of gay marriage. Why did gays want to suffer what straight people go thru??….. until one of my friends couldn’t get in the hospital to see her lover because her parents objected. Also Carlin explained that marriage is the best way to transfer property and money. Being single like us is living dangerously in a world that comes in two’s, especially if you’re queer. You’re a young queer boy and I’m old bisexual dyke. We both like to fuck young men. We have more in common than you realize. But if it helps you to feel better, go ahead and nash your sharp little teeth on my tough hide.

Happy Independent Orgasms, sister Queer



Wed, 06/17/2015 - 20:53
Vince C. (not verified)


Firstly, thank you for your incredibly kind and humorous words. I think we do have more in common than we think, although I do prefer the older, more experienced homosexual Daddies with stamina, as opposed to the younger gay boys that arrive far too quickly. (You should have a male bodysex session and teach these youngins about edging, Betty).

I feel directly inspired by the free speech movement of the sixties, so I wouldn't describe myself as a hardline Republican (even though some of my previous comments might be conservative-leaning, and that I do love the gorgeous women - being a gay aesthete - on Fox News). I just enjoy argument, rhetoric, dissenting, and debate; contesting ideas, concepts, and so forth.

To answer both you and NLH, I fully support civil unions. But I agree with you, NLH, that the term "marriage" is so loaded - and it etymologically descends from the Latin. It comes from the Church. I see both marriage and religion linked. I think marriage is an important institution, but my question is: why is getting married considered within the homosexual population the most radical gesture a gay man can make?
I must be a pre-Stonewall kind of gay - you can keep your marriage, and I'll keep my diva worship of Bette Davis and Katherine Hepburn.

And I'll nash on your tough hide any day, Betty ;o)


Fri, 08/18/2017 - 17:58

Excellent piece, Betty. I have always known/felt that sex always had a political side to it, and that feeling has become stronger than ever these days.  In times of madness such as these, my wife and I relate to Winston and Julia in "1984."  It's as though our sex, our pleasure, our masturbations are actions "against the state."  Your "conspiracy theories" aside, you have ALWAYS been on the right side of any sexually-related issue.  For the love of gawd, the GOP can't even get its head around how countries like the Netherlands have such lower rates of teen pregnancy and abortion, so how would/could they ever even begin to accept/understand same-sex relationships or something as basic as masturbation?  It truly boggles the mind.

I love you

Mon, 10/23/2017 - 22:06
Allen C (not verified)

I do love you so Aintee BAD,
This is Allen, your adopted nephew
of a few years ago from the hood in Texas and transplanted out here in
Cali. No worries if you don't recall, for you surely have many adoptees,
students, and correspondents (although you said mine was among your
fav's -sooo honored).
This article, your story, your experience,
your first hand witness and account of AmeriKKKa's shadow politics and
savage greed, most assuredly your courage to not only do, but to 'SEE',
your processing these things through the lens of sexual repression and
ultimately healing -well, I don't like hero worship, and I'm damned sure
you don't either, but you make it hard, love.
For a
certaintanty, you have broadened the path for us, when you weren't
breaking trail all together. Isn't it strange to have had to wait so
long for your day to arrive? I predict that is precisely what time it
is: your time. I talk about you all the time....frankly, at the oddest
of times sometimes. In the TMI files, often during or at the end of
coitus, something you've said will pop into my head, and I'll share it
with my partner. Every single time it's been recieved with gales of
laughter or absolute wonder and mystification at how they never thought
of something so simple and bright about the awesome and fun thing we
were doing together.
I tell em about my Aintee BAD.