El clítoris es el gran ausente en el porno tradicional, y aunque en ciertos tipos de escenas podemos ver cómo actores o actrices lamen, chupan y...

Íñigo Errejón Nieve.

Cuando estás de botellón y la policía te echa del parque.

Twitter: @ierrejon

Cuando te cae mal uno que le cae bien a todo el mundo y tienes que disimular.

Twitter: @ierrejon

Cuando pides hablar con el encargado.

Twitter: @ierrejon

Cuando discutes con tu pareja delante de tus amigos.

Twitter: @ierrejon

View Entire List ›

A vegan couple in Italy has lost custody of their 14-month-old son after the baby was taken to hospital by concerned grandparents and found to be suffering from severe malnutrition.

The baby weighed the same as the average three-month-old, Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reports. Doctors at Fatebenfratelli Hospital in Milan described the baby's calcium's levels as "the minimum needed to survive." The child was also found to suffer from a congenital heart condition, unrelated to but exacerbated by his calcium deficiency, and underwent emergency surgery.

Hospital workers informed social services after his parents refused to adapt the child's vegan diet at the request of doctors. The child has now been taken into protective custody while the authorities decide whether to place him with his grandparents, or into foster care.

A 2011 Eurispes study puts the number of vegetarians at 12 percent of the population—the highest in the European Union—with 600,000 people adhering to a vegan diet. But a number of recent high-profile cases in Italy have galvanized public attention around the issue of feeding children vegan diets.

Read more: Is Veganism Stupid?

In Genoa, a two-year-old girl was hospitalized for vitamin deficiencies caused by her parents' vegan diet, although she was allowed to remain with her parents. In Bergamo, a row between divorced parents ended up in court after the father contested the mother's decision to feed their son a macrobiotic diet. The court mandated that the mother cook her son meat at least once a week: the dad was ordered to feed him meat no more than twice at the weekends.

"It is possible to feed a baby a vegan diet, but you need to plan carefully to ensure the baby is getting enough nutrients of concern," advises Dr. Lucy Chambers, a nutrition scientist at the British Nutrition Foundation. "The risks of nutrient deficiencies are much higher . It is possible to feed a baby a healthy, balanced diet that is also vegan, but you need to be very well informed."

Fatebenfratelli Hospital in Milan, where the baby was treated. Photo via Wikimedia Commons

Any diet that eliminates certain foods is more likely to lead to nutrient deficiencies unless precautions are taken. "We advise breast milk for all babies until six months of age. After that, as you start weaning the baby onto solid foods, you need to focus on plenty of fruits and vegetables, foods rich in iron—such as dark green leafy vegetables, pulses, bread, protein-rich foods such as lentils and beans, and fortified foods such as breakfast cereals or soya drinks."

Particular care needs to be taken to make sure vegan babies are getting enough vitamin B-12, which mostly comes from animal foods, and calcium, which is commonly found in dairy. Dr. Chambers recommends fortified milk such as oat milk or soya milk, and tofu or sesame seeds. Like adults, a happy vegan baby is a baby who is getting enough calories, so you want to make sure you're feeding them high-energy foods such as nuts and the hallowed avocado.

For More Stories Like This, Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Vegan Society spokesperson Jimmy Pierson told Broadly that media reports around the case were "inflammatory and misleading," emphasizing the thousands of cases of malnutrition in the UK each year that aren't linked to veganism.

"The problem in this case, as with every case of malnutrition, was a shortage of calories and nutrients—absolutely nothing inherently to do with the vegan diet, which can provide all the essential nutrients for optimal health at any age or life stage including infancy and childhood."

In the fifth installment of his My Struggle series, Norwegian author Karl Ove Knausgaard writes about the first time he masturbated. He was in a bathroom, face-to-face with a photo of a buxom, scantily clad woman on the beach. "I wrapped my fingers around my dick and jerked it up and down," the passage begins, ending with Knausgaard's triumphant conclusion that the process was "incredibly easy."

On one level, the fact that a guy who became a worldwide literary sensation through unflinchingly documenting his life in meticulous, sometimes excruciating detail waited until nearly the end of a six-book series to write about cranking his meat hog is flabbergasting—as is the fact that the tale was excerpted in the first nudity-free issue of Playboy. It makes perfect sense too, though, since there's an intense stigma associated with talking about hand-to-gland combat.

Though organizations from Reddit to the University of Indiana have tried to pin down what qualifies as a "normal" amount of masturbation, "it's hard to find good numbers on this sort of stuff," says Professor Thomas Laqueur of UC Berkeley. "A while ago, someone conducted a survey, and the things they had the most difficulty getting answers about were masturbation and responders' income."

Although I have met many people in my life that I'd label "masturbation experts," Laqueur is a true authority on the subject: In 2003, he wrote Solitary Sex: A Cultural History of Masturbation. When we speak on the phone, he's just gotten home from walking his dog and had gotten a late start because he went to the opera the night before.

"Doing things by yourself is thought to be weird," he tells me. "Often people masturbate not because they can't find someone to have sex with, but out of abjection—they can't write, they can't sleep, or something else is off." He went on to note that "masturbating before you write is a constant trope in literature."

I ask Laqueur where the line is drawn when it comes to yanking it too often. "That's a really hard question," he admits. "It speaks to the roots of desire and the difference between humans and animals."

According to Laqueur, the concept of "too much masturbation" is relatively novel, since in ancient times the great thinkers were unconcerned with the subject. "It's not like Plato wasn't thinking about sex," he specifies. "He just wasn't thinking about that particular form of sex." And so the timeless art of self-pleasure cruised under the radar until the Enlightenment era.

This sea change in the discourse of diddling has roots in a 1712 tract written by an anonymous physician, who decried the practice of masturbation as a disease he termed "Onanism." This comes from the the biblical story of Onan, who, rather than marrying his dead brother's wife and raising his children as his own, chose to "spill his seed on the ground." (This was the Old Testament, so God ended up smiting him as punishment.)

Until then, people interpreted the story as a parable about why you shouldn't shirk your responsibilities. However, the anonymous physician interpreted the text as evidence that if you jacked off, God would punish you. "It was totally cynical," Laqueur tells me. "This guy said, 'How can I make some money? I can say masturbation causes illness!'"

An 1800s-era rendition of a man whose fortitude has succumbed to the "mental and bodily exhaustion of Onanism." Image via Wellcome Library

By mid-century, masturbation had become verboten throughout Europe. "Philosophers felt it was the rot of civilization, that it was a morally horrible, pathological, and dangerous thing," Laqueur claims. Immanuel Kant was a particularly harsh critic of the self-administered meat massage, framing the act as comparative to suicide. Laqueur says that, to Kant, "The whole point was that you couldn't use someone as an object. If you killed yourself, you were treating yourself as an object too, but you were slightly justified because you were despairing. Masturbators were just wantonly making up the conditions for treating themselves as objects, which made it worse."

Curiously, the rabid campaign to curb masturbation wasn't necessarily tied to sexuality. "In 18th-century Europe, there was more sex per capita than ever before," he says. The hand-wringing over rubbing one out was tied to "the moral outrage over someone checking out from the world," similar to the impulse that causes adults to fret over their kids playing video games or staring at their phones. "People thought that it produced the sort of person society ought not to produce."

As time wore on, society's attitudes toward masturbation remained unchanged. During the Civil War, "there were records of soldiers being institutionalized for what people called 'masturbatory madness,'" Laqueur explains. "It was the dark underside of the socially virtuous idea that you needed to develop your imagination and sense of self."

These days, we view choking the chicken with a much more liberal eye. This has a lot to do with the groundbreaking sex research of sexologist Alfred Kinsey, who conducted exhaustive studies of human sexuality at the University of Indiana. "The power of Kinsey's findings was the acknowledgement that masturbation was prevalent, and certainly not associated with any kind of disorders," says Dr. Eli Coleman, a professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health at the University of Minnesota. Coleman once organized an academic conference on masturbation, and is an advocate for using it as a tool to help people come to terms with their own bodies and sexuality: "It's a healthy form of sexual expression."

Still, there are limits when it comes to pounding off, and those limits tend to involve blood. As the clinical director for the Center for Healthy Sex in Los Angeles, Alexandra Katehakis has heard her fair share of horror stories involving men with bloody and blistered penises, as well as women using their vibrators to the point where it burns their skin. According to her, if someone's at the point of self-sex self-harm, "it's not even about achieving orgasm—it's about a repetitive compulsive behavior." And such behaviors are potential red flags for issues like obsessive compulsive disorder, or childhood sexual abuse.

Katehakis also warns that, for men, excessively wanking it to porn can lead to an inability to get it up when it comes time for real-life sex. "We come across that pretty often," she says. "If young men in their twenties and thirties are struggling with erectile dysfunction, the first thing they should ask is, 'How much porn am I looking at?'"

And mind you, Katehakis isn't a vigilant anti-masturbation crusader—she's a licensed sex therapist. "Porn and masturbation should be a pleasurable part of a person's healthy sexuality," she declares, specifying that she just wants people of all genders to be safe when they jank it. That means making sure your masturbatory habits aren't interfering with your daily life, handling your equipment gently, and using lubrication.

One of the reasons people might not know safe masturbation techniques is that we're never encouraged to learn about them. "Adults are shamed about masturbation since day one," said Elise Franklin, an LA-based therapist who promotes pro-sex attitudes through her practice. "When you're two years old and your parents catch you touching yourself, they tell you, 'Don't do that!' When you're in school and take sex education, the topic is greeted with discomfort and giggles."

Regardless of the patina of indignity surrounding the subject, there is truly no such thing as too much masturbation. As Franklin puts it, the act of rubbing one out is not dissimilar to snowflake formation: "There's a thousand different styles and frequencies for masturbation, and none of them are wrong."

Follow Drew Millard on Twitter.

Netflix's BoJack Horseman argues in new promo art that its hero is in the proud tradition of Tony Soprano and Don Draper.

Netflix’s BoJack Horseman — which premieres its third season on July 22 — is one of the hardest shows on television to describe.

It’s an animated comedy, but it often tackles extraordinarily dark themes. It’s about the depravity of Hollywood, but it takes place in a world where humans and anthropomorphic animals live, work, and sleep together. It’s about a bitter, alcoholic horse who spends most of his days whining about his life from inside an enormous mansion, but somehow the show makes his (incredibly) privileged problems feel intimate, devastating, and sometimes even horrifyingly relatable.

One of the most crucial attributes a show like this needs to work is self-awareness, and luckily BoJack has it in spades. The first look at season three poked fun at the fact that critical response has largely referred to the show as an unflinching look at the dangers of depression, only to cut to BoJack trashing critics as boring has-beens.

And now Vox can offer this exclusive look at the new art for season three, which leans into the idea of the cantankerous BoJack as a conflicted male antihero character on the level of Tony Soprano, Netflix’s own Frank Underwood from House of Cards, and Mad Men’s Don Draper:

(Netflix)

It's a comparison that at least my colleague Todd VanDerWerff finds particularly apt:

This might sound ridiculous, but I promise it's not ... [BoJack Horseman]'s a strange, sad trip through the dark underbelly of fame, mixed with some of the most brilliant, caustic social commentary out there. And did I mention it's funny? Sometimes bitterly so, with jokes that leave you tearing up as much as laughing.

All of those characteristics should bring to mind AMC's esteemed advertising drama. But BoJack and Mad Men have something else in common, too: At their core, both shows are about the impossibility of happiness.

All 12 episodes of BoJack Horseman’s third season hit on Netflix on July 22. Its two previous seasons — and a bonus Christmas special! — are currently available to stream.

After months of withholding his support, Bernie Sanders is set to endorse Hillary Clinton in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on Tuesday.

What changed? For one, over the weekend Sanders won an additional string of concessions on the Democratic Party platform, pulling the party to the left on the minimum wage, environmental regulation, marijuana legalization, and the war on drugs.

"I think if you read the platform right now, you will understand that the political revolution is alive and kicking," Sanders’s policy director, Warren Gunnels, told NBC News, adding that campaign got "at least 80 percent" of what it wanted.

The platform just outlines the key "ideas and beliefs" of the party — it doesn’t bind any of its members to particular actions — but it’s supposed to represent a sort of blueprint for where the party is headed.

Now, it’s difficult to disentangle just what in the platform can be chalked up to Sanders’s advocacy in particular, and what reflects the more general leftward pull of the party over the course of the Obama administration.

Either way, Sanders’s camp is trumpeting the new platform as a win. We’ll have to wait until November to see if it’s enough to firmly shore up Clinton’s left flank — but it’ll at least give Sanders some cover to rally behind the Democratic Party without facing accusations from within his own ranks of selling out.

The party moves leftward on the minimum wage, carbon tax, criminal justice, marijuana

Meeting this weekend in Orlando, Florida, a committee of 187 Democrats held a series of votes on proposed amendments to the party’s platform. (The committee was composed of 90 Clinton supporters and 72 Sanders supporters, according to the Washington Post’s David Weigel, as well as other members of the Democratic National Committee.)

This new version — the one approved in Orlando — built on an earlier draft approved by a smaller committee late last month in St. Louis, Missouri. And it’s subject to more votes when Democrats gather on July 25 for their convention in Philadelphia.

Still, the platform that’s emerging from Orlando is widely expected to be close to the one that ends up being the official platform of the Democratic Party. And here’s where Sanders’s allies are saying they’ve scored some important victories:

$15-an-hour minimum wage: In 2012, the Democratic Party platform called for the party to push for a higher minimum wage and to tie it to inflation.

That was it. At meetings earlier this summer, members of the platform writing committee only agreed to write that "Americans should earn at least $15 an hour" — not that the party would push for a federal $15-an-hour minimum wage.

This weekend, however, Democrats took a big step forward, embracing a push for a $15 minimum wage, according to a news release from the Sanders campaign. (Vox’s Matt Yglesias weighs whether that’s a good or bad idea here.) It seems like Sanders’s most complete victory.

Stronger language on criminal justice: The platform draft also calls on the Department of Justice "to investigate all questionable or suspicious police-involved shootings," according to ABC News. That’s a major step up from the 2012 platform, which merely said the party should "fight inequalities in our criminal justice system."

The leftward move on criminal justice certainly can’t be chalked up to Sanders alone: Last week, Clinton announced that, if elected, she’d launch a $1 billion new effort to improve race relations in policing. Indeed, Weigel reported that this was one of the ballot changes that passed unanimously, though it was pushed by Sanders’s allies.

Marijuana legalization: The committee also agreed to include a "reasoned pathway to future legalization" of marijuana on the party platform. (The 2012 platform calls for a reduction in racial disparities in drug sentencing but does not mention marijuana.)

Delegates from Clinton’s campaign largely opposed the marijuana legalization language, and it carried by just one vote. (Clinton’s campaign has opposed the legalization of marijuana.)

Carbon pricing: The new platform also calls for carbon pricing, which would tax carbon to recognize its impact on the environment. (You can learn more about this policy from Vox’s David Roberts.)

This stronger language, too, had been shot down by earlier meetings of the Democratic committee — and represents a clear win for Sanders’s allies.

Where had the party platform already moved?

The wins for Sanders during this weekend’s conference in Orlando comes on top of several key victories his allies had won at previous Democratic Party meetings over the platform.

Here are some of the prior changes, sought by Sanders’s allies, approved of by the DNC’s committee:

• Federal reserve reform: The new platform says the party will fight against allowing bank executives to sit on Federal Reserve boards.
• Closing the revolving door: The party will also move to "ban golden parachutes for those taking government jobs" and seek to bar bank regulators from taking any action related to their former employers, according to the draft of the platform.
• Wall Street reform: The party would also seek to crack down on Wall Street by severing banks’ ability to choose the credit agency that rates their products.
• Postal Service banking services: "Democrats believe that we need to give Americans affordable banking options, including by empowering the United States Postal Service to facilitate the delivery of basic banking services," the draft of the platform states. (Vox’s Matt Yglesias explains that idea here.)
• Loopholes for estates and hedge funds: The draft also has strong, Sanders-like language on the need to "immediately close egregious loopholes like those enjoyed by hedge fund managers, restore fair taxation on multimillion dollar estates, and ensure millionaires can no longer pay a lower rate than their secretaries."
• Use closing loopholes to create jobs: The Post's Greg Sargent also notes that Sanders's aides cheered the commitment to put the revenue from closing loopholes toward rebuilding infrastructure and creating jobs.
• Death penalty: The party’s platform also has new language calling for the eradication of the death penalty. "We will abolish the death penalty, which has proven to be a cruel and unusual form of punishment," the platform states. "It has no place in the United States of America." That's a win for Sanders, who had called for absolutist opposition to the death penalty. (Clinton has backed its use in limited circumstances.)

• Earned income tax credit: The 2016 platform’s draft language will call on a specific expansion of the EITC to "low wage workers who don’t have children and to workers age 21 and older," according a news release from the party. (The 2012 platform only praised President Obama for expanding the EITC in general, according to Weigel.)

Where did Sanders lose?

The biggest loss this weekend for Sanders came on trade, where he and his allies failed to push the party toward more explicit skepticism of international free trade deals backed by President Obama.

He’ll get another chance in Philadelphia, where he’ll have the opportunity to call for another vote on amendments to the party platform, according to James Zogby, a Sanders delegate I spoke to last month. Still, for now, Sanders looks headed toward defeat in changing the platform on:

Opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal: The platform does acknowledge that there are Democrats who dislike the TPP deal brokered by the Obama administration, but Sanders’s aides failed to pass an amendment committing the party to opposing the trade pact.

"It’s clear the corporate wing of the Democratic Party wants the window dressing of populist language — Bernie Sanders language — but are not serious about it," Cornel West, a Sanders appointee to the platform writing committee, told the Wall Street Journal after their effort failed.

This is partly understandable — it’d be awkward for the Democratic Party to oppose a deal brokered and supported by President Obama — but it’s also odd given that Hillary Clinton herself also opposes the trade proposal, at least as a matter of record.

Stance on Israeli settlements: Sanders’s backers also failed to get critical language of Israel onto the party platform, an effort torpedoed largely by the Clinton delegates.

According to the Forward, Sanders’s allies wanted to pass an amendment "aimed at criticizing the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, demanding ‘an end to illegal settlements’ and supporting the re-building of the Gaza Strip."

Fracking: Though they celebrated the new language around carbon pricing, Sanders’s aides failed to push through an amendment that would have called for an end to hydraulic fracturing, according to Weigel. (That fight, too, reflects an important fissure from the primary.)

The party stops short of calling for an end to fracking but does say it shouldn't occur in municipalities where the local government objects to it, according to the Orlando Weekly.

Does this really matter?

Commentators downplaying the platform’s significance note that it has no actual enforcement mechanism, and that there’s no guarantee a President Hillary Clinton wouldn’t jettison most — or all — of its main provisions.

"The activists can get something of a free hand with the platform because they can be the only ones who care," says Dave Hopkins, a political scientist at Boston College. "And then the candidates will think: ‘Well, if this makes the activists happy, and nobody else is paying attention, then there’s no harm done.’"

Something similar appears to be playing out in the Democratic primary, Hopkins notes: Sanders loyalists are winning some concessions on the platform, and Clinton wants to ensure that they come aboard for November.

But those stances are unlikely to really hurt Clinton in a general election, where so much other noise can drown them out. "There’s a lot of precedent for the platform to be controlled by the ideological activists," Hopkins says. "They’re the ones who care most about it."

And that’s true. But while the platform itself isn’t binding, it does represent the stated objectives of the Democratic Party. What it says is the clearest expression of what the party stands for and is, more broadly, one of the best ways to gauge the party's overall direction.

Given that it’s moving Sanders’s way on several key issues, it’s a good sign that even if Sanders lost the nomination to Clinton, his candidacy will have a lasting legacy on the party.

And that really could change the party’s members: Ryan Enos, a professor at Harvard University, told me in May that just by being aired, these ideas can gain currency and support among lawmakers.

"We know that voters in the public get pulled in the direction of the people with the microphone," Enos said. "If someone gets up there and tries pulling some issue to the left, the party can move in that direction."

On Monday morning, UK Prime Minister David Cameron announced that he’d be resigning on Wednesday, with Home Secretary Theresa May poised to take over as the next prime minister. At the end of his address, Cameron hummed to himself a little — and it’s the most hilarious, British thing ever:

“Dooo dooo do do. ... Right. Good."

It might be surprising that a leader is super thrilled about leaving his job. One reason why, though, is that being the UK prime minister right now is an absolutely awful job, as a result of the Brexit referendum. As this neat Venn diagram (courtesy of Twitter user Quantian) illustrates, there are only three options available to the UK after the Brexit vote. All of them are terrible, and Cameron is probably thankful not to have to choose among them:

1) "Clean break": In this scenario, the UK just leaves the EU without negotiating any sort of alternative arrangements in place. This option could be disruptive for many EU citizens and businesses, but EU leaders wouldn’t have any way to stop it. And Brexit supporters in the UK would find it acceptable.

The problem: Just quitting would trigger a severe recession in the UK, as the British economy depends on free access to the European common market. Forty-four percent of British exports go to the EU, and the UK financial sector depends on free movement of capital between Britain and Europe. No British leader would knowingly crash the UK economy, so neither Cameron nor May would agree to a "clean break." (There is a chance one could be forced into it, however. If Britain triggers Article 50, a clean break automatically happens in two years absent an exit deal between the UK and EU.)

2) "EEA + deal": In this scenario, the UK negotiates a deal with the EU, which would allow it to remain in the EEA but would exempt it from other EU rules — most notably, free migration rules — that Brexit supporters hate. Indeed, something like this is what Cameron’s successor May is angling for.

The problem: EU leaders seem unlikely to agree to this. They don’t want to reward Britain’s vote with favorable exit terms, for fear that voters in other countries (like Greece, France, or the Netherlands) will take this as a sign that they could get a similar deal. So while this solution would work for British voters and leaders, it’s unacceptable to European leaders.

3) "Annul vote": In this scenario, British leaders call backsies on the referendum results and simply refuse to ever submit Article 50 notification. This would prevent the UK leadership from owning the disastrous economic consequences of Brexit, and European leaders would celebrate it as a step away from the brink.

The problem: "Leave" supporters in the UK would feel betrayed and very, very angry — and even some "Remain" supporters might see it as undemocratic. The political backlash against a UK prime minister who calls "Bracksies" could be immense.

So every option available to the UK leadership right now is either politically unviable or economically disastrous. That’s probably why Cameron is so chipper about being out of a job.

Oh, and good luck, Prime Minister May.

There comes a point, it seems fair to say, when the methods for breaking a given habit become more unpleasant than the habit itself. A quick internet search of how to stop kids from sucking their thumbs, for example, turns up a host of tricks that range from creatively gross...More »

Compostela acollerá a partir do vindeiro luns 18 de xullo o encontro 1936. Un novo relato? 80 anos, entre historia e memoria, organizado por Histagra, grupo de investigación da USC

Crispy on the outside, chock-full of filling inside, empanadas are the savory pastries of my dreams. On their own, they’re a good snack or appetizer, especially for happy hour. Paired with a big salad, you have a perfect meal (but then again, I’d say that about nearly any kind of dough-based baked good).

While there are some rules with empanadas, there’s tons of variations and these bad boys are made for improvising. Here’s what you need to consider before you DIY your own crispy creations:

1. The Dough.

Empanadas are mostly about the filling, but a good dough is key. Traditional empanada dough is made a bit like an unsweetened tart crust: flour, salt (and any other seasonings), and butter are mixed to combine, then eggs and water are added until the dough comes together.

You can use almost any roll-out tart dough recipe (read: your favorite)—just be sure it’s smooth and pliable. But there’s other options, too. I prefer to use pie dough for a flakier exterior. Puff pastry works too! Here are some options:

2. The Filling.

The star of any empanada is the filling. While you can just chuck leftover shredded chicken into an empanada, for the most flavor, you’ll want to cook some aromatics or sofritto, then add your filling choices to it, followed by herbs and spices of your choice. Whether you’re using leftovers or raw meat, this is a great way to bring flavor to the filling.

The one thing to avoid is fillings that have too much sauce or liquid—they’ll seep out of the empanada.

Here are some ideas—mix and match them if you like:

• Meat: Cooked ground or shredded are my favorites, but small chunks work too!
• Fish and seafood: Yes, it’s meat, but you’ll want to prepare it differently. Chop it pretty finely or use a homemade ground mixture. Shrimp, scallops, and tuna are all great choices.
• Tofu or Seitan: Marinate it, then chop it up in cubes, a small dice, or a crumble to resemble ground meat.
• Eggs: Scrambled for breakfast, or hard boiled anytime.
• Beans: Mashed, refried—or whole for texture
• Cheese: Shredded melty cheeses, a scoop of soft fresh cheese, or crumbled hard cheese, depending on your other fillings.
• Vegetables: Grilled, sautéed, or raw all work. I like caramelized onions, sautéed mushrooms, grilled peppers, wilted greens, and roasted winter squash.
• More Starch: Rice, corn, grains, or thinly sliced or chopped potatoes.

Some ideas for mixing and matching:

• Potatoes with cooked rice with beans (or use leftover rice and beans)
• Farro or wheatberries with wilted greens
• Potatoes with pulled pork
• Chicken and shredded cheese (a classic)

3. The Assembly.

To assemble the empanadas, roll out your dough to about 1/8 to 1/4-inch thick. Cut the dough into circles using a floured cutter or the bottom of a glass. The larger the circle, the more room you’ll have for fillings, but it will also take longer to cook and larger empanadas can be harder to eat. I usually opt to cut circles 3 to 3 ½ inches in diameter. Have a small bowl of cool water at the ready, as well as a floured fork or your fingers for crimping.

Scoop mounded filling on one half of the dough. (Around 2 tablespoons is a good place to start for a 3-inch dough round) Then brush one half of the dough’s edge with water. Fold the dough over the filling, then use your fingers or a floured fork to crimp the dough well. You want to be sure it stays sealed!

If your filling has a lot of moisture in it (it's saucy or it has ingredients that retain moisture, like mushrooms), it can be a good idea to cut vents to help some of that internal steam escape. If your filling is on the drier side, you probably don't need to cut a vent. If the dough has gotten warm while you’ve been assembling, it’s best to refrigerate the empanadas before you proceed.

4. The Cooking Method.

The next big decision when you’re making your own empanadas is how you’re going to cook them. The ultimate goal is a crispy crust, but there’s two very different ways to get there: baking or frying. One isn't necessarily better than the other: Fried empanadas will have an evenly crisp, golden brown crust and richness from the frying itself. Baked empanadas will be a little drier on the outside in comparison, but not dry! If you don't feel like frying, you can emulate the richness a little bit by brushing the empanadas with a little melted butter or good olive oil when they first come out of the oven.

If you choose baking, empanadas can benefit from a brush of egg wash or cream before baking to help them brown evenly. Place them about an inch apart on a lined baking sheet. Use a relatively high temperature (375° to 425°F) to get it nice and golden and promote plenty of flakiness. How long they bake for depends on the size, shape, and type of dough you’re using. Many will need around 20 to 30 minutes.

If you’re frying, the ideal temperature for the oil is between 325° to 350°F. You can pan-fry the empanadas in about 1 inch of neutral (vegetable, canola, or peanut) oil, or go for the full-on deep fry: Both are delicious.

5. The Dip.

Now that you’ve got a crispy, crunchy empanada stuffed to the brim with plenty of filling, it’s time to talk condiments. Of course this can be as simple or as complex as you want, but I always consider the filling when picking the sauce. For example, a richer filling (think: cheese), might benefit from a tangier sauce (say, salsa verde). But as usual, the sky’s the limit: and for the record, I’m totally for having multiple sauces.

• Salsa (red or green, fresh and coarse or smooth and jarred)
• Guacamole
• Sour cream / fresh crema
• Queso!
• Hot sauce
• Chimichurri or other other fresh herb sauce
• Aioli

Foto: diarioinformacion.es

En el día de ayer falleció el editor Paco Camarasa, a la edad de 52 años y tras una larga enfermedad. Camarasa, nacido en Alcoy, fue el fundador de Edicions De Ponent, una de las editoriales clave para entender el cómic español de los últimos veinte años, responsable, junto a otras, de la implantación de la novela gráfica en España. De hecho, Camarasa fue de los primeros editores en apostar por el formato de libro y la edición muy cuidada por encima de otros criterios.
En su editorial, Paco Camarasa aunó la recuperación de grandes talentos de los ochenta y noventa con la incorporación de nuevos autores. Laura Pérez-Vernetti, Keko, Antonio Altarriba, María Colino, Arnau Sanz, Martín López Lam, Mirchamut o Santiago Valenzuela son algunos de los autores a los que editó. Descanse en paz.

La noticia en:

elmundo.es

diarioinformacion.es

Entrevista a Paco Camarasa en:
El coleccionista de tebeos (2006)

rcampus.net

Un reportaje en vídeo realizado por Spain Comic sobre Edicions De Ponent:

Un reportaje escrito realizado por África Prado para diarioinformacion.es (2014)

A privacy trainwreck: Pokemon Go, the hit augmented reality game that's seeing kids and adults alike scouring the real world looking for monsters to nab, quietly gets "full access" to players' Google accounts. And check out the small print that goes with it. (more…)

While we've already established that Pokemon Go [Free] is on track to be bigger than sliced bread, not everything is as awesome as it seems in the land of Pokemon. As discovered by Adam Reeve, principal architect of the security firm RedOwl, if you're playing Pokemon Go via logging in through your Google Account, you're potentially giving Niantic and Pokemon Go access to everything on your Google account. What can you do with full access to a Google account? Well, as Reeve points out:

Let me be clear - Pokemon Go and Niantic can now:

• Read all your email
• Send email as you
• Access all your Google drive documents (including deleting them)
• Look at your search history and your Maps navigation history
• Access any private photos you may store in Google Photos
• And a whole lot more

Sure enough, I double checked my own Google Account, and Pokemon Go has full access to everything. Oddly enough, Niantic's other game, Ingress [Free], which also uses your Google account only requests permission to basic account info:

The other option for playing on iOS is by using a Club Pokemon account, but it seems the whole Club Pokemon system has been offline ever since Pokemon Go got slammed so hard. Also, there doesn't appear to be any way to transition from a Google account to a Club Pokemon account, as your progress is locked to your account. Right now, this is all feeling kind of gross as Google really ties you into their ecosystem and I really, really don't like the idea that Pokemon Go has access to send email as me.

If you want to check what access Pokemon Go and other apps connected to your Google account have, click here, log in, and then go to the connected apps & sites link. Also, while you're in there, it's a good idea to revoke access to stuff you're not using anymore. We're going to keep a close eye on this, so stay tuned for updates on how this all ends up unfolding.

Update: Unsurprisingly, it turns out this was just an error on Niantic's part. The Verge received the following statement from them:

"We recently discovered that the Pokémon GO account creation process on iOS erroneously requests full access permission for the user’s Google account. However, Pokémon Go only accesses basic Google profile information (specifically, your User ID and email address) and no other Google account information is or has been accessed or collected. Once we became aware of this error, we began working on a client-side fix to request permission for only basic Google profile information, in line with the data that we actually access. Google has verified that no other information has been received or accessed by Pokémon Go or Niantic. Google will soon reduce Pokémon Go’s permission to only the basic profile data that Pokémon Go needs, and users do not need to take any actions themselves."

–

‘Jurakan’ – Los Bronson

Los creadores de ‘Jurakan’ son un cuarteto de surf rock establecido en San Juan, Puerto Rico, que fusiona sonidos del surf clásico de los 60 con punk, funk y jazz.



–

‘Sangre en los adoquines’ – Los Bronson

Durante el 2015, Los Bronson lanzaron su primer disco homónimo con la producción del “Bronson Fest” y estrenaron el video musical de ‘Sangre en los adoquines’, a partir del cual comenzaron con una gira bastante exitosa en Perú.



*Surfing in México: entrevista a Surfistas del Sistema

–

‘Twist Twist’ – Imperial Surfers

A comienzos del 2003 se formó el grupo de los madrileños que retomarían los inicios del surf junto con el retorcido ritmo del twist para crear su primer disco: “Imperial Walk”.

–

‘Bala de Plata’ – Los Tiki Phantoms

Otro de los grupos de surf rock que optaron por mezclas más instrumentales fueron Los Tiki Phantoms, quienes están muy presentes en el mundo actual del género que nació en California hace más de 10 años.



–

‘La Viuda Negra’ – Fenómeno Fuzz

Otros que forman parte del “rock surf mexicano” son los integrantes de Fenómeno Fuzz, quienes han escrito varias letras para los locos ritmos de sus discos inspirados en la cultura de este estilo musical playero.



–


Es muy interesante cómo un mismo género musical puede concebirse de manera distinta dependiendo el lugar de donde éste parta, pues para California el surf es el ritmo al que las olas del mar golpean la playa, en Australia consideran parte de los grupos problemáticos a los que tocan este ritmo y a los que lo adoptan como estilo de vida, a quienes la policía tiene que estar vigilando constantemente, mientras que en México se le ha relacionado con la lucha libre desde sus inicios, tal cual lo hace el grupo Sr. Bikini.


–
‘Misterio’ – Sr. Bikini



Entonces, de acuerdo a estos artistas y muchos melómanos que intentan definir el complicado y cautivante género musical conocido como surf, éste es una combinación originada a partir del movimiento que intentó darle un giro distinto al rock & roll, pues los textos sobre olas, surferos, chicas en bikini, tablas y ligues sobre la arena vinieron después.

Es decir, lo que intenta hacer el surf instrumental es recoger en sus sonidos las sensaciones del deporte sobre una tabla que baila con las olas a través de guitarras, bajos y baterías que simulen el golpeteo del mar, la adrenalina recorriendo las venas de los que lo desafían, los movimientos del surfista sobre su tabla y todo lo que rodea a este fenómeno que hoy podemos llamar “cultura del surf”.  

Para que conozcas más de este deporte que formó parte de la inspiración de todo un fenómeno musical, lee sobre la violencia y drogas, el lado oscuro del surf y de vivir en la playa y después conoce a la banda más importante del mundo que nos enseñó 10 lecciones de amor.

The post Canciones que puedes escuchar para enamorarte de la música surf appeared first on Cultura Colectiva.

La historia de Sergi Mora podía contarse en una sola posición: sentado frente al ordenador. Fue hace años y no fue el único. Le ocurrió a media civilización y desde entonces se convirtió en una plaga. Eran millones de individuos que, por su trabajo, empezaron a vivir en postura de silla. Pero un día Mora […]

Este post El (bellísimo) yoga que escapó de la estética New Age, escrito por Mar Abad, se publicó originalmente en Yorokobu.

Of all the reactions to the upcoming Star Trek: Beyond, this one surprises me.

Star Trek, as a franchise, has always prided itself for its progressive stance on science, the future, and diversity. Gene Roddenberry envisioned a utopian future of exploration in which people of all races, creeds, and colors could work alongside one another to seek out new ground on the “Final Frontier”.

From its earliest incarnation, Star Trek, as a series, employed diverse casting. In the notoriously fraught 1960s, it was hard to get a black character on screen who wasn’t a servant. Roddenberry not only had a cast boasting a black female character in Lieutenant Uhura, but an Asian character in Lt. Sulu. While it may not seem much now, the show’s approach to race became important enough for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr himself to urge Nichelle Nichols to stay on the show to serve as an inspiration to black youth. EGOT-winning actor/comedian Whoopi Goldberg (who would go on to play Guinan on The Next Generation) famously spoke of her initial reaction to Star Trek, seeing Lt. Uhura and immediately running to her mother and going, “Mama! There’s a black lady on TV and she ain’t no maid!”

Trek still had its issues with inclusion, such as with its approach to women. (The infamous “Turnabout Intruder” episode, the design of Counselor Deanna Troi, which required her to wear a bunny suit for five and a half seasons and originally included her as a sex-obsessed hermaphrodite with four breasts)

Another aspect of diversity that Star Trek seemed to neglect was the inclusion of LGBTQIA characters. Something which might surprise some, given that one of Star Trek’s original main cast members, Lt. Hikaru Sulu himself, George Takei, went on to come out of the closet and become one of the most vocal and recognized advocates for LGBTQIA rights in America. (Not to mention, the fan-fueled pairing of Kirk/Spock basically launching the culture of slash fanfiction as we know it)

Roddenberry, according to Takei himself, was always an “ally” to the LGBT community. But Star Trek rarely went beyond one-off moments and hints of queer sexuality in the show. References to races that practice bisexual polygamy appeared in Star Trek: Enterprise. Jadzia Dax famously shared a same-sex kiss with the current incarnation of one of her past hosts’ spouse in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. But aside from that, many Star Trek materials, aside from parts of the expanded universe, never really featured gay or bisexual characters.

Until now, it seems.

With the upcoming release of Star Trek: Beyond, the third film in the alternative universe film reboot of the beloved franchise, filmmakers and cast members made an announcement. For the first time in a major Star Trek release, a main cast member would be openly gay. Who?

Well, Hikaru Sulu, of course, the role originated by George Takei and now played by Harold and Kumar alumn, John Cho. According to the Herald Sun, Beyond writer Simon Pegg and director Justin Lin revealed that Sulu, pilot for the USS Enterprise, raises a daughter with his male partner (husband?) aboard the famous star ship. Apparently, this is a “nod” to George Takei and his revolutionary work as an LGBT icon.

Too bad it appears Takei isn’t quite as honored as people expected.

In statement to The Hollywood Reporter, Takei went on record saying:

“I’m delighted that there’s a gay character. Unfortunately, it’s a twisting of Gene’s creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it’s really unfortunate.”

This response came as a huge surprise to many people, including the filmmakers. Both Simon Pegg (who, in addition to writing, plays Scotty in the new films) and Zachary Quinto, who plays Spock and is openly gay, made public responses.

Pegg gave a statement the following statement to Buzzfeed:

“I have huge love and respect for George Takei, his heart, courage and humour are an inspiration. However, with regards to his thoughts on our Sulu, I must respectfully disagree with him. He’s right, it is unfortunate, it’s unfortunate that the screen version of the most inclusive, tolerant universe in science fiction hasn’t featured an LGBT character until now.”

Quinto, speaking to the A.V. Club, had this to say:

“I think any member of the LGBT community that takes issue with the normalized and positive portrayal of members of our community in Hollywood and in mainstream blockbuster cinema… I get it that he’s had his own personal journey and has his own personal relationship with this character, but, you know, as we established in the first Star Trek film in 2009, we’ve created an alternate universe. My hope is that eventually George can be strengthened by the enormously positive response from especially young people who are heartened by and inspired by this really tasteful and beautiful portrayal of something that I think is gaining acceptance and inclusion in our societies across the world, and should be.”

So, is either side right or wrong?
Well, before any opinion is stated, a few notes on Sulu and Star Trek for those unfamiliar with the franchise and character.

Lieutenant Hikaru Sulu is one of the longest-lasting characters on Star Trek, his first appearance made at the very beginning of the original series. While originally drafted to represent “all of Asia”, with a first name not established until years later, the writers eventually established Sulu as Japanese. Sulu served aboard the bridge of the original USS Enterprise, as pilot and helmsman for the ship. As the series went on, it established character traits such as athleticism and an affection for fencing.

Another trait implied in the original series was Sulu’s interest in women. Albeit in a manner that is not set-in-stone-canon. In the famous episode “Mirror, Mirror”, a transport accident accidentally drops members of the crew in an alternate dimension. In it, the Federation is totalitarian and everything is more “evil”. Thus, MirrorUniverse!Sulu wastes no time in sexually harassing Uhura at the first opportunity.

Information on regularuniverse!Sulu’s sexuality rarely gets explored. In one episode of the animated series, Sulu conjures a female companion. That’s really it.

As of the first several movies and several of the sequel series, we learn more about Sulu and his career trajectory, rising to the rank of captain, taking command of the USS Excelsior, and, eventually, admiral in Star Fleet. He at some point has a daughter who herself goes on to helm the Enterprise-B on its doomed maiden voyage. Never is her mother mentioned or referenced.

With that in mind, how should we view this “change” to Sulu’s character?

On one hand, the man who helped build this character in the first place, isn’t pleased. While making his character gay may have been intended as a nod to honor Takei, the man’s reaction implies that he wasn’t even consulted on how or whether he’d like to be honored.

Takei’s contributions to Star Trek, Roddenberry’s vision, and the LGBT community is worth a thousand honors, but in honoring the man, his wishes should probably be a factor in how one goes about it.

Takei has repeatedly praised Roddenberry’s support of the LGBT community and has always venerated the man and his vision for Star Trek, and his words should have weight. Disagreeing with Takei about anything, especially anything Star Trek or LGBT related, seems almost like sacrilege.

That said…

Behold, the bane of many a Trekkie’s existence.

Quinto has a point. The fact is, the ship has already gone to warp nine in regards to the new films changing things when it comes to Roddenberry’s original vision. The narrative of the new Star Trek films have been controversial from the beginning for rebooting not only the franchise, but the timeline itself, explicitly and deliberately setting the new films in an entirely new timeline.

In Roddenberry’s original vision, Kirk was never a car-stealing hooligan in his youth. His father lived long enough to see him become captain. Planet Vulcan never met its destruction. Khan wasn’t white. Carol Marcus was a molecular biologist and not a weapons engineer. Captain Pike was not crippled by Romulans. Uhura couldn’t speak Klingon and never had a romantic relationship with Spock. All of the main cast members are commissioned, not enlisted, officers.

There is hardly a main Star Trek character that wasn’t changed. OG!Kirk grew up with both of his biological parents. Spock didn’t really confide in his mother that much. No one ever considered Chekhov a whiz-kid by any stretch of the imagination.

Some of these changes are the result of the time travel plot of the first film. Some are not. The Romulans killed Kirk’s dad and blew up Vulcan. That still doesn’t explain the Spock-Uhura relationship.

Thus far, there are plenty of canon-friendly nods to Sulu’s character. Sulu’s daughter still exists, so does his warp-throttle from the films, he’s still an enthusiastic swordsman. True, there isn’t much Sulu screen time in these movies so far. But nothing I’ve seen so far would make their Sulu seem any less “Sulu” if he were gay. This alteration is far less distracting to a Trekkie like myself than the destruction of Vulcan.

So why should Sulu having a same-sex family be any more “unfortunate” than any other change to Roddenberry’s vision?

Incorporating Takei’s sexuality into their work without consulting him beforehand certainly has its issues. After all, if one wanted to truly be inclusive and honor Takei, why not include him in the decision beforehand? Why not ask him to collaborate on this aspect of the scripting? Or even cast Takei himself as a whole new, LGBT character?

Why not make Spock, now played by any openly gay man, bisexual? Why not do something that would actually involve Takei, especially now that Leonard Nimoy is no longer around? Why not make Kirk bisexual? Or McCoy? Or Uhura? Why specifically use the character once played by a gay man as your token gay character? Especially without consulting the gay actor who originated him?

Who is better to give you notes on gay Sulu than ACTUAL GAY SULU?!

Takei is under no obligation to celebrate or praise this move by the filmmakers, and he has every right to disapprove. If anyone’s criticism regarding this is valid, it’s his. But the reasoning he voices does seem a little odd, given the circumstances.

Whether or not Takei’s objections work for you, Star Trek: Beyond should be inclusive. That, more than anything, is the core of Roddenberry’s vision. But one character who has had relatively limited screen time in the films thus far hardly counts as the groundbreaking representation that the studios seems to want to tout it as. We must wait for the premiere to see how well the filmmakers handle queer!Sulu.

In the meantime, it seems Takei, Quinto, and Pegg all have valid things to say on the topic. Here’s hoping Beyond turns out better than its first trailer suggests.

Images courtesy of CBS, Paramount Pictures, Cryptic Studios, and Perfect World International

The post Beyond Inclusion: Pegg vs Takei appeared first on Fandom Following.

Still via 'Daddy Daycare,' via IMDB/Revolution Studios

For most of the year, my partner and I split the duties of caring for our two-year-old daughter 50/50. But at least once during the year, when my partner's work schedule becomes more demanding, I step in as our daughter's sole caretaker. We spend this time together at the park, in the aisles of toy stores, in the waiting room for the pediatrician.

In the past two decades or so, the number of stay-at-home dads has risen—from just over 1 million in 1989 to 2 million in 2012, according to the Pew Research Center. We've also become more visible in society, from the cover of the New Yorker to the butt of every joke in movies and TV shows like Guys with Kids or Daddy Day Care.

You might think there's a certain comfort in knowing we're not the only ones bouncing babies on our knees and reading children's books all day, but no. The reality of being a stay-at-home dad is that strangers are suspicious, our friends are patronizing, and stay-at-home moms—the one group you might actually expect to have your back—often won't let you into their club.

Bradley Egel, who has been a stay-at-home dad for the last decade, told me when he first started taking his son to the park, he felt ostracized by the other moms.

"There was this group of moms who were extraordinarily cold to me. Sometimes to the point where they would just leave ," he said. "Then, after a year, this one woman—I guess she was like queen bee—walks over and says, 'We've been noticing that you come to the same park all the time. What's your deal?' I was like, 'I'm here with my kid. The same as you.'"

Those kinds of negative reactions take a toll. James Kline, a board member of the National At-Home Dad Network, told VICE social prejudice and isolation are among the top causes of depression among full-time dads.

"Even though great progress has been made toward acceptance, the idea of the inept father is still being reinforced through media and the general public," said Kline, a father of three from Raleigh, North Carolina, who sought treatment for depression and anxiety after the birth of his second child. Now, as part of the National At-Home Dad Network, he provides support to other stay-at-home dads in similar positions.

Depression issues can be exacerbated, he said, because men don't always ask for help. "We tend to internalize it and have the DIY attitude."

"We've been noticing that you come to the same park all the time. What's your deal?"

Of course, plenty of new parents struggle with depression—whether they're moms or dads, stay-at-home or not. A UK study published last month showed 3.6 percent of men had depression in the first year of fatherhood and another survey showed one in three new dads were worried about their mental health.

But stay-at-home dads aren't just struggling to adjust to the demands of parenthood; we're also acknowledging that we aren't the breadwinners in our households, and that can hurt. I'd like to think we're more enlightened than needing our own paycheck to prove our masculinity, but financial dependency does have a correlation with depression in men. A 2013 Danish study, for example, found that financially dependent men were more likely to seek treatment for anxiety, insomnia, and erectile dysfunction. Their explanation? Social norms made these men feel inadequate.

"I have friends tease me about being financially dependent," said Mark Suguitan, an LA-based full-time dad-of-two, whose wife works as a naval dentist. "They'll ask, 'What's your allowance?' So I say to them, 'Well, how much do you think childcare costs? Because that's what I'm getting paid.'"

Another study from Cornell University found that men who earn less than their spouses were more likely to be unfaithful, which the study's authors saw as a way to counter the threat to their manhood posed by the wage deficit. (These studies focused on men in heterosexual relationships; the dynamic could be different for financially dependent men and stay-at-home dads who are in same-sex relationships.)

"No one wants to have to ask permission to buy something, but that can be even more true for a man, especially if the man had spent time earning his own money," Peggy Drexler, a psychology professor at Weill Cornell Medical College, told VICE. That goes for women, too—as Drexler put it, "few people like to feel dependent, even in a marriage"—but the taboo against financial dependence is much greater for men.

According to Drexler, the way men respond to this perceived threat to their manhood depends on how the couple came to the decision that he should remain at home, "and whether it was a choice or an inevitability." A man who becomes a stay-at-home dad because he lost his job, for example, might react more negatively than a man who consciously left the workforce to focus on parenting.

Plus, not all stay-at-home dads are unemployed. Ian Kerner, a New York-based psychologist and sexologist, told me most of the stay-at-home dads he sees in couples therapy have freelance jobs or work that doesn't require them to go into an office. Compared to office-bound dads, Kerner said the at-home dads are "usually more invested in making the relationship work, in part because they have more to lose financially if it fails." In other words, there's more on the line—which can either be motivating or depressing.

Egel, who was bullied at the park by the stay-at-home moms, told me he loves being a full-time dad. But he also recognizes what it's cost him, both in his career and his personal life.

"I've sacrificed ten years where I've not been able to do a lot of things," he said. "But this was more important. I don't care if they're the best-looking kids or the smartest kids. I just want them to be decent human beings that treat people right. That's all that matters to me. That's my job."

Follow Paul Willis on Twitter.

Una vez, Oswald Hendryks Cornelius tuvo, sin quererlo, un encuentro carnal con una leprosa siria, hija de un jeque árabe, en medio del desierto del Sinaí. El error se produjo cuando, bajo la oscuridad de una noche sin luna, intentó beneficiarse a hurtadillas a la mujer y a la otra hija del jeque, y tentando, tentando, acabó en cueros en la habitación equivocada. 

El mismo Oswald Hendrycks Cornelius que, años después, conoció a Henri Biotte, un belga "peludo como una cabra" y químico olfatorio de profesión que le convenció para participar en un experimento con partículas olorosas altamente erógenas. Y el mismo que, de nuevo, acabó en cueros en otra habitación equivocada, abarraganándose con Mistress Posonby, la "hembra más enorme que jamás había visto" -y eso que había visto mujeres gigantescas en el circo-, debido a un escape fortuito de la sustancia afrodisíaca del señor Biotte.  

Pero ¿quién es el tal Oswald Hendrycks Cornelius, amante confuso y allanador nocturno de habitaciones ajenas? Ni más ni menos que el tío ficticio del escritor Roald Dahl, nacido de la cara más pícara, verde y retorcida del autor galés de cuentos infantiles por antonomasia.

Steven Spielberg, al que a olfato no le gana nadie, ha aprovechado que se cumple un siglo del nacimiento de Dahl para estrenar su adaptación cinematográfica de 'El gran gigante bonachón', uno de los clásicos modernos salidos de la pluma del escritor, además de 'Charlie y la fábrica de chocolate', 'Matilda' o 'Las brujas'.  Novelas infantiles siempre con un punto de humor negro e irreverencia que alcanzan su culmen en el poemario 'Cuentos en verso para niños perversos', en el que Blancanieves y los siete enanitos se hacen superbillonarios en el mundo de las apuestas gracias al espejo mágico o donde el narrador vota por condenar a Ricitos de Oro por cometer allanamiento de morada, ser una cochina y romper una silla isabelina.

Sin embargo, esta otra faceta de Dahl, opuesta a la de autor prolífico de novelas infantiles, es mucho más desconocida y refleja el carácter aventurero y algo caradura del hombre que algunas de sus biografías describen como "el mayor 'cocksman' de América" -'cocksman' viniendo a significar "hombre sexualmente talentoso"-, en la época en que el galés trabajó como agente secreto vinculado a la embajada de Reino Unido en Washington en plena Segunda Guerra Mundial.

El binomio Dahl-'Playboy'

Algunos años después, en los inicios de su carrera literaria, Dahl alternó las novelas infantiles con cuentos macabros para adultos que iba publicando periódicamente en revistas como 'The New Yorker', 'Harper's', 'Tomorrow' o 'Ladies' Home Journal' -este último vendría a ser algo así como 'el diario casero de las señoras'. Pero no fue hasta 1959 cuando comenzaría la unión del binomio engendrador del tío Oswald Hendrycks Cornelius, las colaboraciones de Dahl en una de las revistas más populares del mundo: la 'Playboy'.

En las páginas interiores de una edición especial sexto aniversario, casta como una trenca de paño, el escritor de ascendencia noruega firmó 'Un buen hijo' -que luego retitularía como 'Génesis y catástrofe' y que formaría parte del libro recopilatorio 'Kiss Kiss'-, un relato en el que Klara, una mujer austrogermana que ha sobrevivido a la prematura muerte de tres de sus hijos y que acaba de dar a luz, teme que su hijo recién nacido, de aspecto frágil y pequeño, acabe siguiendo los pasos de sus difuntos hermanos. Klara reza por que sobreviva, y le pide a Dios misericordia para con su hijo, cuyo nombre, que nos revelará el autor justo al final es... Adolf Hitler. Giro dahliano en su máxima expresión. ¿Pero dónde está el erotismo de este cuento? ¿Dónde están los cuerpos turgentes y las curvas seductoras? En el mismo lugar que en la portada de este número de diciembre de 1959. En ningún sitio.

Tuvo que ser casi seis años después, en mayo de 1965, cuando entre los pechos y pechos de la 'playmate' Maria McBane, el escritor presentase a su tío ficticio Oswald Hendryks Cornelius en el relato 'El visitante', donde cuenta el desliz infeccioso-ulceroso con la leprosa siria. Una traslación de su humor retorcido y negro en un contexto de encuentros sexuales sórdidos y fantasías eróticas chifladas con las que se tomaría un respiro de niños, niños-ratón, niños-mago, oompa-loompas enanos, chocolaterías gigantes, melocotones gigantes y gigantes gigantes.

En el número de enero de 1966, con la pelirroja Judy Tyler en la portada, Dahl publicó 'El último acto', un cuento que él mismo definió como "un asesinato a polvos" que no se acaba de consumar por una "vaginitis atrófica senil". En él, la protagonista, Anna, no le encuentra sentido a la vida después de enviudar y de que sus hijos abandonen el nido para formar sus propias familias, y busca una forma de acabar con su alienación vital. Y aquí Dahl recurre a un sexo de un "realismo trágico" de amas de casa, sequedades, depresiones y coitos frustrados de forma original y extraña. 

El gran cambiazo

En abril de 1974, Dahl volvió a recurrir a 'Playboy' para publicar 'El gran cambiazo', donde el autor danés construye un alocado plan para que los hombres de dos matrimonios puedan consumar un intercambio de parejas con sus respectivas mujeres sin que se enteren. El plan parece salido de las cabezas de Mortadelo y Filemón, pero extrañamente funciona. Pero con Dahl no se puede cantar victoria antes de tiempo. Siempre hay un giro, siempre hay moraleja y todos los vencedores se convierten en vencidos.

Tan solo tres meses después, 'Playboy' publicó 'Bitch', la segunda parte de las aventuras de Oswald Hendryks Cornelius -la de la sustancia afrodisíaca del señor Biotte-, el último cuento que, junto con los anteriores, completará el recopilatorio 'El gran cambiazo' (1974) -cuyo título original, 'Switch Bitch', es un juego de palabras intraducible con las palabras cambio y perra.

Y este 'bon vivant muchimillonario' sofisticado, viajado y cínico, consiguió tanta aceptación entre el público masculino que Dahl tuvo que dedicarle una novela entera, 'Mi tío Oswald' (1979), que su autor calificó como "la historia más sucia y más larga" que jamás había escrito. En esta comedia de picaresca erótica, el tío Oswald decide ampliar su fortuna con un negocio de venta de esperma de los hombres más brillantes a mujeres que quieren tener los hijos más brillantes. Además de escritor, emprendedor visionario. Roald Dahl fue un hombre polifacético, controvertido y terriblemente talentoso que enseñó a leer a generaciones y generaciones de niños en todo el mundo. Y por eso, el 13 de septiembre -fecha de su nacimiento-, estudiantes de todo el globo celebran el día de Roald Dahl, ajenos -¡animalitos!- a las vaginitis atróficas seniles, la venta de esperma al por mayor y las consecuencias nefastas de tener sexo sin protección con leprosas del desierto. 

Se estaba por acabar el siglo. Faltaban seis años para abordar el tan inútilmente mentado cambio de milenio y decidió que era hora de confesar. El secreto se había perpetuado por cuatro interminables décadas. Hasta que un día, ella, que tenía 86 años, le reveló a un periodista que era la autora de Historia de O. Cuatro años después, murió. Este, claro, es el final. Pero, primero, hubo una hoja en blanco y un desafío. "Ninguna mujer puede escribir literatura erótica".

La sentencia la había lanzado un tipo al que pocos le hubieran discutido: Jean Paulhan. Escritor, influyente crítico de arte y encendido intelectual anarquista, su palabra era sumamente venerada en la efervescente Paris de las primeras décadas del siglo XX. La mujer que lo escuchaba era otra brillante intelectual y periodista, que le había sugerido al gran Paulhan —su amante—, que ella también podría escribir algo en el estilo del Marques de Sade.

Esa mujer era conocida como Dominique Aury (un seudónimo que gravitaba a su favor en las competencias literarias, por ser un nombre tanto femenino como masculino). Su verdadero nombre era Anne Desclos y nació en 1907; hija estudiosa de un profesor universitario y obediente discípula de las enseñanzas religiosas de su abuela. Graduada en Letras en la Sorbona, su vida profesional se edificó sobre sus valiosos trabajos como traductora, editora literaria y crítica de cine; fue la única mujer en 25 años que ocupó un cargo en el comité de lectura de la prestigiosa Casa Gallimard, y recibió varios premios por sus poemas y traducciones.

La protagonista es una fotógrafa que acepta la propuesta de su amante de convertirse en esclava sexual

Detrás de esa mujercita pálida y tímida, con su look de mecanógrafa recatada y sus austeros trajecitos grises, había un demonio creativo con una filosa capacidad crítica y salvajes mundos íntimos. Estuvo casada con Raymond d'Argila, un aristócrata violento al que abandonó muy pronto, y con el cual tuvo un hijo. Y tuvo algunos flirteos ideológicos inconfesables; por ejemplo, con la extrema derecha en la década del 30, cuando tenía una visión del mundo adherida a la de su padre. Probablemente esa perspectiva empezó a cambiar a través del amoroso intercambio de esencias con la periodista y militante feminista Edith Thomas, una de las damas con las que entretejió un romance.

Jean Paulhan y Dominique Aury se conocieron durante la ocupación nazi, cuando ella, enrolada en la Resistencia, distribuía la revista antifascista Lettres Francaises (que en 1945 se editó en Buenos Aires, bajo la tutela de Victoria Ocampo). La atracción fue inmediata: compartían la pasión por la política y la literatura; se admiraban mutuamente y se deseaban, a pesar de que (o especialmente porque) él le llevaba 23 años y estaba casado. En esa reveladora entrevista que le hizo John de St. Jorre en 1994, publicada en el New Yorker ("The unmasking of O"), Dominique confesó la combustión inicial que cocinó su famoso relato: "Ya no era tan joven ni linda, y temí que se desvaneciera el interés que él sentía por mí". Y esa ambición de alcance módico –mantener a su amante en llamas—, la motivó a hilar, con elegante artesanía psíquica e impecable prosa, la más inquietante ficción erótica del siglo XX.

Ella comenzó a enviarle a su enamorado, uno a uno, por correo, los capítulos de su novela. Del otro lado, el regocijo de Paulhan era doble; además de la regia calentura que la dama iba sembrando en él, diseñaba mentalmente el lanzamiento editorial del tesoro que le caía en manos. Tenía una fluida relación con Jean-Jacques Pauvert (el mítico editor que publicó —entre otros célebres libros— los del Marqués de Sade), a quien intrigó durante meses susurrándole que atesoraba el manuscrito de un autor, "que iba a tener un lugar en la historia de la literatura".... gooHasta que un día se lo entregó.

Pauvert devoró las páginas esa misma noche. "Es lo que estaba buscando", le dijo a su mujer, según cuenta en La travesía del libro, el volumen en el que compiló su intensa vida editorial. "Voy a marcar época con esto". Al día siguiente, llamó a Paulhan demasiado temprano, ansioso hasta la desesperación. "Quiero firmar el contrato", se entusiasmó. "Y quiero conocer a la misteriosa autora". Del otro lado, la respuesta fue un prolongado acceso de tos; porque, en realidad, otro editor ya había fichado el libro. Jean-Jacques Pauvert partió de su casa dispuesto a comprarle ese contrato a su competidor, y preparado para exterminarlo si no llegaban a un acuerdo. Un voluptuoso cheque de 100 mil francos antiguos lo antiguos lo resolvió todo.

Fotograma de Historia de O dirigida por Just Jaeckin

En julio de 1954, Historia de O fue publicado bajo su otro seudónimo de Pauline Réage. A raíz de la indiferencia de la prensa, se vendía a ritmo aletargado y las malas lenguas comentaban que era una edición clandestina. Un librero parisino sacó rédito del rumor: aseguraba a los curiosos que era un libro prohibido del cual tenía un solo ejemplar, y lo alquilaba a precio de oro. Pero el escándalo se esparcía de todos modos como un bramido silencioso, por el peso de las fantasías inconfesables condensadas en esas páginas.

La protagonista, O, es una hermosa fotógrafa que acepta la propuesta de su amante de convertirse en esclava sexual. Para consumar su entrenamiento iniciático, él la entrega en un espectral castillo, sede de una cofradía sadomasoquista; allí la heroína vive suspendida en una dimensión paralela, en la que es, a diario, desnudada, perfumada, encorsetada, manoseada, azotada y encadenada; es penetrada por hombres a los que ni siquiera puede ver, y hasta el criado que la asiste tiene la potestad de poseerla y castigarla. A medida que transcurre, el devenir de la historia levanta cada vez más la apuesta; y aún así, la minimalista prosa de la autora tensa el relato con tan sobria exquisitez, y expone con tal elegancia la cruda belleza de esas ceremonias brutales, que deja la sensación de no haber vertido una sola palabra de más. Como si hubiera capturado la estructura atómica del deseo.

En cierto sentido, el libro va un paso más allá que los escandalosos textos del Marques de Sade. Porque la protagonista no es una joven desdichada a merced de hombres impiadosos, sino una mujer empoderada que, voluntaria y activamente, decide sus pasos. "En los libros de Sade no existe la conciencia personal, si se exceptúa la del autor. Pero O sí tiene conciencia, y es esta la que le sirve como atalaya para contar su historia", analizó Susan Sontag en su ensayo La imaginación pornográfica. El nudo del escándalo de esta historia, es que O no se propone como víctima. Su máximo acto de libertad, es elegir esa lúbrica sumisión. Busca su destino en un derrotero de intensa devoción erótica, y parece rendirle tributo a un extraño culto perdido, del cual el resto de los mortales no tiene ni noticia. En algún punto, la debilidad queda del lado de los hombres que la aman o la desean con locura, y sólo atinan a someterla. En cambio, el capital psíquico de O, es su majestuosa entereza que no reclama ningún tipo de piedad: mayor es la dosis de brutalidad que resiste su cuerpo, mejor cimienta la supremacía de su voluntad. Y, contra todos los pronósticos, goza.

Albert Camus, que adoraba el libro, declaró delante de la autora que era imposible que lo hubiera escrito una mujer

Ya lo había advertido Jackes Lacan: "El masoquista es el verdadero amo. El es el amo del verdadero juego". Cuando Historia de O ganó el premio Deux Magots, en 1955, aún todos se preguntaban quién era la pluma fantasma detrás del seudónimo. Albert Camus —que adoraba el libro—, exclamó delante de la autoraque era imposible que lo hubiera escrito una mujer. (Lo curioso es que el personaje de O estaba levemente inspirado en una joven y atractiva amiga de la Aury, Odile, que estaba enamorada de Camus). Se especulaba que el autor podía ser André Malraux; o quizás Raymond Queneau, o George Plimpton... De lo que nadie dudaba, es que esa prosa implacable y esa imaginación diabólica, habían sido derramadas por una fálica pluma con los pantalones bien puestos.

Tanto Jean Paulhan como Jean-Jacques Pauvert fueron interrogados judicialmente varias veces, y perseguidos por la brigada policial antivicios para que revelaran la identidad de la autora; pero se escudaban en el secreto profesional estipulado en el contrato editorial. Uno de ellos, incluso, sugirió que la libertina podría ser la esposa de un influyente político, para generar un virtual vallado sobre el secreto. Un vínculo de Dominique Aury en las más altas esferas gubernamentales, logró desactivar el intento de censura.

En 1965, el libro se comenzó a vender legalmente en Estados Unidos. Un detalle que no se le escapó al creador de Mad Men, que incluyó en la serie una potente escena en la que se despliega un juego de dominación erótica entre el protagonista (Draper) y su amante (su vecina, Sylvia), que parece recrear un pasaje concreto del libro, o al menos, rendirle homenaje.

Historia de O y su adaptación cinematográfica

En 1970, Alan Klein —el que fue manager de los Beatles y los Stones— le propuso al singular Alejandro Jodorowsky filmar la historia, y lo tentó con un contrato de un millón de dólares; ya le había producido antes El Topo y La Montaña Sagrada. Pero, por algún motivo, Jodorowsky desistió de embarcarse, y huyó repentinamente de las negociaciones para trabajar con el guión de Dune. La venganza del productor desairado fue ocultar todas las copias de sus films durante 30 años.

En 1975, el director Just Jaeckin (que un año antes había alborotado el gallinero global con su taquillera Emanuelle), estrenó su versión cinematográfica de Historia de O. Construida sobre una narración en off y una saturada estética setentista, se apoya en los radiantes encantos de la perturbadora y angelical actriz francesa Corinne Clery (quien luego fue muy cotizada para ser chica Bond en Moonraker). Si bien la ambientación capta cierta atmósfera espectral del texto, quizás, como sucede con muchos libros, la mejor adaptación a la pantalla es la que no se hace nunca.

En los setentas, el New York Times legitimó el género con la denominación "porno chic" para catalogar este tipo de producciones en las que el erotismo, ante todo, es un fetiche estético, apto para consumo por su elegancia aristocrática. O sea: porno para gente que se empapa de buen cine, para gente con ínfulas intelectuales, porno "para los que no buscan porno". Por supuesto que esta ficción es parte de las sagradas escrituras del mundo BDSM; el símbolo del trisquel allí mencionado es el discreto emblema que identifica actualmente a los miembros de esta comunidad.

Las prácticas BDSM fueron encuadradas como síntomas de trastornos mentales hasta ayer; en 1994 han sido eliminadas de la lista de perversiones del manual de la Asociación Norteamericana de Psiquiatría, que ostenta el poder fáctico de establecer los criterios por los cuales los guardianes de la salud mental nos condenan a la hoguera del diagnóstico. Con semejante tabú de por medio, vale la pena repasar el amplio arco de interpretaciones que desató esta obra a través del tiempo.

Algunos intelectuales la han comprendido como una denuncia de la sumisión de la mujer en el contexto patriarcal. Otros, han pensado lo contrario: que es una apología de la mujer sometida, que adora a quien la humilla. Y, en realidad, éste último sería el caso de la penosa 50 sombras de Grey: una oda a la manipulación emocional y la violencia (disfrazada de ese romanticismo vetusto que el mercado del entretenimiento adjudica a una demanda femenina), y que nada tiene que ver con una práctica erótica consensuada. También se lo pensó como una metáfora de la humillante predisposición a aceptar lo inaceptable, a la que parece inclinarnos universalmente el amor.

El escritor André Pieyre de Mandiargues —quien prologó la versión norteamericana del libro— la concibe como una obra mística: una descripción metafórica del camino de anulación del ego para ascender a un plano de conciencia superior, que proponen tanto el Zen como otras corrientes espirituales.

En el best seller Sumisión (esa distopía política de Michel Houellebecq que nunca nos pondremos de acuerdo si es racista, oportunista, paranoica o simplemente aburrida), uno de los personajes, Rediger, curiosamente se instala en la mansión que le perteneció a Jean Paulhan, y hace esta reflexión: "Es una idea asombrosa y simple, jamás expresada hasta entonces con esa fuerza, de que la cumbre de la felicidad humana reside en la sumisión más absoluta . Para mí hay una relación absoluta entre la absoluta sumisión de la mujer al hombre, tal como la describe Historia de O, y la sumisión del hombre a Dios, tal como la entiende el Islam".

Aunque lo más probable es que la autora nunca haya leído sobre su existencia, el libro está cruzado por el espíritu lúdico del Shibari, el complejo antecesor oriental del bondage. Uno de los fundamentos filosóficos de este antiguo ritual japonés es despojar a la mujer de la culpa ancestral, liberarla del pudor atávico que la atraviesa desde el fondo de los siglos por medio de las ataduras que la inmovilizan mientras estimulan estratégicamente ciertas zonas erógenas; a partir de ahí, el dominante y la sumisa juegan tan suave o tan intensamente como hayan consensuado previamente.

Derramados tantos torrentes de tinta sobre este libro, no es posible finalizar sin volver al principio; más precisamente, al prólogo de Jean Paulhan, el primer fan que, con mucho conocimiento de causa, lo definió como "la más feroz carta de amor que puede recibir un hombre". Amén.

The wellbeing ideology is a symptom of a broader political disease. The rigors of both work and worklessness, the colonization of every public space by private money, the precarity of daily living, and the growing impossibility of building any sort of community maroon each of us in our lonely struggle to survive. We are supposed to believe that we can only work to improve our lives on that same individual level. Chris Maisano concludes that while "the appeal of individualistic and therapeutic approaches to the problems of our time is not difficult to apprehend . . . it is only through the creation of solidarities that rebuild confidence in our collective capacity to change the world that their grip can be broken."

The problem with self-love as we currently understand it is in our view of love itself, defined, too simply and too often, as an extraordinary feeling that we respond to with hearts and flowers and fantasy, ritual consumption and affectless passion. Modernity would have us mooning after ourselves like heartsick, slightly creepy teenagers, taking selfies and telling ourselves how special and perfect we are. This is not real self-love, no more than a catcaller loves the woman whose backside he's loudly admiring in the street.

The harder, duller work of self-care is about the everyday, impossible effort of getting up and getting through your life in a world that would prefer you cowed and compliant. A world whose abusive logic wants you to see no structural problems, but only problems with yourself, or with those more marginalized and vulnerable than you are. Real love, the kind that soothes and lasts, is not a feeling, but a verb, an action. It's about what you do for another person over the course of days and weeks and years, the work put in to care and cathexis. That's the kind of love we're terribly bad at giving ourselves, especially on the left.

La Policía pondrá a su disposición un documento de pautas de detección y actuación contra el terrorismo.

ISFJ

You are the serious-relationship boyfriend. In a world full of dudes who won’t commit, you are the coveted anti-fuckboy. You invest yourself fully in relationships and don’t shy away from putting serious work into keeping things running smoothly. You throw your absolute all into meeting your partner’s needs, whether it’s a week-old relationship or a fifty-year marriage. You date to find a life partner, not to kill time, and it’s incredibly refreshing for everyone.

ESFJ

You are the chivalrous boyfriend. In a world full of hitters-and-quitters, you remain committed to opening doors, paying for dinners and sending ‘just because’ texts to the people you’re interested in dating. You believe that any potential partner of yours deserves to be treated with the utmost respect and devotion – you never want a partner of yours to be left wondering how you feel for him or her.

ISFP

You are the sweet and smoldering boyfriend. You have a sensual streak to you that is absolutely unmatchable – it keeps new partners coming back for more, but it’s your kindness that ultimately wins them over. You care deeply and passionately about the people you fall for, and there’s nothing you love more than making your partner feel special. You are constantly looking for new ways to make your significant other happy, which makes you a phenomenal boyfriend.

ESFP

You are the affectionate boyfriend. You’re an outgoing and adventurous guy, but you also have an undeniable soft side – one that your partners absolutely love you for. You want your significant other to feel completely adored by you – and you make sure they do, by showering them with a constant stream of attention and affection. You’re as smooth as they come when you’re flirting but as genuine as they come in relationships – and it’s a side of you that new partners are delighted to discover.

ESTP

You are the superhero boyfriend. You’re as high-energy and adventurous as they come, but the people you love bring out a soft side in you – the side that wants to protect his loved ones at all costs. There’s nothing you love more than being able to swoop in and save the day for the people you care about – and when it comes to your romantic relationships, you do so without a second thought.

ISTP

You are the jack-of-all-trades boyfriend. You may not be overly showy or romantic when it comes to intimate relationships, but you show your love by helping your partner solve just about any problem they’re up against. You have a knack for picking up new systems quickly and you use this skill to offer fixes for whichever issues your loved ones are facing. You’re a true Jack-of-all-trades and your SOs appreciate you enormously for it.

ESTJ

You are the stable provider boyfriend. You go out of your way to ensure that anyone you date is practically supported and getting their needs met. You loathe the idea of not being able to provide for the people you love should they ever need your help – so you work as hard as possible to support your partner in whichever hands-on ways he or she needs from you.

ISTJ

You are the strong, silent boyfriend. You may not be the first to preach your feelings to new partners, but you’re absolutely the first one to show up for them when they need you. There’s nothing you will not do to ensure that the people you date are being looked out for, and when you pledge your commitment to someone, you take that commitment seriously. You aren’t afraid to step up and be your partner’s rock and grounding force in a wildly unpredictable world.

INTP

You are the intellectually challenging boyfriend. You are constantly picking the mind of the person you’re dating – wanting to learn as much as possible about them and the way they process the world around them. You aren’t afraid to challenge your partner’s way of thinking in a relationship and it’s something that the right partner absolutely loves you for. You’re constantly learning from one another and it keeps the relationship fascinating for both parties.

ENTP

You are the wildcard boyfriend. With your quick wit, undying curiosity and never-ending stream of new ideas, you are constantly keeping your partners on their toes. Luckily, that’s what your SOs love best about you. You’re always the first to propose a new adventure, spark an intriguing debate or crack a perfectly-timed joke. There’s no such thing as stagnancy so long as you’re around – and your unpredictability is the very thing that keeps your relationships thriving.

INTJ

You are the mindful boyfriend. You approach your relationships the way you approach everything else – seriously and deliberately. When you’re with someone, you take specific measures to ensure that the relationship is progressing in a healthy and positive manner. You learn as much as you possibly can about your partner and are constantly looking for ways to challenge and improve the relationship you share with them. Love, to you, means continuously growing and developing alongside your partner.

ENTJ

You are the high-achieving boyfriend. Partners know that you hold high expectations for both yourself and the people in your life – but once you meet someone who fulfills those expectations, you’ll absolutely move mountains for him or her. You are powerful, committed and intense when it comes to all of your commitments – and when that commitment is to a relationship, you can bet your ass you’ll do whatever it takes to make it work.

ENFP

You are the hopeless romantic boyfriend. When you fall hard for someone, there’s no outrageous length you won’t go to in order to sweep that person off their feet. You’re the master of elaborate surprises and extravagant romantic gestures. You want to make your partner feel as though they’re living in a modern-day fairytale – one that you’ve craftily written for the two of you to star in and play out.

INFP

You are the emotionally aware boyfriend. In a world full of douchebags and fuckboys, you show the hell up for your partner’s emotional needs. You are genuine, romantic, passionate and devoted to the people you invest in. You’re the first to check in on how the person you’re dating is feeling and the best at helping them sort through and overcome their struggles. Your partners always feel heard, appreciated and understood as long as they’re with you.

ENFJ

You are the giving boyfriend. Once you invest yourself in someone, you are happy to give him or her as much of your time, energy, attention and love as he or she needs and desires. You want nothing more than for the person you’re with to feel seen, appreciated and supported by you. You’ll go well out of your way to meet your partner’s physical and emotional needs within the relationship. If there’s anything your partners can’t call you, it’s neglectful!

INFJ

You are the psychoanalytical boyfriend. Everything your partner does fascinates you, and you want to learn as much about him or her as possible – in order to connect with them as intensely as possible. Your partner will never feel more seen, understood or supported as they do when they’re with you. You will go to great lengths to ensure that you really know the person you’re dating – and that you can consequently cater to their needs as effectively as possible.