Sorry to dominate this thread, but…God bless Google. (This “feminist theory” essay reminds me of why studying literature in college almost made me hate literature. Thank God I didn’t go on to graduate work in literature, or I’d be watching reality shows on television by now.)
“…But while critics such as Nancy Holland are correct in noting that "Sugar Walls" contains startling vaginal imagery ("Blood races to private spots/That lets me know there's a fire. . . . Temperatures rise inside my sugar walls"), sexual experience is still defined in phallocentric terms. The singer addresses a male audience which is repeatedly instructed to "take advantage" so they'll find "Heaven on earth inside my sugar walls," yet little mention is made of female pleasure. In the logic of the Prince-Easton effort, a woman's sugar walls have the ability to sate male appetite, but prove to be unsatisfying to their very host.”
See, to my way of thinking, Ms. Easton is indeed speaking of her own pleasure, even as she invites her partner(s) to similarly enjoy the delights inside of her Sugar Walls. In short, a good time was had by all, and the Sugar Walls are to thank. Moreover, the female singer seems to be running the show here. I can’t, however, argue with the fact that Easton was indeed addressing a “male audience” in 1984 – including certain pre-pubescent boys whose on-line moniker would later rhyme with “fun suits.” (I wonder if this post will be deleted. I can’t say I would really blame anyone for doing so.)
(b.t.w. - has “phallocentric” ever been used in a spelling bee? I think Prince might have a song or album called “phallocentric,” actually…)
The wind kicks up with the smell of rain
The kids are gone but the souls remain