A New Sex Word: Valprehend

The ever-fabulous Becca got in touch with me recently and asked if I knew of a word for the receiving penetrative sex that’s more active. After all, you can be the one who gets penetrated and be the active one. Heck, you can even be the dominant one and be penetrated. But most of our language rests on the assumption that penetration = active and being penetrated = passive.

I’ve heard a few people use the word “engulf”, although I don’t think that really captures the essence of what Becca & I were talking about. So imagine how happy I was when she emailed me and suggested a new word: valprehend.

According to Becca, if you break it down to its roots, val means strong and prehend means grasp or seize. So to valprehend someone is to grasp them strongly or firmly. And that’s a great word for what we were talking about. It’s a very active term and it conjugates nicely:

After lots of warm up, she anally valprehended her lover.

Valprehensive sex is one of my favorites.

My boyfriend enjoys it when I valprehend him

In any of these examples, you could easily substitute an equivalent form of the verb to penetrate, so there’s a linguistic consistency. It’s also a new word, so there aren’t any other connotations to overcome. And it gives us one more way to shift away from the idea that being penetrated is passive.

Pass it on. Let’s see if we can get it in the Oxford English Dictionary. And follow Becca’s blog. She’s groovy.

Post Tagged with

7 Responses so far.

  1. Angiportus says:

    A nice one indeed, too nice to limit to the sexual realm. A CNC lathe has a chuck that automatically valprehends the workpiece. And so on.

  2. Angiportus says:

    ..On second thought, it sounds more like a mental act, a form of comprehension that takes courage to acheive. I guess we need some more new words.

  3. James says:

    Omg. This is an Orwellian style moment- trying to change the language we use–> trying to change the way we think–> trying to change the “idea” that being penetrated is passive–> trying to change the REALITY of sex to suit an a-sexual feminist agenda.
    A word has to be either a noun, name, adjective or verb. To penetrate is a verb as it’s something that is done by someone. Valprehenisve or whatever its called cannot be used in the VERB tense as you are not doing anything during it, unless the woman is on top. I cannot make up the word “ditgrahum” as the term to be SMACKED. Then when John comes along and smackes me in the face with the baseball bat I can say “Oh I ditagrahumed John in the face.” I am not doing anything therefore I cannot be carrying out a verb. You can’t bend the rules of language and common sense.
    Get a grip of yourselves and start facing the truth about sex. Ladies, you are getting “fucked” even if you don’t like the sound of it or if it clashes with your a-sexual feminist outlook. The majority of confident, strong and feminine women don’t mind using the word, this is because they lack the same Daddy issues as you all do and are getting a good fucking on the reg.

  4. James, if your idea of getting fucked is equivalent to passivity, to not “doing anything”, that says something unfortunate about your sex life. But then, so does equating this to “Daddy issues and not getting fucked enough”.

  5. Captain Scarecrow says:

    I disagree with James. It hadn’t occurred to me before, but I think this is a concept in search of a word, and valprehend will do.

    If I open a girl’s mouth, grab her by the ears and stick my cock down her throat, I’m certainly penetrating her. But if I’m lying back and she takes my cock in hand and wraps her lips around it and slides her mouth over it until it’s down her throat, I’m not doing shit to her. She’s doing something to me, and until now it hasn’t had a name.

    If, after a few martinis, I suction cup a dildo to the floor, position my ass over it, grit my teeth as my girlfriend looks on with delight (Don’t worry honey, as you always say “it won’t hurt a bit!”),and slide myself down over it, it seems stupid to say “this dildo is penetrating me”. IT isn’t doing anything, I am. And what am I doing (besides clenching my teeth)? Er, well, umm….aha! – “Valprehending” the dildo. Whew! Nice one!

    Think of the Imperial Cruiser approaching Princess Leia’s ship. It opened its giant pod bay door and engulfed the smaller boat. I doubt Leia was thinking “Take that, we have penetrated you! How do you like them apples!?” Too bad it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, or she could have said “Fuck! Boys, we’ve just been valprehended by a guy in a big black dildo costume!”

  6. Fortuna Veritas says:

    I notice, upon reading both your entry and Becca’s entry on the matter, that both of you seem to reject or hold as impossible the idea that more than one person can be an active participant in sex.

    Why is this, and have your views on the subject evolved in the almost half-decade since you coined the term? Can both the penetrator and valprehender be active now or is it still a zero-sum game between them?

  7. Shahar says:

    The need for this term, is absolutely there, and the intent is very well placed, however as a word, to be used in the heat of the moment, it’s clumsy… and etymologically it’s also vague and hard to place for a native english speaker (as close to one as I am) perhaps taking the word “envelop” which doesnt indeed cover the term, and combining with “valprehending” to form “velping” ? I’m not the originator of the term so it’s not my place, but those are concerns I’ve had in conversations about the term.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *