And the answer is.. Just Don't!

I think it's time to sharpen all our brains a little bit, so I'm giving you a quiz. It's about Sex in America, focusing on the "teens" or the "children" depending on how much outrage you want to drum up. It's by The Concerned Parents of America a concerned lot that want to make sure kids get the right sort of sex ed, that is Abstinence Only.

Don't worry if you're not American, the quiz is dead easy.. all you have to do and I know I'm totally ruining the quiz here, is choose the worst possibility each time, with no regard for logic, or any facts you may think you know about sex, science or statistics.

Actually I lie, in question #6, "What percentage of new Chlamydial infections in 2000 occurred among 15-24 year olds?" the possible answers are, 25%, 54%, 74% and 100%. The answer is not 100%. I was wrong. The answer is 74, so not that bad really.

Other questions include:

1. What percentage of teen women using contraception will be pregnant within 2 years of use? The answer is 21% which sounds high, and leads me to believe they're not using the words "using", "contraception" and "2" the way I would. And teen of course, but what do I know?

2. How many young women between the ages of 14-19 years old in the U.S. are infected with at least one of the most common sexually transmitted diseases?? Yes, the double question marks are theirs, the answer is 1 in 4, and no mention of the young men of this age.

Then there's 2 questions about condoms being any good for preventing anything nasty, answer being "they don't", and one about hormonal contraception preventing STDs which of course don't but apparently teens in America don't know that so what the fuck.

A few more about diseases and how many young teens/children/adults have them. Answer is "a lot", and then..

9. What % of teens that practice abstinence from all sexual activity either contract an STD or become pregnant? And finally we get a positive answer, which in this case is 0. It sounds like a no brainer, but if you take into account that many of these "abstinent" kids don't exactly stay abstinent, and when they fall of the wagon they are more likely to go commando so to speak, and are thus more likely to end up diseased or with child, it's probably something that should be mentioned. Then there are the "not really sex" types of sex that abstinent kids often to which can also give you diseases n stuff. And of course, abstinent doesn't really mean no sex evah, it means no sex until marriage, so.. after marriage, I suppose pregnancies are always wanted then, all of them, all the time, (cos you're not sposed to use the rubber thingies or pills then either) and the other stuff.. well.. you're beloved shouldn't be diseased should they?

10. Oral contraceptives have been shown to be associated with ________________?
Breast Cancer
Cervical Cancer
Artery-Clogging Plaques
All of the Above

And the answer is... of course, all of it! Those pill things are just that bad. Now.. I don't know much about this stuff, but I call a big fail on this one. I can't see this as being anything other than a bare faced lie. I mean the other stuff is twisted statistics and irregular wording and leaving out whole chunks of relevant data but.. is this actually based on anything?

11. Teens that have sex at an early age increase their risk of delinquency. True of course. And it's that simple, really. There are no other factors involved.

14. Virginity during teen years is associated with decreased likelihood of divorce later in life. This is true. I don't know if this is based on anything either, but if it's true, it's got absolutely nothing to do with the fact that people who come from more traditional backgrounds are more likely to remain virgins until married, and are also less likely to divorce if they're wretchedly miserable/being beaten, raped and held controlled by an abusive spouse.

15. Girls who are living with their partner (cohabitating) are less likely than others to experience contraceptive failure. False of course. Nothing good can happen to those that live in sin. The girls anyway. Then they try to tell you that people who use contraception have more unintended pregnancies than those who don't. This of course means.. ??? Profit. Or something.

And that's it. I learned a lot. Most of it being that nothing makes sense and there's no point in anything, so why bother? At least that's what I think I'm supposed to take from it.

The very definition of "fitting"

Finally, they got the right type of person to teach abstinence only education in the US. A clown.

It's quite perfect. The parallels between this sort of "entertainer" ie, said clown and this sort of "education" the aforementioned abstinence only kind, it's uncanny.
At best they provide a tiny bit of unintended amusement, typically they're utterly useless and achieve nothing, and at worst they cause major trauma in later adulthood. See? Perfect!

Of course, this clown is kind of lame, even for a clown. He doesn't look like a clown (apart from some rather large pants) and he doesn't really joke, he just talks and juggles. Take a look.



*groans*

It's almost embarrassing watching it. The message is really really dumb stupid and I hope most of the kids have a similar reaction to mine upon hearing it. It's simplistic to the point of.... dumb stupid. He talks about hopes and dreams for the future, and then says that alcohol, tobacco, drugs and premarital sex will cause you to fail at fulfilling those dreams. He talks about risks, and demonstrates by juggling machetes sorta near a person lying on the ground, points out that it would have been irresponsible to juggle them over him and uses it as an example of a risk. Get it, that's a risk, just like those other things. A single puff, one drop, getting to know someone very well, thinking about it and knowing you want it and using the necessary contraception, then having sex are risks. Just like juggling machetes over a person. It's so simple! Now if you've already done one of those things (and presumably survived)I suppose you're fucked so you might as well go hog wild, but he doesn't really address that possibility. Maybe we'll get that installment next week.

Plastic shopping bags have all the fun..

Once upon a time, I had a little series going on the blog about sex metaphors, in particular the ones that treat sex as something to be extracted from the female body, like the famous cow one. and various others brought to us by modern day abstinence pushers that compare us to flowers, houses, pots and of all absurd things sticky tape.

It's been a while, but I'm inspired to bring it back from it's slumber by Paris Hilton, who has something to say on the subject. This time, we're designer handbags.

“I’ve only ever done it with a couple of people. People make up stories, but mostly I just kiss. I think it’s important to play hard to get. Nobody wants the fake Prada bag - they want the brand new bag that no one can get and is the most expensive. If you give it up to a guy he won’t respect you. He’ll want you much more if he can’t have you.”

It doesn't work so well as an analogy, as noted here, what she's describing sounds more like a used bag, rather than a fake one, but I get it, designer bags are worth a lot and harder to get, therefore more desired. A woman who's higher quality (less used) and harder to get is more desired. Apparently. Also if you get a genuine designer bag for free, or for cheap because you just got lucky you'll value it less. And you won't respect it because.. just because.

It's not so surprising that this is coming from Paris Hilton. I don't really follow her much but I do know she's known as a big old whore and gets a lot of shit for it. She just wants to assure everyone, however clumsily, that's she's not like that, really. And it's sad, because no one will question the content of what she said, but will just laugh and say oh yes she is a slutty McSlut who sluts a lot! And then perhaps compare her to another inanimate receptacle for carrying stuff, but one that's cheap and worn out. It's already being said, you can see if you follow the first link.

And so the same old bullshit keeps being flung around. Even celebrities who make their name being sexy have to take pains to make sure that people know they don't act on it. Even women with more money than any man they've ever met see sex as something to be bartered for. What fucking year is this again?

Oh well.. one good thing about it is that I'm pretty sure I'll have plenty of more material for this series.

More of the same..

More on Dennis Prager's Put Out 4 Your Husbandz Bitchez... part II came out "literally" the second I finished writing about the first one, so I reckon it's about time I added to the pile on. In short, it's more of the same. At least I think it is, it doesn't really make that much sense to tell you the truth.

In this part he's focused on why women's moods don't matter, and why they should let her husband get it on in them regardless.. he's no lightweight this guy.. no, he gives us 8 reasons so he must be right. Summarised, those reasons are, 1. women want sex less, 2. sex is a job for women, 3. that's some hippy shit, 4. that's some feminazi shit, 5. people are on the bitchez side so the man is more important, 6. that's some hippy shit, 7. men have to get everything their own way before they'll do anything for you, 8. just shut up and put out.

I'd more into detail but there's too much of it, and I get the feeling I've been through this before.. I'll just give you this. Reason #1.

But for most women, for myriad reasons -- female nature, childhood trauma, not feeling sexy, being preoccupied with some problem, fatigue after a day with the children and/or other work, just not being interested -- there is little comparable to a man’s “out of nowhere,” and seemingly constant, desire for sex.

All reasons given to support his assertion that women like sex less than men, he's got evidence, he's right so he can then go to the next happy step and argue that this means that how a woman feels about this sex thing should be rendered meaningless.. the logic, it's genius.

It doesn't occur to him to perhaps suggest helping out with the kids, talking about it and getting o the bottom of what the problem is, if there even is a problem, backing the fuck off and giving her whatever support she needs in the case of a long held childhood trauma for fucks sake..

then there's always the possibility that she's not so into sex because it's not that great for her.. but let's be honest, the issue here isn't a woman's desire for sex. The goal is not to get her to want sex but to do it anyway. I guess it shows how much she loves you if she puts out even if she doesn't like it. Excuse me I need to go barf now.

Yes sir, you are a dick.

I've fallen out of the habit of commenting on stuff that's out there of late, but I came across this article that "literally" screamed out for mockery. It's been done by everyone by now, but I'm nothing if not a bandwagon jumper.. so here I go.

Dennis Prager is a conservative American dickheads who writes for Town Hall, a site for stuff written for and about conservative American dickheads, and this is his article.. excerpts shall commence..

It is an axiom of contemporary marital life that if a wife is not in the mood,
she need not have sex with her husband.

In non pretentious wanker speak, that means something like, it's a widely accepted idea in modern times that a woman has autonomy over her own body even when she's married. In general people who in any way resemble reasonable think this is a good thing, a very damn good thing in fact and a downright necessary thing, but as I said, this is a conservative dickhead, writing for a conservative dickhead site so needless to say he disagrees with "this axiom".

First, women need to recognize how a man understands a wife's refusal to
have sex with him: A husband knows that his wife loves him first and foremost by
her willingness to give her body to him. This is rarely the case for women. Few
women know their husband loves them because he gives her his body (the idea
sounds almost funny). This is, therefore, usually a revelation to a woman. Many
women think men's natures are similar to theirs, and this is so different from a
woman's nature, that few women know this about men unless told about it.

I don't know how many types of bullshit this is, I count about 5. One is the obviously being bullshit type of bullshit. A man needs sex to feel like he's loved? How about being told, verbally.. how about a woman shows her husband she loves him by staying married to him.. or acting like she's rather fond of him, which can be done in not directly sexual ways.. yeah, I'm a dumb woman and can't read "man" but most men are slightly more complex than that. There are times of course, when someone doesn't give off those "I love you" cues as much, due to stress, being tired and other things, which are things that most likely mess with the sex drive too.. in these situations, the best idea, not a genius one, is to ask about it, talk about it, find out what the problem is etc etc.

Oh and women couldn't possibly understand things from a male point of view, being that we never get to hear about it. We could never get the idea (true or not) that men only care about sex, think about sex, have sex on their minds all the time. And women never feel like shit, unloved, unattractive and ignored if their partner doesn't want sex with them.. we don't think like that, we aren't told by society that our worth and our lovableness comes from our sexual desirability.. so thank you Dennis, for telling us silly ladies how it is. Not!

And I love how the theory is "A husband knows that his wife loves him first and foremost by her willingness to give her body to him" as opposed to she wants to have sex with him. The husband doesn't fucking care if she finds him sexually desirable or not, just that she's willing to make the sacrifice and do her duty! Really fucking romantic.

The basic gist of the whole article is further detailing just why women should give it up all the time, women and men are different, they just are, he says so. Men are animals so should be panedered to unless it causes them great pain or whatever, women are just different and can't possibly understand. He acknowledges that sometimes the woman wants sex more, but that's different so he won't address it here, but don't be getting any ideas ladies that all this applies to you if you're wanting more sex. Then the disclaimer that this only applies to good men, and you should compromise a little bit on this issue, but not much. And there's this line.

Every man who is sexually faithful to his wife already engages in daily
heroic self-control.

*stops laughing*

fuck me, I didn't think even your average conservative dickhead would go so far as to actually say that. Well give the man a medal would ya.. he hasn't fucked around on his wife.. and she's not even super hot and almost the same age as him.. we're not worthy we're not worthy!!

Ok, that's all for that. But wait, this is only part I, part II is coming and he will explain in detail why mood should play little or no role in a woman's determining whether she has sex with her husband. I thought he already did that? Anyway it's pretty easy, her husband wants it when he wants it, and sometimes the wife might not be in the mood. Next!

Does it still count if your name makes you sound like a porn star?

Abstinence Only Ed is in trouble! This is indeed a problem, as it's one of my favourite subjects to ridicule in the whole wide world! For those that don't know, in America, they have this form of sex education in schools, which is basically summed up as "Kids, don't do it", and it's in danger of not receiving more funding to continue. But never fear! It's supporters are fighting to save it,

“You have to look at why sex was created,” Eric Love, the director of the
East Texas Abstinence Program, which runs Virginity Rules, said one day, the
sounds of Christian contemporary music humming faintly in his Longview
office. “Sex was designed to bond two people together.”

Actually I thought it was for the propagation of the species, though over the years we've figured out how to fuck without having to have a baby every time.. which I tend to think is a sign of being civilized.. but carry on..

To make the point, Mr. Love grabbed a tape dispenser and snapped off two
fresh pieces. He slapped them to his filing cabinet and the floor; they trapped
dirt, lint, a small metal bolt. “Now when it comes time for them to get married,
the marriage pulls apart so easily,” he said, trying to unite the grimy strips.
“Why? Because they gave the stickiness away.”

Oh my god! It's Mr Tape! Is he any relation to Miss Tape? A brother? Maybe they're like, going steady but never had any more contact than a kiss on the cheek while having both feet on the floor! Oh, these 2 totally need to get it together if they haven't already. Get em both laid so they'll shut the fuck up and leave everyone else alone already!!!

But seriously. I can't believe this terrible metaphor has been used more than once. A tape that loses it's sticky? Don't get me wrong, pretty much all metaphors for sex used by just about everyone are pretty bad, but at least flowers are pretty and cars are cool, but sticky tape!!! Oh if you have sex you're like a sticky tape that's lost it's sticky, but if you stay off fucking then you're a piece of sticky tape that's still sticky. Oh that's much better. Bunch of fucking losers.

also here and here

Well I turned out all right..

One of my first photos
Originally uploaded by Ms Kat, cuddly mascot of the Wachoo Wachoo tribe..

Prudence is one of those people who gives Advice on manners and morals. You know, people write in with their problems.. like this one. I'm rather inclined to think it's a joke, but you never know with some of the freaks out there.

Dear Prudie,
My daughter is 5 years old and has, like most girls her age, a hamper's worth of stuffed animals. While she has her favorites, she constantly wants more and usually connives to get someone (read: her grandparents) into procuring a new one every couple of weeks. The new one immediately becomes her favorite and she must sleep with it every night and haul it around half the day. My question is: Does this behavior indicate she'll be overly promiscuous as an adult, or at least unable to commit to a single partner?

—Perhaps Overly Worried Father

Well, all I have to say is that I had lots of toys when I was little and I used to play with all of them at the same time. Make of that what you will, but those of you who know me, know that I'm quite a lady and don't get up to those sorts of shenanigans at all!

Her reply was.

Dear Perhaps,
Of course that's what it indicates. You'd better start thinking now about what you're going to do when she's a young woman and throws over that big, chubby guy with the annoying laugh, Barney, for the sexually ambiguous Tinky-Winky, whom she then dumps for that moron, Elmo, who every time they come over asks you to get down on the floor and tickle him.

—Prudie

Fitting.

Found via Feministe.

Second hand pots have more fun.

Time for another in my sex metaphors series. I have to thank Feministe for this one. It comes from a site, about the people in America who are teaching young people about sex by using the revolutionary new "kids, don't do it" method. Abstinence Only Education, In Their Own Words.

One example of wisdom from the site, which can be found in the WAIT Training, Workshop Manual, yes a real life textbook used in real life school.

“Men sexually are like microwaves and women sexually are like crockpots...a
woman is stimulated more by touch and romantic words. She is far more attracted
by a man's personality while a man is stimulated by sight. A man is usually less
discriminating about those to whom he is physically attracted.”

A crockpot. Nice. It fits in with the idea of woman as vessel, a passive object who exists to be filled, who then lovingly nurtures it's contents until the desired outcome is achieved. And if you're the kind of girl who finds herself attracted to someone and ready to "do it" too quickly, you're just some kind of ordinary crappy old pot.

A man is a microwave. You stick things in it, push the button and you're done in a minute. Hmm, not sure if that's what they were trying to say.. but if you're going to compare the two things..

That's 'Ms' Tape to you

Goodness! I've been a cow, I've been a house and a pretty pretty flower. And now I'm a piece of tape. At least according to Jennifer Waters, the Sex Lady.

The Sex Lady teaches abstinence to American schools and church groups. Now, if you're wondering what you can teach about abstinence that goes any further than saying, "kids, don't do it", well the answer is nothing at all. But you can have fun saying it. Ms Waters likes to demonstrate her message with her friend Miss Tape.

She slaps a piece of clear tape across Julian’s arm. He winces.
“It’s gonna hurt when I take it off,” the lanky boy protests.
“But it’s fine now, isn’t it?” Ms. Waters whips back.
The puzzled looks on 18 eighth-graders at Carrollton’s Arbor Creek Middle School
brighten. The Sex Lady has made her point: Bad relationships hurt.

Not letting the boys off the hook here at all. Good on you Sex Lady.

The Sex Lady tells Julian to break up with Miss Tape.
"I don't wanna,"
Julian screeches before obeying. He cradles his arm as he sits down.

Poor Julian has just been dumped by that hussy Miss Tape. And it hurts.

Ms. Waters shows Miss Tape to the class before calling up another boy, Spencer.
"We got some skin, Julian's hair," she says. "Spencer, did you get a good
look at Miss Tape?
"You bond with Miss Tape," she says, slapping the strip
onto Spencer's arm. "Everything Julian had has now been passed on to you."

That slut Miss Tape (her first name is probably Debbie) has just given Spencer the clap, which she got from Julian. Thanks a lot Julian!

Ms. Waters does this again with a third boy, Jonathan. This time, when they break up, the tape comes off pretty easy.
"What happened to the bond?" Ms. Waters asked the class.
"It didn't hurt as much," a girl replies.

Debbie tape has lost all her sticky by now, so she doesn't have the power to hurt the boys anymore, (unless she's slept with Julian and given everyone the clap) and is pretty useless as far as tape goes so she's fit only for Mr Rubbish Bin.

Moral of the story being. Girls are evil and want to cause you pain, so boys, only fuck the sluts, because breaking up with them doesn't hurt so much, and you get the fun of tossing them in the trash like they deserve. When you like a "nice" girl don't fuck her until you marry her. And if you give her the clap because you slept with Miss Tape who slept with Julian.. well, that's just tough.

Girls, you're an evil piece of tape. You have the power to hurt a man by ripping all his hair out by the roots, until you've had sex a couple of times that is. By then you've lost all your sticky, and therefore pretty useless as far as pieces of tape go, so you're worthy only for the bin.

How to fix a broken window

Time for post #3 in my ground breaking new series about Sex Metaphors. Today I'll be revisiting the one which actually inspired this whole thing. It's from this book which bemoans the fact that young women today are ruining their lives by screwing around instead of demanding a solid commitment from everyone they fuck. The quote, which is written in the form of a letter to mothers and daughters, goes like this:

Your body is your property. . . . Think about the first home you hope to
own. You wouldn't want someone to throw a rock through the front window, would
you?

No. I wouldn't want my body violently assaulted by someone, whether a stranger or otherwise. Thanks for allowing me the ownership of my own body by the way.. no thanks for deciding for me what equals a violation of my own property.

Yes, we know, there are women who slut around because they have a crave affection or attention, because their father didn't love them enough etc etc.. who are left feeling empty and used after such encounters, yes we know there are men who are shitheads, yes we know that women get pressured into things they don't want to do.... but that's now how it is for everyone.

Oh yes it is! Or so says our wise and all knowing author. You might think you're perfectly ok with the arrangement you have with your man friend, and in fact quite happy to be having sex without worrying about long term commitments, or you might be looking back on the days before you were in your current blissful relationship without any regret... but no! You're fooling yourself. You are distressed. You feel wretched. Stop telling me you're ok, I'm afraid your thoughts don't enter into it.. this is for the big people to decide.

If you sit here and let me tell you how terrible you really feel, and it's really quite unbecoming to let yourself be used as a human bouncing castle.. and eventually your distress will come out and you will feel shame. Then you will be cured.

Bare stems have all the fun..

#2 in my Sexual Metaphors series comes to us from the Abstinence Outlet people who's best selling produce is this Abstinence Rose Pin. Their message is.

You are like a beautiful rose. Each time you engage in premarital sex, a
precious petal is stripped away.

Don't leave your future husband holding a bare stem. Abstain.

So now you're a flower girls. I don't know if that's better or worse than a cow but anyway... Your petals are your sex. Each time you have sex you lose a petal. Once you lose all of your petals you become a bare stem. And the man who you're going to marry one day deserves better than that, because, well.. because.

Well, each time you have sex before you're married you lose a petal, somehow magically one you have continuously rejuvenating petals, which a husband is allowed to pluck to his heart's content, I'm presuming. As it says "each time you engage in premarital sex you lose a petal" then I suppose it doesn't matter whether you're a full on slut, or whether you just have one boyfriend you have sex with. And just how many times do you have to "engage" before you have no petals left? That rose in the picture looks like it's got about 8 petals, does that mean if you have sex with one man 8 times after being with him for years (but not married to him) you have no petals left? And what exactly happens when you're an empty stem? Are you unable to have sex? Is the sex less enjoyable for the husband/god who has the right to have a beautiful rose as a gift without being obligated to give you anything special? Or is it just that if you've had sex before marriage you're a dirty whore (the more sex/more fellows the dirtier and whorier you are) and that's icky, no man wants to be where another man's been? Anyone going to clear this up for me?

Sunday Sermon

It's the time of week for preaching, so I thought I'd take this opportunity to share some of the wisdom I've acquired over the years with some of the younger, more impressionable of you.

Kids, don't do drugs. Drugs are bad mmkay. And don't drink. Don't have sex either, not until you're married anyway, and certainly don't get into that hookups jazz. Trust me, I've been there, I've done it all, and it was.. well to be honest it was a lot of fun. A lot of fun, those years of moving around one exciting city to another, meeting new people, the parties, the wild experiences, oh, the great stories I have... but that's not the point. The point is that now I don't do those things. Not as much anyway. And my life today is, well it's ok. I'm pretty happy and certainly haven't had any terrible tragedies brought on by boozing or fucking or anything, but that's not the point.

The point is that it's bad. Nobody warned me about these things, which never existed before my time of course. Well, actually they did but I wasn't listening but that's not the point. The point is that I'm telling you now that these things are bad, so you don't have an excuse, you know these things are bad. So don't do them!

Free milk, come and get it! Hurry up before it dries up.

I mentioned not long ago that I might start a blog series on sex metaphors, or rather "sex as something extracted from the female body" metaphors. As I have nothing else to write about, I might as well start now.

I will begin with a classic. You may have heard this one before, it's in the form of a question, and it goes,

"Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?"

To begin with I'll break the sentence down for you.

• The question "why" is addressed to you, the man, the subject, the individual for whom everything is for.


• Buy refers to getting married.


• The cow is the woman, the one that is to be owned. I'll be playing this part(I know I wanted to be a dog yesterday, but alas I cannot deny my true nature).


• Milk refers to sex, which is something that is extracted from the cow/woman.

I am now going to answer the question, and give some reasons, on just why you would buy me (the cow) when milk is so easy to get these days:

1. The status that you get by being a cow owner, you're considered more grown up, you're more respected, and you have, (and are given the opportunity to acquire more) dependants who respect and look up to you.
2. You may receive other benefits from me rather than just easy access to milk. I might be useful in keeping the lawn trimmed, or maybe you can use my manure as a fertilizer, etc.
3. It might be worth your while to just buy me instead of going out and buying milk every day.
4. You may find me a good companion, someone you can share your hopes and desires with, who understands you like nobody else can. I am someone special to you, who you want to spend your life with.

So there you go. Reasons even for the most selfish of you. Now, it's true that my opinion doesn't count here, but as this question is usually a rhetorical one used to scold us cows for squirting our milk all over the place willy nilly, I thought I'd address some of my own issues with the question.

1. I might enjoy the act of giving milk for it's own sake and find it pleasurable.
2. I might enjoy the act of giving milk with you specifically because I like you and am attracted to you.
3. I might find you a good companion, someone to share my hopes and desires with etc, but not feel the need to be officially bought for us to share our lives together.
4. I might find you a good companion, someone to share my hopes and desires with etc, but have a particular aversion to being bought either for personal reasons or because I don't believe in the institution of ownership.
5. I may have no interest in either giving you milk or being owned by you, get over it.
6. I might not want to give milk or be owned by any man, as I prefer to share my milk with other cows.

I think that's enough, though I'm sure you could find more reasons for both a man getting married when he can get it that easily, and women giving away their sex without demanding a ring first.

I wanna be a dog

More on the whole hookup culture thing that I recently wrote about. This guy gives us his opinion of it all, which is that men are horrible, women shouldn't try to be like them and ner ner you can't anyway.

It's pathetic that this is what is now deemed "progress" among the
feminists -- attempting to ape the most selfish, brutish behavior by men and
calling themselves enlightened and empowered for doing so.

As is typical, he just doesn't get it. He cannot conceive of the idea that people might have casual sex with someone they don't despise, but let's just pretend that it is true that a) all men are dogs who just want to use women for sex and throw them away, and b) there's no chance of this ever changing.

What the fuck is in it for women to be good then? Fuck that! If men are going to be like that, then you can be damn sure I'm going to be too. Why would I want to stay pure so I can be one of the good, virginal women who'll win one of these prizes as a husband one day? Or why would I want to be the kind of woman who has sex but cares deeply about every man she fucks so I can be truly miserable when I get treated like this?

No, I'll be as callous as they are if they're going to be like that. Fortunately I have a higher opinion of the human male than this person does. There are a couple of decent ones out there... Or so I've heard..

via Pandagon

My house ain't even got any windows...

I read proper newspapers sometimes, or at least read parts of articles linked by the blogs I read, and a recent one is basically about how young people today are behaving disgracefully, or at least how the young female people today are being disgraceful and "hooking up", having sex and not particularly fussed about that "love" thing. Anyway my basic take on it is that most likely there are still some young people who have and want relationships, some that are having sex for fun because they don't want to get involved right now, some that don't want to get involved until they meet someone who they really want to be involved with, and certainly some people who are living whichever way they are for fucked up reasons which has certainly never happened before this current destructive generation, but for now I'm going to take it easy and guess that civilization will continue to exist for a few more years.

The author, Laura Session Stepp has written a book titled, UNHOOKED, How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love, and Lose at Both which of course I haven't read, but I've read the review, and this is my favourite part:

In the final chapter, Stepp writes a letter to mothers and daughters, in
which she warns the girls: "Your body is your property.... Think about the
first home you hope to own. You wouldn't want someone to throw a rock through the front window, would you?"

I think I'm going to start a blog series on sex metaphors, that is "sex as something extracted from the female body" metaphors, because there are so many of them and they're so bloody bad. I'll give Ms Stepp some credit here, at least she considers women to be the owners of the property that is their body unlike some others, but that's all I'm giving her credit for. She seems very confused about the idea of casual sex between two willing participants. I think there are just some people who just can't seem to grasp the concept that sometimes women just want to fuck. It's an alien concept, and they think that if a woman has sex with someone before some magic time which signifies it's ok, (ranging from being married to having 2 dinners paid for you depending on who's talking) she's being used and abused. You couldn't possibly let her decide for herself that it's what she wants. No she must be lying, or confused, and every time she fucks without getting the ring or equivalent it's as bad as having the windows in your house broken, but with your body instead.

I have another house metaphor.

Your body is like your house right? You live alone in your house. One day you invite a friend over, you watch tv, have some beers, talk, listen to music a bit and have a really nice time. Your friend stays the night on the couch because they don't want to drive after drinking beer. The next day they go home, after helping you clean up a bit. Now how would you feel after that? Just how would you feel after having shared your "house" in that way?

Sounds awful. And then your mother comes over and rants at you for not being clean enough, and for letting people into your house to use it and disrespect it and almost forbids you from ever having anyone over again, it's for your own good. You tell her to fuck off because it's your house and you can do whatever you want there, and this is exactly the reason you moved out of home. She gets pissed off and leaves. You call about a week later and say sorry and you make up. But you get the idea.

What's good for the goose, is good for the... er... other goose.

They've done it! The people who brought us Father Daughter Purity Balls, have now come up with a male equivalent for young men and their mothers. Only this version is called and Integrity Ball, which does sound more manly.

And not a moment too soon. It's about time they expected chastity from boys as well. Surely if a girl keeps herself pure, swearing off sex until such time as she can get some guy to marry her, she deserves a shiny clean cock, unsullied by the extract of other woman, right? It's only fair.

Baker [ ] told them that while they might not believe it at the time, the
girl they may date in high school is probably not going to be the one they will
marry. “So you’re dating someone else’s future wife,” he told them. He also told
them that someone else may be dating their future wife.?”

Oh, silly me. Mustn't disappoint "someone" should we?

“If you knew somebody was with your future wife,” Baker asked them, “touching her in ways you wouldn’t like, pressuring her, how would that make you feel?”

Please think of the men! Some man might end up being married to that. But just in case the point hasn't been made clear enough, I'll let Jackie Detweiller, "an attractive 19-year-old young woman who is practicing abstinence" explain it more..

She told the tale of a person who had waited a long time to buy the car of
their dreams, but when the day arrived to drive it home, the dealer told them
that the steering had problems, that it had a lot of mileage on it, and had been
in a few wrecks.

Dear, the car analogy is a little bit old isn't it? Personally, as far as tired old metaphors go, I prefer the cow one...

How would you feel if you bought a cow, took it home from the shop and
found out it had been milked? You paid your own money for this cow,
and it had just given away milk like it was it's own to give!

Now, imagine that you met a cow who took it upon themselves to give you
their milk, and you went ahead and took it! Essentially you would be stealing
milk from another man. How would that make you feel, you milk stealer
you!

Moral of the story is, if you fuck a chick, make sure she's already a slut. Someone else already committed the property crime, and thus you are absolved.

Curtesy of others.

At this point, I'll take whatever I can get.

Bad sex, better than nothing, don't you think.... well.

...a commotion of grunts and squeaks, flashing unconnected images and explosions of a million little particles.

I don't even know what that's supposed to mean, but it doesn't sound like anything I want to experience (or be in the presence of someone experiencing).

The above passage is by Iain Hollingshead, in his novel Twenty Something, the winner of the much coveted Literary Review's Bad Sex in Fiction award. And he's a newcomer, he must be proud, but his .."description of "bulging trousers" sealed the win, the judges said.."

"Because Hollingshead is a first-time writer, we wished to discourage him from further attempts," the judges said in a statement. "Heavyweights like Thomas Pynchon and Will Self are beyond help at this point."

Yeah, but you he got to meet Courtney Love, who presented the award, for that I'd be happy to be considered the worst sex writer of the year, I'm gonna have to polish up my skills in time for next year, anyway

"I hope to win it every year," said Hollingshead, who receives a statuette and a bottle of champagne.

I'll be keeping and eye on him.

What has become of civilization?

I don't know whether it's just here, or the weather or it's a new trend. It's disturbing! I keep hearing people having sex!

Ok, I did for the 2nd time in 2 days, but still! In the daytime too. What is going on! I mean don't these people know that your'e supposed to do it at night, with the doors closed, the lights turned out and under the covers? Which of course should muffle any noises that you may be so vulgar as to make.

You wouldn't catch me carrying on like that.

Just the right size, any bigger and it would hurt way too much

I am so glad, for the second time this week, to have my own flat to go to. I was sitting here, luxuriously enjoying the place to myself, W was out all night evidently. He just came stumbling in, quite drunk, immediately put on music and started telling me how much he loves me and always will. Blrgggh!

And after the wonderful night I had last night! Rowr! I feel giddy. I'm all drained of energy and I can't think straight. Heavens! Did I mention rowr!

Unfortunately there are no photos. It's difficult to find someone who has the technical excellent as well as the artistic talent to capture that kind of action, but there is always the future.

Now I have to wait until next weekend until we meet again! However will I bear it! Drudging through another week of work, whining and everything that begins with W.

It will be tough, but I'll survive it, I'm strong.

If you want to get laid, read on.

This is a comment I made in response to a post about feminist stereotypes at Pandagon yesterday. It was completely ignored by the fine folk over there, but I though the rabble who hang out here might get a kick out of it.

To answer the question of if a man can be a feminist.

Yes, but in order to join the club he has to go through a de-nutting ceremony, which is exactly what it sounds like. This will take place on a stone slab surrounded by candles, and performed by the high priestess, who will of course be wearing a dark hooded robe, and will be surrounded by her sisters who will hand her the severing instruments while a mass is chanted, in a sort of latin/celtic/ancient greek language that nobody really understands.

He will then spend the next 6 months as a trainee, during which time he will be allowed in the compound only while wearing a pink robe and fluffy slippers and will be required to walk around dusting everything (the duster is also pink), and serving his lady masters while they sit around in dark suits, discussing the matters of the day and playing poker and smoking cigars.

After 6 months he becomes a full member, which means he occasionally gets to sit in on the discussions, but still do the cleaning and bring drinks to the women, though he doesn´t have to wear pink, unless he wants to.