Sexytime Dilemmas: Rape, Feminazis, and Grammar

Do you have sexy questions but you don’t have access to Google, a therapist, or a close friend who isn’t a complete shithead? Send them in to Jezebel’s new sexpert, Karley Sciortino – AKA “Slutever”! The edgy name should give you a hint about the edgy content in store for you. If you’re lucky, she might not suggest you sexually assault someone!

In the first edition of “Slutever,” someone writes in concerned that facials (the kind with semen, not the kind at the spa, unless you go to one of those spas) are too degrading for women to participate in. Obviously this is a complex issue involving degradation, objectification, power dynamics, and OH JUST KIDDING you guys, don’t think about the implications of sex acts! Thinking ruins all the fun! If an act seems degrading but you like it, it’s best to just push all your negative feelings deep down inside yourself and pack it into a hard ball of self-loathing that sits inside your stomach forever:

I understand there are complex emotions involved in sex, so everything isn’t always black and white, but I also think that sometimes girls’ brains become so clouded by bullshit “feminist” ideals — “thou shall not be treated like an object,” “thou shall always be offended by men’s pervy remarks” (as if we are not equally adept at dismissing them, and dishing them out) — that we spoil our own fun.

Oh man, remember how much fun sex was before those “feminists” came along and ruined it with all their talk of a woman’s right to be seen as a real human being instead of a convenient hole? Oh, and that dumb “feminist” idea that it’s not cool for strange men to shout sexual come-ons at us on the street? It’s totally cool, ladies! We have the ultimate power of dismissal. Psh. “Feminism.”

What a bunch of bullshit that was, amiright? It’s those kind of edgy insights that probably sealed the deal for Sciortino’s writing gig on a feminist website.

It’s bad to analyze these things so much that they lose their spontaneity and hotness (and the rules of “real life” don’t apply in sex anyway, so whatever).

God, that is so true. I remember that a friend of mine was once in bed with a girl and he thought, “I want to shove something up her butt right now, but is it the right thing to do?” Then he remembered, “Oh hey, ‘consent’ is just a bullshit feminist idea that doesn’t apply in sex, anyway, so whatever. All this thinking is a total hornkill!” So he went for it! Hott. I wonder if Sciortino would approve? We may never know, but luckily, we do know how a woman should go about getting inside a man’s asshole, thanks to the second question sent to “Slutever.” Here’s the secret:

Step 1: Give him “temporary retardation” with a blowjob (HAPPY WORLD MENTAL HEALTH DAY, EVERYONE!).

In my experience, guys are generally more open to new concepts, and trying out new things, when you have their dick in your mouth. (This is because fellatio slows their brain down to a point of temporary retardation, which means their guard is down.)

Step 2: Don’t ask him if he wants a finger in his ass.

Step 3: Just go for it. If it seems like he’s not into it, don’t stop trying.

If he flinches as soon as you start poking around in that area, that’s not a good sign, but don’t give up hope just yet….even if your first attempt is a total failure, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s never going to happen…. Basically, never give up.

Not talking to your sex partner about what objects they would like in what orifices is definitely the smart way to go. As we’ve already covered, thinking about things ruins the “spontaneity,” and if you’re actually conversing about things with your significant other, well, you may as well just join a nunnery right the fuck now.

All of which brings us to the final question: “Michael” is a virgin and is wondering how to bring himself to orgasm and BLA BLA BLA BORING, just Google it, Michael! Sciortino doesn’t have the time to deal with your virgin problems. Look up guys masturbating and then do what they do, duh!

Best sex advice column ever!

In all seriousness, this column is obviously the worst, so I’ll end with my favorite typo in what is an astoundingly terrible and badly edited piece:

…intra-anal lacerations are not not glamorous.

I’ve heard some terrible Cosmo sex advice before but this takes the cake.

Thanks to Kate Beaton for Tweeting this and to John R. for pointing out the hilarious typo. Featured image: straw feminists by Kate Beaton, herself.

Rebecca Watson

Rebecca is a writer, speaker, YouTube personality, and unrepentant science nerd. In addition to founding and continuing to run Skepchick, she hosts Quiz-o-Tron, a monthly science-themed quiz show and podcast that pits comedians against nerds. There is an asteroid named in her honor. Twitter @rebeccawatson Mastodon mstdn.social/@rebeccawatson Instagram @actuallyrebeccawatson TikTok @actuallyrebeccawatson YouTube @rebeccawatson BlueSky @rebeccawatson.bsky.social

Related Articles


  1. …I know Jezebel has a, um, mixed reputation as a feminist website, but you’d think they could find a “sexpert” who wouldn’t advise people to sexually assault their partners.

    1. This is the societal conditioning:
      1) Feminists are anti-sex man haters
      2) That anyone who advocates for women is a feminist

      And it’s the totally WRONG view of sex that men are given (and women internalize). Because you can have lots of good, hot, kinky sex if you COMMUNICATE and CONSENT. And generally that’s when the sex is better, when the partners communicate and agree on what they both want. It’s when only one takes the liberty to get what they want (usually the guy) when sex begins to suck or segue into sexual assault.

      Giving the idea that you have to be rapey to have any kind of good sex is the WRONG thing to do.

  2. Finally, I can stop getting hung up on this bullshit “feminism” (if the word “bullshit” doesn’t tell you what I think about it, hopefully the scare quotes will finish the job) and just get my rocks off.

  3. Does Jezebel still consider themselves a feminist website? I thought they gave that title up back when they posted the consent is for losers article.

    At least they’re being consistent in their views on consent. Ugh.

    1. Jezebel,Inc. has been really clear that they’re not a feminist website. They hire some (great) feminist writers, and a lot of the commenters are feminists, but the site is aimed at middle class white liberal women. Not progressive, not feminist.

  4. Finally, someone who understands how feminism has ruined my sex life. Like letting me know it’s okay to say “No.” Or letting me know that I’m allowed to enjoy sex. Or letting me know that I can talk about sex – with my partner, even. Or letting me know that just because I’ve consented to sex once doesn’t mean that I’ve given up all rights to deny consent.

    Feminism sucks.

  5. I was going to comment on Jezebel’s site, but their comment system makes the baby Jesus cry. So below is what I was going to write. Without further ado, my desired response to Ms Sciortino:

    Here’s the thing about #2. Before I get trolled on how people shouldn’t have to talk out every single possible thing they want to try, let me explain where the real problem lies.

    “So, while you’re sucking, start playing with his balls and then slowly move moving your fingers back in the desired direction.”

    – Some people think this is where the problem is. It’s not! This is just a non-verbal question Potential Pooper Poker Susie is going to ask. Inching back is just a non-verbal “Can I finger your fart factory?”

    “If he flinches…”

    – *hit’s pause* Let’s talk about what this is. If you are using the non-verbal communication and he flinches, that’s his non-verbal answer: “I’d prefer you didn’t prod my prostate please.”

    “…don’t give up hope just yet.”

    – Said every fratboy trying to “drop” it in her butt. Persistence isn’t always a bad thing, but insistence when there is clear discomfort is a clear violation of autonomy. So before you keep trying to put some digits in his dirt-hole, remember that it’s not your body. I’ll repeat that… It’s. Not. Your. Body.

    I’d like to say I’m mad, but really I”m just disappointed. You’ve missed a golden opportunity to talk about how sexism hurts both sexes and how cultural expectations of sex with men can limit men’s enjoyment of sex. You could talk about how women wouldn’t necessarily want men to just “accidentally” start in the wrong hole. You could have provided great insight on how to have awesome consensual (Yes means yes!) sex.

    But instead of talking about the greater issues this questioner brought up, you decided that Potential Prostate Poker’s desire to rub the rump room trumps her boyfriend’s discomfort and any discussion of greater issues.

    Guess this is just one more blog going down the crapper.

    1. I was with you up until the end of your comment here. I agree completely that non-verbal communication is an important part of sexual communication. I generally think anal play is something to discuss verbally, but I think that can be an interesting discussion to have and you have some good thoughts on it.

      However, writing off all of Skepchick as a blog because you disagree with one post? That’s just stupid.

  6. Dismissal and aggression are completely equal. If I swing a bat at you and you’re able to dodge it, no harm done right?

    1. I misread that as “dislodge it.” I am filthy-minded. But Rebecca is right. If you get off on facials it’s definitely a good idea to avoid dumping without permission. Wouldn’t want to risk spoiling the joyful spontaneity of sex with someone who knows you respect her opinion.

  7. I don’t really agree with your interpretation of the first answer. It seems pretty clear that the question being asked was something like, “Is it okay to enjoy something that’s degrading?” And the response was to not worry about needing congruity between your social beliefs and what gets you off, which is perfectly reasonable advise. Nowhere does the question imply that she actually feels bad about doing it(rather it’s asking SHOULD she feel bad for liking it), or that she’s coerced into doing it. Nowhere in the answer does she imply that people should do things that they aren’t comfortable with, so your interpretation as of the answer as: “If an act seems degrading but you like it, it’s best to just push all your negative feelings deep down inside yourself and pack it into a hard ball of self-loathing that sits inside your stomach forever.” Seems pretty damn uncharitable.

  8. Ohhh man, the myth of spontaneity = best sex evar. If there was one meme I could kill it would be the idea of completely spontaneous awesome sex, which is basically the idea that your partner should be telepathic. If you can’t communicate about what you like and what you don’t like, be it verbal or non-verbal, it will not be good. It will be one person having a great time and someone(s) else putting up with it (or a couple people being super confused).

  9. I read most of that in a hipster pseudo ironic voice. Clearly the author is just too edgy for most to understand.*

    I was amused that her final sex advice answer was basically ‘go ask someone else if you want a real answer.’

    *If my eyes rolled any more every time I used the word ‘edgy’ they would pop out and take off.

  10. “It’s bad to analyze these things so much that they lose their spontaneity and hotness (and the rules of “real life” don’t apply in sex anyway, so whatever).”

    That was the most fucked up thing I’ve ever read. Spontaneity is for losers and in this case, horrible awful people. The only method that has ever produced really good sex for me AND my partner(s) is effective communication and planning ahead of time before we try something new. These are the fuckin keys to a good sex life.

  11. So. Awful.

    Can I please recommend Dan Savage for decent sex advice? His column almost never makes me want to scream, and this one did IMMEDIATELY.

    1. Things Dan Savage has said:

      Statutory rape is A-Okay, as long as you follow his ‘campground’ policy.

      He has a lot of sympathy for straight men because they have to put up with women.

      Gaining weight is hostile and abusive to your spouse/partner.

      He didn’t imply these things, he’s said them outright. So, take his advice with a dumptruck of salt.

      1. Citation Needed on him saying statutory rape is OK. I listen to his podcast a lot and he’s always been careful to qualify that the campsite rule only applies to people legally able to consent.

        1. You’re right about the ‘campground’ rule. I apologize.

          The particular column I was referring to, he advises a writer asking about having sex with the teens he works with.

          Savage’s response was along the lines of ‘don’t get caught, but it’s ridiculous that the law denies them the wisdom of your cock.’

          Of course I can’t find it now, so I’ll take it on the chin on that one.

          1. That sounds like a pretty Savage-y thing to say.

            Anyway, how often do you actually read/listen to his columns instead of critiques of him? I rarely hear anything very objectionable or irrational from him, and is usually pretty willing to admit when he’s wrong (for example, when Jen McCreight wrote a post criticizing something he said on an episode, he invited her on his next podcast to correct him.)

      2. I don’t think Davage is anti-woman, he’s really quite aware of and actively argues against stereotypes of women and mysoginy. Yes, he’s been criticised as such, but having listened to 310 of his podcasts in the past year he’s very sensitive to not offending people (and qualifies everything he says very distinctly).

        I’ve been quite surprised not to hear him come up more often in the atheist community surrounding debates on sexism and feminism. If Dan Savage’s approach was used to create sex-ed teaching materials mandatory in all schools, a lot of the problems surrounding sex and sexism (those stemming from ignorance or a rejection of being educated) could be relieved.

    2. The same transphobic, biphobic, fat-hating Dan Savage who also has made some really nasty rape apologies?

      1. Citations please. I listen/read to Savage regularly, and I think all of these are flat out wrong or grossly misleading. I know he has inappropriately used the “tranny” word (and then apologized), but I don’t think his views on the transgendered exhibit any phobias.

        He does write and say a lot, so I’m sure there are a few statements that are poorly worded, but I don’t see any basis for all of this excessive name-calling.

        1. Transphobia: http://masculinetoast.tumblr.com/post/1260470380/dan-savage-and-transphobia

          Fat hatred: http://red3.blogspot.ca/2007/12/dan-savage-picks-fights-with-fat-people.html

          And biphobia: http://www.afterelton.com/oysters-04-28-2011-dan-savage-biphobic

          Here’s some about him making rape apologies: http://notanaughtyword.blogspot.ca/2012/04/dan-savage-rape-and-gray-area.html

          And that’s not getting into his, ahem, issues with black people. Stop being an embarrassing fanboy.

          1. Thanks for the links. The transgendered issue presents real problems that Dan needs to correct, but it seems to me that his attitude has improved. I note that the last clip in the article is actually to a blog post where Dan is trying to come to the real aid (actual money, not warm internet hugs) of a transgendered teen. I think that represents his current attitude pretty well based on what I’ve read and heard.

            As for the remaining links, I think the analysis is either bad, cherry-picked, or completely off. They seem to represent people who are looking for something to criticize, rather than trying to understand and represent the intended and overall message Dan gives (and consistently says about these issues). I can’t imagine a regular reader of his columns and blogs legitimately believing Dan is in favor of fat shaming, bi-phobia, or minimizing rape. Instead, he consistently gives out the opposite messages on all three of those topics, even if in the thousands of blog posts, books, and articles he has written, he has chosen some of his words poorly.

          2. So you’re still going to say his intent is magic, and screw what those trans* people (by the way, it’s “transgender” not “transgendered”), bi people, fat people and rape survivors have to say. He’s been shitty to us for years, and no, a few tiny steps here and there to scale back the outright disgust towards us isn’t exactly much.

            I used to be a huge fan of his, followed him for years, but eventually, the fact that he thought I was revolting made me wonder why I was supporting that asshole.

          3. Sorry about the term mistake. I’ll be more careful, and no offense was meant.

            As for the rest, I have no idea where you are getting the notion that I am saying to screw what bi, overweight, and rape survivors have to say. I think that’s a pretty large strawman. I am saying that his message, as I understand it after listening and reading for the the past 2 or 3 years, is that he has a very positive message to bi, overweight, and rape victims.
            Anyone getting a different message, in my opinion, is not hearing what he is trying to say (as I understand it).

            In any event, his positive impact on LGBT rights, on sex education and a sex-positive culture, on helping address suicide rates in young children, his real life aid to gay and transgender teens, and his (I think) extremely insightful advice (most of the time) certainly warrants that he not get flatly dismissed as an out-and-out bigot. If we are going to throw him and those like him out of the “movement” because he is too conservative on a couple of issues, let’s just resign ourselves to a movement the size of a decent tupperwear party.

          4. Based on the links, I guess a case can be made for transphobic, but I don’t see the biphobic, fat hating or rape apology claims as justified.

            He correctly points out that the vast majority of bi people wind up in opposite sex relationships. Obviously there are exceptions, but he cautions people who are in same sex relationships with bi people that they’re unlikely to be the one their partner winds up with. In Bayesian terms, the prior probability that it’ll be a successful relationship is low.

            He often points out that being sexually compatible is extremely important in a relationship. If a partner is gaining weight (obviously, this doesn’t include due to medical problems) then he sees it as not holding up your end of the bargain to keep sexual chemistry alive in the relationship.

            The post you linked doesn’t even really accuse him of rape apology, it’s rather asking whether we should have a gray area here at all, or whether that’s just due to rape culture. I don’t think that’s the case, though. Human relations are messy and frequently poorly defined, there’s no reason to expect sex to be different.

    3. I concur. I would very much like to see Mr. Savage take this so-called “advice” apart.

      Also, for those of you maligning Dan Savage’s character, do any of you actually read his columns, or do you just read people’s opinions of him? Because none of those links are to Dan’s column on The Stranger, his blog on that site or his podcast. I have been following all three for years now, and have found no opinions or behavior of the sort you describe. If you’re going to convince me to change my opinion that he is an overall upstanding, considerate (though opinionated) advice columnist, you’re going to have to show me the raw data. No second-hand reports from people with a vested interest in slander or hair-trigger ideological outrage buttons, thank you very much.

      1. Read him for years, was a huge fan, eventually was too sickened by his rape apology and unambiguous stance that I was disgusting to keep up.

        Quoting him, and linking to his stuff isn’t slander, and being part of the groups he is actually slandering is not being just a meanie who’s seeking outrage. Check your fucking self.

        1. You mention his rape apology again, and I really don’t understand this point. The article you linked as evidence of his rape apology summarized Dan’s thoughts on a question as follows:

          “Dan’s opinion is that people have experiences, negative experiences, that leave them feeling violated but that aren’t necessarily rape. … So he’s saying that there are situations that lead to feelings of violation, feelings of being taken advantage of, that don’t necessarily mean the other person involved is a criminal because of what happened.

          He also said that he doesn’t understand what good it does (in some cases, not all) for people to label a situation like this as rape. For example, he told the guy who called that he could label it rape, he was well within the general definition to do so, but he didn’t understand what good that would do.”

          I really have no earthly idea why is opinion is wrong, much less offensive or qualifying as a “rape apology.” I think that is a very strong term to throw around, and I think it should take a lot more evidence to smear someone with that brand. To me, this is evidence of the opposite — he is acknowledging that even if you are not raped, you are entitled to feelings of violation.

          1. Well said on your defenses of Dan. I have also been listening to him for a few years now and he’s clear-headed. My niece(who’s kind of my daughter) told me that she listens to him too now, and I feel she’s in good hands as she starts college. He has certainly said some offensive things, and made a few mistakes, but that makes me wonder – how many of us haven’t? If someone had as easy access to all our comments just on this site, with attached commentary, which of us wouldn’t have issues of fact, or bias, or insensitivity, or ignorance?

            What makes Dan positive on the whole, is that he listens to the criticism, addresses it, and makes changes (most of the time). Sure, keep correcting him – keep correcting everyone (skeptics wooh!) – but don’t ostracize or dismiss people who are doing good work but aren’t perfect (all of us (well, those of us who do good work)).

  12. She’s encouraging equal opportunity sexual assault. I that’s the definition of equality, right?

  13. Weird. Well, sure it’s okay to enjoy things that are degrading – that’s what a lot of kink is about. Just make sure when play time is over, it’s over and you get back to your regularly scheduled life.

    The tough part (that isn’t actually very tough) is to make sure you’re doing it with perfectly nice people. You know, ones that don’t think the whole “get consent” thing is a chore…

    1. I don’t think it was intentional, but your last paragraph is victim blaming. Or do you actually believe it is the victim’s fault if they didn’t “make sure” they before they were assaulted? I sure hope not…

      How about people make sure they receive consent?

      1. Yeah, ‘You got raped because you were stupid enough to play with the wrong people’ isn’t helpful.

      2. Um, are we reading the same thing? We are talking about kinky sex, NOT rape, right? These are two different things. Was there a paragraph in the story that I missed completely? Hope not, but if so:

        If somebody you want to have sex (or are having sex with) with isn’t interested in getting consent, don’t have sex with them. I’m not talking about rape, wasn’t thinking about rape, and not advocating any kind of rape! You _can’t_ consent to be raped – I thought this was a self-evident thing.

        However, there are some people who confuse kink with rape, in the belief that any kind of aggression during sex is wrong or shameful. This is a mistake. The folks who people who play with kink are generally playing with people they know and trust, but consent is still not to be ignored or just skipped over – which is what I though I said.

        Again, I’m talking about people who already have a sexual relationship. (And yes, I know that who most assaults come from.) I’m not sure how you’re getting the idea that I think rape is the victim’s fault: how should I have phrased it to make it clearer?

        1. “The tough part (that isn’t actually very tough) is to make sure you’re doing it with perfectly nice people. You know, ones that don’t think the whole “get consent” thing is a chore…”

          That’s what we’re referring to. I don’t think it was intentional, but that’s what we’re responding to.

        2. “if someone you want to have sex with (or are having sex with) isn’t interested in consent, don’t have sex with them.”

          SERIOUSLY? Keep digging that hole, dude.

          Am I supposed to be psychic? What happens if I am having sex, say no, and they don’t stop? Am I at fault because i didn’t stop having sex with them when they started raping me?

          Also, if someone if ignores or doesn’t get consent … That is rape. Even if they are having kinky sex.

          Do you expect people to be psychic? How are we supposed to know someone isn’t into content until they rape?

          P.S. I was in an abusive relationship for two years. It became obvious to me that he wasn’t interested in consent. I would say no or stop, but he would continue. Or he would coerce and threaten until i let him rape mw. It took well over a year to finally leave him.

          But, according to you, as soon as i learned he didn’t care about consent, -I- should have stopped having sex with -him-.

          Especially since we often participated in kinky sex.

          seriously dude. Regardless of your intent YOU ARE VICTIM BLAMING.

  14. I have to agree. I think it’s a legitimate complaint about feminism.

    Provided you got stranded on an island sometime in the 70s. If that isn’t the case, you should probably be wondering why you haven’t updated you views on feminism since before you were born.

  15. @omfgscience I read Dan Savage weekly when I was a teen/twentysomething. I still look at his column pretty regularly. The problem isn’t that he’s wrong a lot (I don’t think he is), it’s that when he’s wrong, he’s very, very wrong, and is in a position to do a great deal of harm.

    I’m glad to know he’s willing to correct himself- It’s true that I’m more likely to see the faceplant than the retraction.

    1. That’s exactly how I would describe Dan Savage. It really bothers me when people round him up to some sort of bigot. He believes that bisexuals exist and deserve to be treated with respect. He doesn’t lecture fat people about proper eating habits. He talks about issues like the fact that there are many people that like bigger women and won’t admit it. He even supports the right to use and use up our bodies.

      Some of the things he says are problematic. Some of the things he says (usually things that aren’t problematic) get a lot of activists angry at him. He doesn’t apologize, even for the stuff that clearly should apologize for, and he doesn’t seem to have a lot of respect for the people criticizing him.

      I’m still shocked by the way he is constantly misrepresented. I’m not okay with it, not just because it’s unfair to him, but because those messages are still spread just as if he had said them. It’s not okay to say that transpeople are disgusting, regardless of whether or not you agree with or take credit for those sentiments. I don’t really fully understand the phenomenon, but I think it has a lot to do with the fact that Dan Savage talks about these groups without being a part of them, and the only other outsiders in those conversations are bigots.

  16. I’m relieved this is here. This is the conversation my hubs and I had at dinner, in the restaurant.

    My first reaction? Honestly? It was, “In other words, just lie back and enjoy it, amiright?”

  17. While i agree with the article, i have to point out that anyone stupid enough to ask a stranger on the internet what they should — or should not — do in bed is asking for trouble.

  18. Before we lash out at Slutever, I actually think this is mainly Jezebel’s fault, and just another one of their stunts to draw page views. Slutever isn’t perfect, and I have a few personal issues with her, however they’re passing her off as a normal sex-advisor, with no background whatsoever. When in all reality she is in-character, and the whole thing is entirely tongue-in-cheek, and the last thing she would intend is to take this advice seriously. I’d recommend checking out one of her vice videos before coming to any conclusions.

    Honestly this all comes down to Jezebel trolling us. It would like having Colbert do an article on Fox.com without giving him any background, leaving us to believe he’s dead serious.

    1. The Colbert-Defense? Really?
      You know Poe’s law, don’t you?
      Because she wrote that stuff and she obviously didn’t make sure that (if it actually was) people understood it as satire.
      Because you really, really can’t just presuppose that everybody knows you when you’re actually not much of anybody.
      Really, I can’t take the Colbert-Defense anymore. Every time somebody gives some really rapey advice it comes up.
      In a world in which rapey misogyny is the norm and not an exception, it doesn’t work.

      1. I’m really not saying this is acceptable at all, I’m honestly not even a fan of hers in the right context for much the same reasons you mentioned (rape-advice is never funny to me). I’m just thinking we’re pointing our fingers at the wrong person. Gawker media has been going out of its way to post bait-y things, and I think it’s no coincidence that they casually left the entire context of Slutever.

        What I’m saying is that we really should be pissed off at Jezebel more than Slutever for misleading us for pageviews. I don’t mean to say that her satire is right, I just think we should be putting our energy into being mad at Jezebel more than Slutever who intended something entirely different than what was published due to lack of context. Especially when Jezebel has been trolling their feminist-leaning readers for the last year or so.

  19. You should refer people to Dan Savage instead – he is standard as far as sex-positive, lgbtq&bdsm-positive, stereotype-privilige-aware and anti-religious-bs sex advice goes.

    1. He’s got…a lot of problems, and he sure as shit isn’t LGBTQ+ positive. More like GL positive and fine with hets. See upthread.

  20. I didn’t think her advice for coming on the face was bad. I mean, I do think it’s pseudo-feminist bullshit that certain sex acts are “degrading” and certain ones respect women intrinsically. People have degrading sex in the missionary position, while receiving oral, etc., and have perfectly fun consensual respectful anal and come on face sex. The only way to know if someone is being degrading to you while having sex with you is how they treat you and communicate outside and inside the bedroom.

    Agree that her other advice was the worst ever though. The line about having perseverance when trying to finger someone’s butt even though you’ve NEVER TALKED ABOUT IT was frankly pretty terrifying.

    1. Okay, I guess I understand a little more the objection to the advice after reading Amanda Marcotte’s write-up on it. I still don’t agree with what seems to be the accepted truth that come on face is inherently degrading and that’s the only reason it exists as a sex act (I’ve definitely had experiences with it where that wasn’t the purpose at all, but apparently that’s not common), but I do agree that saying to never analyze sex acts and what they mean is stupid, and certainly not following your gut and being careful is really stupid.

  21. Rebecca, this is a serious issue, and I agree fully with all you have said.

    Nevertheless, I am still giggling over the thought of Predatory Potential Pooper Poker Suzie.

    Either she is a rare individual or I’ve been invited to the wrong sort of parties for 60 odd years.

  22. I had a hard time figuring out if/where the article and this post were being serious. Had to google feminazi.

    I think the article could’ve been great except for a few stupid remarks.

  23. I’ve noticed a lot of these “sex advice” columns are becoming more and more misogynistic and porn-inspired. They rarely, if ever, seem to deal with actual issues regarding sexuality and sexual health — focusing on porn practices and how to “endure” misogynists dudes who want to shoot jizz in women’s eyes.

    Also, the fact that she just blamed feminism for making women “think” about things is disgusting. Jezebel made a mistake, for sure. I mean, she was over at VICE before, and I’m not sure of a non-porn related magazine that is as misogynistic as VICE. Okay, maybe GQ.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button