My entire 16 years as a resident of Texas were shattered in an instant. Apparently, not everything is bigger in Texas.

Condomania, makers of the TheyFit line of condoms, compiled data based on measurements associated with their “Fit Kit” which matches users with 76 different sized condoms based on erect length and girth. Based on the results from 27,000 men, they know whom to salute and published lists of the top 20 most sizeable cities and all 50 states ranked by their crank.

Another Reason to “Head” to Mardi Gras

New Orleans ranks as head honcho in the prickography rankings by city. After all these years, I thought Mardi Gras was about the boobs-for-beads exchange. I’m wrong. If you’re in search of something more fulfilling than beads, The Big Easy is waiting. I was pretty impressed by the Super Bowl upset but given this info, I’m really not all that surprised: Indianapolis was only 13^th on the city-specific list of schlong.

Objects in the Mirror are Larger than They Appear

While New Hampshire may only be 9,351 square miles, it’s the biggest swinging dick of them all in prick. Unless you’re from there, it’s unlikely you’ve thought twice about this blink-and-you’ll-miss-it New England gem. Well, here’s some other awesome shit about New Hampshire you never wanted to know:

• Four-Legged Chicken. You can see one at the Woodman Institute in Dover (get in the motherfucking car. NOW).

• Stevie Ray Vaughan – eat your heart out. The author of the famous rhyme (Sarah Josepha Hale), “Mary Had a Little Lamb” was from Newport, NH. That’s hot.

Perhaps they should change their state motto from “Live Free or Die” to “Go Big or Go Home.” Just a thought.

We All Knew Politicians Tend to Exaggerate

The truth is in: politicians are liars. I know – say it’s not so. But Condomania’s study indicates that Washington, D.C. is only SECOND in prickonomics. New Orleans, a city duly fucked by FEMA during Katrina, has the last hurrah – our dicks are bigger than yours. New Orleans makes better blues music and here’s an awesome tidbit: blue states have bigger dicks than red ones. Gonna have to assume that red states rank higher in cases of blue balls as a result.

Yeee-ha…ha-ha-ha

The joke’s on you, Texas. Dallas/Ft. Worth ranks dead last in dick size. As a Texan (raised in Houston, born in Alabama…shut it), my world is shattered. What you’re telling me is that not only is the phrase “It’s bigger in Texas” a lie, but since Texas ranks a measly 35^th out of 50 states in penis size, that George W. Bush may indeed have a small, red state schlong? I don’t know what I can do with all of this new information in one day.

A Lesson in Dickenomics

New Hampshire isn’t small. Texas isn’t big. Politicians lie. Hurricane Katrina wasn’t the biggest thing to hit Louisiana. But let’s go beyond the numbers and look at this study as fodder for a different kind of stimulus plan. Let’s look at some schiz, using a handy dandy spreadsheet:

It’s simple numbers, folks: spending more doesn’t make you a big swinging dick. The State of New Hampshire boasts the highest income per capita according to the U.S. Census Bureau, has a very modest GDP and rather spectacular size rankings. Texas, in all it’s glory, is only ranked 38^th in per capita income, has a huge GDP and (apparently) a bunch of residents wishing all of the urban legends were true. Louisiana sits smack in the middle, partially obliterated by a hurricane and while a paltry per capita income ranking of 49^th out of 50, they’re a pleasing 7^th in penile.

I knew that New Orleans would triumph again. A Super Bowl title (explained above), a city returning from true desolation to a lively Mardi Gras celebration and now, the model for Dickenomics. They may not be first in GDP… their residents may make a modest living.

But they sure do know how to swing.

If Washington started paying more attention to statistics like penis size we may see an interesting paradigm shift. A decrease in braggadocio accompanied by an increase in personal productivity. There’s something that New Hampshire’s doing right, and it ain’t just good genes. A prick is still a prick (and Washington has those in spades) but perhaps what Washington needs to light a fire under this economic weirdness at present is a sit-down, rock hard lesson in Dickenomics. Not the kind that Cheney would deliver, either. God knows, he chose Palin as a running mate and that’s proof alone that thinking with your dick is a bad idea. But Dickenomics breaks down to this:

It’s not about size. It’s not about money. It’s about strength and a collective willingness to get the job done. Kinda like a good romp in the sack. A $400 per night whore will lie to you and say Captain Fantastic is fantastic but a guy who makes less money than you may be the lay of you life. It’s about using what you’ve got – brains, chemistry, resources, a kitchen table. It’s Dickenomics. And we’re lacking it in Washington these days.

The reality of Dickenomics is simply this: size isn’t everything, but it does matter. We knew all along that the voices of Washington were filled with some fish stories and that Texans were prone to brag. Perhaps that’s why Washington, D.C. and Texas are so far down in the rankings. Fish stories and filibustering aren’t going to get you anywhere in a Super Bowl or the Senate. You can sit there and brag to your date about how big your dick is, but when the pants finally come off, you’re the one who stands on trial. Who knew that a study on penis size would lay it all out on the kitchen table that so many of you like to be bent over?

Now I ask you, dear readers: is there a relocation in your future? Are there famous folks from states of note with whom you’d like to have your very own Dickenomics roundtable?

(Note: I’m filing a grievance regarding Colorado’s ranking. My better half should have blown the bell curve on it’s ranking as 40^th out of 50 states and Denver’s most average 16^th place among cities. I’m willing to submit evidence – but I ain’t sharin’.)

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

Dickenomics – Penis Sizes Ranked By State

Related posts:

1. What I Would Do If I Had Penis For A Day
2. Self Deprecation And My Small Penis
3. The Most Beautiful Penis In The World

What I do remember, however, is not having any desire to have sex for the next two years. Not because I was scarred, traumatized or anything of the sort. It was a combination of two things:

I wasn’t interested and there weren’t any candidates.

Why? I was a nerd.

Yes, those are huge glasses with a violet tint to the lenses. And that’s a motherfucking TROPHY. I was a competitive geek, more interested in grades than dick. This held true until the summer before my senior year of high school when I met Shawn.

Shawn was 19 – an older boy! We started dating and everything was pretty sweet. We listened to music, talked about music, kissed and held hands. And you betcha – we also had sex. We turned up the music in his room and with his mom and dipshit little wiener dog James (who always pissed on me when I came over) in the next room, we’d do it.

And then one day, Shawn looks up at me with a look on his face like I just kicked his pee-factory dog.

“The condom broke.”

Four weeks later, I had an abortion at age 17.

Moving On

To friends and family who might read this week’s column – yeah. That’s what I was doing when I was running out of Mr. Stanford’s history class the beginning of senior year. Puking. I have no regrets, no shame about how things turned out. At age 37, I love my life, my friends, family and all who grace me each day – I would have none of what I love so much had the sliding door slid another way. Wish it never happened? No.

What I wish is that someone had sat my punk ass down and talked to me about The Pill.

Y’see, kids do stupid shit. From the day our mothers kick us out of the womb to the day we die, we’re going to do stupid shit. Repeatedly. And a large proportion of the stupid shit we do occurs during adolescence. That’s why I’ve got an issue with abstinence-only sex education.

In my eyes, it’s like fucking for virginity and bombing for peace. Largely a product of the conservative Christian community, sex is often a vilified act riddled with shame. My word – what if we fuck-up and…fuck? Well, it’s hellfire and eternal damnation, as who’s going to want someone who’s not a virgin?

<raises hand – ME! ME! But I digress…>

This past week, I caught wind of this gem of a “study” that purports that “abstinence works.” Well, tickle my ass and call me Susan. Of COURSE abstinence works.

If I lock myself in the house all day long, it’s (pretty much) impossible to be hit by a car.

Honestly, I’m not impressed. We’ll get back to the “study” of 662 “young girls” in a moment. Grab a chai – we’re going to dish for a bit.

Let’s start with the surprising knowledge that abstinence-only programs only came of age in 1999-2000 in the U.S. 1996’s Welfare Reform Act earmarked $50 million in funds to be used for the purpose of teaching “abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school-age children.”

Kabam. There you have it.

Then, Gee-dubyah came along and said to hell with separation of church and state and initiated CBAE grants (Community Based Abstinence Education). Now, not only could states tap that awesome pool of WRA funds, but community organizations (including religious ones) could access CBAE money. Praise Jesus – pass the chastity belt. Newsweek offers this interesting tidbit:

“During the Bush administration, funding for abstinence education more than doubled, from $80 million in 2001 to $200 million in 2007, according to figures from the Congressional Budget Office.”

Newsweek also offers the following information:

“In 2007, a federally funded study of four abstinence programs found its students no more likely to abstain than those in a comprehensive program. At the same time, comprehensive programs that discuss contraceptives and their use received better, although by no means perfect, marks. Researcher Doug Kirby’s 2008 review of 48 studies of comprehensive curriculums found that two-thirds either reduced frequency of sex or number of sexual partners. By time Obama cut Title V abstinence-education funds from his budget, 25 states had already begun rejecting the money, 16 because they didn’t agree ideologically or weren’t seeing results, the others for administrative reasons.”

Now, if you want to read more than Newsweek, you can do so here on a comprehensive article that recounts the results of multiple abstinence-only programs.

So if it doesn’t work, what’s all the bitching about the demise of abstinence-only programs about?

Where I Stand, With My Mouth Open

I’m of the school of thought that abstinence should be taught in conjunction with safe sex education. Condom use, birth control options, STD prevention…let’s go back to the premise that kids fuck up. People fuck up. A 40-year-old can catch Chlamydia just as easy as a 15-year-old. The difference? The 15-year-old needs parental consent to get thee to a clinic.

Once again, I polled the Twitterverse and my followers on Facebook: give me your views on abstinence-only education. I wanted parental perspectives, thoughts from across the nation, male, female…I got ‘em. And the most surprising thing about the reactions?

No one’s against teaching abstinence, but they all agree: it should be a part of a comprehensive sex education program. Let’s review the personal stories and the angles from which people approach this testy (giggle – I said testy…and I damn well know the entendre is “teste!”) issue:

Raised Mormon

“I grew up in a Mormon household and started dating my son’s father when I was nearly 16. We waited almost a year before we had sex. I was in love with him and emotionally/physically ready at that age. However, the guilt I felt after having sex was horrid.  I remember sitting in church at 15 and them telling us we would go to…well, basically Mormon Hell if we had sex before marriage and not to masturbate.  I wanted to melt into my seat at that service. My mom and dad told me the basics about sex, but of course never mentioned masturbation.  I got on birth control right away but had to hide it and live in terror that my mom and dad would find it. Growing up in a household where abstinence was preached didn’t keep me from having sex. What it DID do is keep me from really enjoying sex and becoming comfortable with my sexual self for a long time. It wasn’t until I was in my 30s that I really understood and was comfortable with many aspects of my sexuality.”

Lisa – Colorado

Hi – I’m a Mom and the Joke’s on My Kid

My daughter is a freshman at a high school in Jeffco, forced to take a semester of phys ed. (Turns out she likes it! Joke’s on her!).

She told me all about the two-day “WAIT Training,” partly because I bombarded her with questions – I had to sign permission slips for her to look at line drawings of penises in 5th and 7th grade, so why wasn’t I told that the Abstinence Police were coming?

The more I heard, the better I felt about it. The messages seemed to be to think about what you’re doing, understand that there are some primal communication differences between girls and guys, and also understand that the culture has ways of making you believe that everybody’s doing it but you, everybody’s smoother or prettier or more popular than you and sex = instant grownup status.

Nothing about Jesus wanting you to wait, or your virginity being a beautiful gift, or any of that.

For the second day, they had to find a magazine ad with a sexual undertone. My daughter ripped out the first perfume ad she found, then came out of the bathroom waving the perfect ad, from a food magazine — the one where a guy and a girl are gazing at each other across a crowded elevator. She’s obviously smitten with the giant … tumescent … loaf of Tillamook cheese he’s holding. Vertically.

So yeah, my daughter gets it.”

Lisa the Mom – Denver area

The Dude (with kids) Speaks

Trying to prevent teenagers from having sex is like trying to stop water from flowing downhill. You can create the illusion that you have succeeded but ultimately the dam will break and the water will continue on its predetermined way. And teenagers will continue to have sex.

We got that lesson with my youngest – he was 15 he had sex with his GF (she was 14).

They planned it thoroughly, stopping by Rite Aid to buy lube and condoms then doing the deed when no one was around. When we came home we thought it was really, really weird that he was sitting quietly doing his homework, the dishes were in the sink, his bed was made and room picked up. That had never happened. A few hours later we got a call from his GF’s mother, freaking, that they had had SEX and WHAT THE HELL WERE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?!?!?!

We had THE TALK with them and from that day on, our son was the model kid. Good grades, homework on time without hounding, clean room and laundry in the basket, etc. The surprise here was that from that day on, everything was on the table. We have very adult conversations about marriage, family, kids, how many, when, etc. And these are conversations we rarely have with our adult friends and never have with our older son. Wild.

Teenage sex was the best thing that ever happened to him.”

An anonymously awesome dude

I’m 27 and Think We Should Teach the Little Fuckers the Consequences

“I feel that if we did explore these topics (abstinence, STDs, birth control, etc.) in sex ed, the awareness of both the cons and pros would allow kids today to be held responsible for their choices. It’s time to take control and accept what we decide to not face. But in educating teenagers in other methods besides abstinence and not skirt around the topic of avoiding sex all together, I’m sure you will find a bigger improvement in them making a smart, responsible decision about their sexual health and we’ll begin to see the positive elements, opposed to the shocking stupidity that is common in that age.

In conclusion, sex education classes should not promote just abstinence as their sole platform in sex ed. Europeans have been, mainly the Dutch, have included safe sex methods (like putting on a condom properly, etc.) in their sex ed curriculum for years and with success. It allows options and the more options they have, the more they will begin to think about the consequences that accompany each option. Why keep promoting Utopia when there is a war going on daily around us? Offer a solution – don’t be apart of the problem. Teach the little fuckers how to put on a condom already.”

Andy-a-la-Twitter

A Perspective from a (real) 40-year-old Virgin

My problem with abstinence education is that it’s based upon fear. Fear of being rejected by god, church, or society. Fear of catching an STD. Fear of getting pregnant and altering your potential in life. A man should never be taught to be abstinent until they are married.  The amount of self-confidence that is lost destroys your future worth substantially. As for women, they should be choosey and there are benefits to your health and livelihood that accompany not having sex.  But everyone should be taught all the options, given the pluses and minuses and allowed to make their own decision. Taught that having sex can be enjoyable and given the information of the health benefits that go along with having an active sex life. People shouldn’t be taught that sex is bad and have fear motivate their abstinence.”

Another awesome anonymous dude

Acknowledging that the readership on ToyWithMe is of open mind, heart and oftentimes, legs and mouth, I don’t feel ashamed about my stances on the puritanical, Utopian (thank you, Andy) viewpoint of the abstinence-only crowd. What I’ve got a problem with is the religiously-fueled hype that keeps screaming that abstinence works.

Of course it works, you idiots. You can take your 662 “young girls” and rap their knuckles with a ruler for all I care. Your touting of abstinence as a panacea for the sexual woes of America’s youth is tragically misguided and blasted by the evidence I’ve cited above that clearly shows that abstinence-only programs are ineffective.

What I’ll say is this (and it’s the bottom line of this argument): we all agree that abstinence works and it’s a great component of a healthy sexual education. What we don’t agree on is what accompanies it in the curriculum. Those who say that it’s abstinence or the highway to hell are missing out on the beauty of human sexuality (and if you haven’t read Mary Roach’s BONK, you should – an astounding non-fiction read). There is more to sex than marriage. There’s more to marriage than sex. There are components of adolescent development that are glaringly absent from abstinence-only education, like the realities of the world we drive to work in each day. STDs exist. Pregnancies happen (thank heavens). Condoms break. Boys hit girls. Girls hit boys. People stalk people. How about teaching kids that it’s about loving who you are and equipping them with the tools they need to make the best decisions possible when life throws them a curveball?

Stop Blaming the System

I love kids, I want kids, I’m delighted to be with a man who has kids. Your kids are yours and they’re welcome to play with my hypothetical kids anytime on the playground. But why don’t you start being a parent and stop relying on the public school system to do your duty? Sheltering your children from sex only creates an environment of taboo and you’re going to flip your shit twice as fast as you flip the pancakes for breakfast when you find out little Amy and little Johnny got it on in your bed while you were out of town. Whatever your beliefs dictate, talk about it at home. At church. Where those conversations belong. Sex education in schools is meant to be scientific and factual – just like the day you dissect a frog in Biology class. You let the family dog run around showing its tits and dingaling for all the world to see. We are intelligent beings (well, for the most part). We get smarter as we get older (hopefully). Give your kids some credit – if they don’t hear it from you, they’ll hear it elsewhere. Wouldn’t you rather control the content?

If you want your kids to be educated along a religiously-based party line, enroll them in a private school and keep them the hell out of the classroom with the kids that are going to go on to be the scientists of tomorrow. And enjoy those religious schools while you’re at it. There was a lot of boning going on in my public high school, but I’m sure anyone who went to a religious school can tell you – there was more boning going on at theirs.

Start acting like parents and start treating teachers and administrators like the professionals they are – people trained to deliver subject-specific content to your children – instead of babysitters burdened with the deliverance of your message of the moral rights and mights of the world.

I’ll offer bonus points in this week’s comments section for dirty parochial school stories and other kickass comments about why the burden should be relieved from the teachers of America and placed on the parents.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go shop for a naughty schoolgirl outfit.

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

A Naughty Schoolgirl Mouths-Off About Abstinence

No related posts.

It’s the basis for my career. I call it like I see it and have no tolerance for bullshit. However, there is a distinct difference between “bullshit” and “differing viewpoints.” Some don’t see it that way, however.

There’s a talent that comes with stating your opinion, offering substantiating information and creating a dialogue.

Today’s column has issue with two things: media bullshit and misogynistic bullshit. We’ll get to both in due time, but let’s start with the media fucktardery…

Two weeks ago, we chatted about the hullabaloo on the CBS/Tim Tebow ad. Quite a bit of debate and a lively comments section – thanks to all who chimed-in. This week, I’m following it up by calling bullshit on all the hype. Why? Because what the media sold me and what was delivered were two entirely different things.

Where the hell is the ad that was depicted in the numerous news stories pre-Super Bowl? Here’s what I was responding to, as were the others who came out in either opposition or defense of the FOTF/Tebow spot:

• Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad: Anti-Abortion Commercial to Air – ABCnews.com
• Super Bowl ad featuring quarterback Tebow, mother riles abortion rights groups – Washington Post

I was unfond (new word – JUST made it up!) of having my evening nacho-and-football celebration interrupted by what was touted as an “anti-abortion” ad. I was non unfond of the ad existing (and I won’t rehash arguments here except to correct that it was funded NOT directly by FOTF (Focus On The Family) but by contributors TO them specifically for this cause…wondering where my $2.5M friends are…holler?) If you didn’t see it last Sunday, here’s what aired.

Yup. That’s what we call “innocuous,” folks. It’s certainly not worth $2.5-3M, but hey – to each their own, right?

A Brilliant Execution Of Bait And Switch

I’m offering a serious hat tip to Focus on the Family (still advising them to focus on their own damn family and keep their nose out of mine) for masterminding the biggest bait-and-switch, false journalism lead in the name of publicity since the Balloon Boy incident of ’09. I’m calling bullshit on the lack of journalistic integrity displayed by the entire mediascape on this now non-issue. As the Washington Post so eloquently stated:

“No matter its content, the ad’s existence is about what it’s always about — a nation split not only over the concepts of abortion and choice, but over all sorts of choices: the red and the blue, Coke and Pepsi, McDonald’s and Taco Bell. By announcing its ad-buy in advance, Focus on the Family is reaping the benefit of manufactured controversy and free publicity.”

Manufactured. Key word, there. Right along with free.

As I previously stated in my original piece on the issue, you have to look at Focus on the Family for what it is and no more: they’re a group committed to an agenda.

Like Republicans, Democrats, GLBT advocacy groups, NOW, the Klu Klux Klan…

I’m sitting here straight pissed that something went awry between journalistic integrity and whatever firm was handling the PR for FOTF. A set of facts doesn’t get as straight fucked as this without something being very well planned. I have two dogs, one of which likes to sneak off and shit in the basement.

I can smell shit a mile away.

All of the scuffle about the Tebow ad did one thing and one thing only: it made people on both sides of the issue stand up and firmly state their opinions.

Those on the pro-life side of the fence cried foul, saying their story should be heard.

Those on the pro-choice (not pro-abortion) side of the fence cried foul, saying the anti-abortion message was out of context, unwelcomed and speaking against the current legality of abortion.

Erick Erickson, The Schoolyard Bully

And on Sunday this week, Erick Erickson (Editor-in-Chief of Redstate.com) crawled out of the woodwork (once again). This time, to run around like the schoolyard bully who had just tripped the class nerd and sent him face-first into a steaming dog turd:

Now, I read Mr. Erickson’s bio and all tweets aside, there’s some serious education to contend with there. But here’s where I’ll ask (and DID): does the conservative community need one of their own spewing sentiments such as these?

Some insights:

“I find people like Mr. Erickson to be the comic relief of the Republican Party, a bit like Ann Coulter without the Barbie looks.” @themomjob (Republican)

“He has one point, I think the pro-choice (anti-abortion whatever you want to call it, I think it’s a highly personal choice and I rarely fight the battle as I make mine and let you make yours) faction overplayed their hand, and it appears he may have overplayed his.” @mesorrentino (Republican)

“Seems Erickson really dislikes ugly women, and because you are ugly, your opinions are thus invalid or stupid. I don’t see how that ends the credibility of ‘pro-abortion groups.’ They were responding to FOTF’s initial release of what the ad would be about versus the actual ad that aired. Ultimately, it’s a misleading bait-and-switch tactic. Again, perhaps ugly women who have opinions need to get back into the kitchen, perhaps to keep his wife company while she cranks out sandwiches for him.” @nickpepito (unaffiliated politically, but identifies himself as Republican/Libertarian)

“I am speechless! From what moronic brain did this misogynistic crap spew? And, for the record, since when did what anyone looks like have anything to do with supporting women’s rights? Oh wait … the answer to that would be NEVER. Mr. Erickson, you are an asshat.” @ShellyKramer (not a Republican, but a fabulous woman with an intellect and the ability to use “asshat” in proper context)

Note: I did offer Mr. Erickson the opportunity for an interview. I emailed him at 9:40am MST yesterday and informed him of my deadline of 5pm MST and sent him an @ on Twitter. As he had plenty of time to respond to other users and not my request, I stated that he was ignoring me around 1:37pm. Others RT’d me. He got pissed at 4:05pm and declined the interview. Them’s the breaks, folks.

Mr. Erickson, You’re An Asshat

Mr. Erickson, with the little respect due to you after such vile comments, I agree with Shelly: you’re an asshat. And you’re not an asshat for making the misogy-licious comments above. You’re an asshat for placing the conservative political community for whom you speak in a negative light. Some of my best friends (bless their hearts) are gun-toting Republicans and we share off-color humor on a regular basis. What I have never heard, for all their ranting, is that “ugly feminists should return to their kitchens” or that the reason for MY viewpoints differing from theirs is that I’m “too ugly to get a date.”

Republicans Have Played With My Tits

I’ve got nice tits. I’ve been on lots of dates. I now go on dates with the same guy on a regular basis and he likes playing with my tits. (On a side note, Republicans have played with my tits as well.) I believe what I believe because I was given a gift as a young woman: the ability to explore the political landscape and figure out what was important to ME. My parents? Staunch Republicans. My sister? An ordained Lutheran minister. My brother? A libertarian atheist. We ran the gamut and I’m delighted to be part of a family where our holiday dinner conversations are lively and involve the throwing of Pillsbury crescent rolls at one another like Nerf balls.

Misogynistic Bullshit

We all had the same news stories going into the Super Bowl abortion debate – so why it is that those who are advocates for women’s rights (as afforded to us by federal law – please see Roe v. Wade, mkaythx) are labeled with such misogynistic terms? What I need is everyone without a uterus to get the hell out of the pool and stop throwing labels on women. I think Ann Coulter is a perfectly good waste of tits (and she likely thinks the same of me – IF she thinks of me…maybe she thinks about me naked. That would be WEIRD!) but I think she’s entitled to her opinion. You, however…Mister Erickson…wow. You’ve got the ability to spin a story like no one I’ve ever seen.

Oh wait – you can spin one like Focus on the Family. Nevermind.

Women who use the facts they’re given to compose an argument aren’t “feminazis,” while I’ll conceded that the recent debate brought out extreme statements from BOTH sides of the agenda.

Pot, Kettle, Black

Those women are intelligent. Using the resources you’re given to build an argument, organize people to support a cause and rise to the occasion to bring about change – isn’t that what you’re doing over at Redstate.com? And I think you’d refer to your readership as intelligent. That’s exactly what the groups against the Tebow ad were doing – working with the information given. Albeit, it was information hyped-up by spinning PR pros that manipulated the mainstream media for some manufactured hype and free publicity, but hey – who’s keeping track, right? Consider turning the issue around. If an ad ran from the ACLU in support of free borders or lessened border restrictions, wouldn’t you be up in arms about it until you found out it was more along the lines of bringing a family together? For fuck sake, man – put on your law school smart person hat! I began today by applauding FOTF for hoodwinking a nation and its media community and this recent post (note to readers, Erickson is NOT the author) on your site struts about the schoolyard with a braggadocio rarely seen outside of World of Warcraft circles.

Women Who Stood Against The Ad Are Not “Feminazis”

Hindsight is much closer to 20/15 than 20/20 and it’s terrible to gloat. Can you not accept the situation for what it is rather than what you’ve twisted it into? The WOMEN who stood against the FOTF Super Bowl ad are not “feminazis.” The conservative community that stood its ground in defense of letting the ad run is not a collection of right extremist morons. Each side was working with a faulty base of information – one which, if it had been portrayed accurately, would have presented no hullabaloo at all.

Would You Like A  Misogy-licious Sammich?

So, yes – I’ll call you an asshat, Mr. Erickson. And I would have even sent you a picture of me standing in my kitchen, sans shoes, making you a misogy-licious sammich. However, I’ve been working from home all day today (because I’m a business owner and thriving in what people depict as a depressed economy, not because I’m sick). I haven’t put any makeup on or done my hair, so I’m one of those Uglies you were talking about. I’ll just stay here in my kitchen and waggle my frying pan at you in shame. I think it’s hideous that you find it AOK to make statements like you do on Twitter while a leading representative of the conservative right. All leaders have an obligation to their community – are you really doing yours justice with your misogyny buffet?

Kindly Exit My Uterus

So here’s the bottom line: Whoever you are, whatever you believe – kindly exit my uterus. And stop it with the schoolyard bully tactics shouting “Ha ha!” each time you feel your side of an argument emerges victorious. The recent bullshit with the Tebow ad? Inexcusable. We could have all spent our energies more effectively had it been presented in an honest light. I can speak as a successful businesswoman with a college education that none of you have any business, elected official/spokesperson for a movement/otherwise, for weaseling your way into my bits and pieces. Stop the shenanigans and be who you are, say what you mean to say – and do it without the derogatory words. Stop yelling, start listening and quit trying to shove your beliefs in my face. The only thing I want shoved in my hoo-ha each month is a tampon – not a piece of legislation. Stop hating and start conversing. You might be intrigued with the dialogue of which you unexpectedly become a part.

Opening up a dialogue like I do here each week (and a heartfelt thanks to those who continue to join the conversation) while stating a specific stance on a story isn’t hate: it’s opinion, feelings and the heart of what we purport to be the core of this country – spirit. Hate kills spirit, but dialogue? Oh, how it lets spirit thrive.

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

CBS Abortion Ad A Classic Bait And Switch

Related posts:

1. Focus on the Fuckery: CBS Aborts Good Judgment

I sent out a call over Twitter and HARO.com for former servicemen and women (gay or straight) to share their views on the potential repeal of DADT. While many of the quotes you read in today’s column will be anonymous, their points of view are no less valid.

“I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

The Oath of Enlistment for all U.S. Military Members

The oath above is one of the biggest reasons I’ve always had a stick in my craw about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (henceforth to be referred to as DADT). Raised by veterans of the U.S. Air Force, I learned to say the Pledge of Allegiance and sing the National Anthem with my right hand over my heart, hat off… looking at the flag with a patriotic reverence. I took my right to vote seriously and won’t deny that in 1992, I voted for Bill Clinton.

In 1993, I doubted that decision wholeheartedly when DADT was instituted.

DADT – to me – seemed like a cop-out. A false panacea to kowtow to the moral right and appease the left-leaning hippies. Having an inarguable history as being a shitty secret-keeper, I had no delusions about the policy being effective. Or for that matter, plausible.

My belief is that one’s sexual orientation has fuckall to do with their patriotism. While many may disagree with me, those of the Keep Them Fuckin’ Queers Away From Me school of thought…a school of thought more perverse to me than the practice of a homosexual or transgender lifestyle, there are many who don’t. If you read my take on the whole Prop 8 issue, I think the heterosexual “norm” is pretty bleak and breeds more screwed-up kids than any gay couple I’ve ever had the pleasure of meeting.

Obama put the Commander-in-Chief smackdown on the military and Congress during his State of the Union address to actively take steps towards ending DADT. Since 1993, my nation’s government has discharged over 13,500 servicemen and women under the policy. That’s 13,500 job dismissals based on sexual orientation.

According to Nolo.com, “Twenty states and the District of Columbia have laws that currently prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in private employment: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. Some of these states also specifically prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. (In addition, a handful of states have laws prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in public workplaces only.)

So lemme get this straight (pun intended): private employers can’t discriminate based on gender, but the federal government CAN?

Straight fucked. Gay fucked, even.

As one of my interviewees states:

”Doesn’t it seem odd that queers have to hide who they are to serve in an institution that claims to protect our individual and institutional freedoms?” @orenkiwi– Dayna Downing, discharged in 1994 for “homosexual conduct”

It does, indeed. Especially since bullets and bombs don’t know the difference between a queen and a redneck backwoods cocksucker (last I checked).

And now…the other side of the sexual orientation story from a currently enlisted straight female who has nine years of service under her belt:

” Obviously sexual preference doesn’t affect one’s ability to do any job, and the military is no different. A military that represents and protects a nation founded on liberty and religious freedom that attempts to remain close-minded and bigoted is at risk to destroy unit cohesion and strength, not vice versa.” Sarah (@lizfits)

Since I decided to write this article, I’ve received responses from numerous former and current military, each with stories from “the workplace” more remarkable than mine (and at last count, I’ve had 23 jobs). Lesbian, transgendered, gay and straight – whatever the bent, I got the perspective. Several former servicemen called collective bullshit on the whole “showering with gay folk” issue.

The case? “I don’t want some fucking faggot checking me out in the shower” Yeah, because he wants to see YOUR fat, white trash body all lathered up nice and gooey. *hurl* (anonymous)

The snark? As a member of 24 Hour Fitness, I see several clothed people (sexual orientation indeterminate) that I do not want to see lathered-up next to me. Ever. *hurl* is right.

Here’s the shit folks: it’s fear and I simply don’t get it. If you hate homos so much, why would you deny them the opportunity to catch a bullet in your place? You’ve got no problem telling the fat chick at the bar “no thanks” when she hits on you and starts drooling after three PBR tall boys. And ladies – stop acting like you haven’t tongued-down your best girlfriend after three shots of Patron because you thought it would make your boyfriend hot (and if you have not done this, you should – women are great kissers).

Enough of the hypocrisy. Seriously. Sexual harassment is a threat in each and every workplace and should be dealt with accordingly, regardless of sexual orientation.

I loved this one thought shared by two separate former servicemembers:

“Somebody flaunting their lifestyle and ‘camping it up’ in the presence of people who are known or make it known to be uncomfortable also need to be answerable to the same discipline and regulations as everyone else. Sexual harassment comes in many forms and it needs to be known that it will not be tolerated from anyone to anyone no matter any individual’s preferences.”
-Jay (@JayJM)

”If there are gay or lesbian soldiers, marines, sailors, or airmen sexually harassing fellow servicemen, they should be punished in exactly the same way any heterosexual serviceman would be punished for such behavior.”
-Peter (@cololawcompass)

Right – but then again, we ARE talking about the federal government here. Remember? They’re the ones who can still discriminate based on sexual orientation. Legally. Military intelligence takes on a whole new meaning.

But I will concede this: the repeal of DADT is going to be a shit storm. It was the same in the military when blacks were permitted to enlist (Tuskegee Airmen fame) women were allowed to enlist in non-combat roles and then allowed to cross-over into pilot roles and such in fighter jets. The military is a huge testosterone fest and thank fucking Christ they are. I need boys and girls with guns to go out and do a job that I cannot do myself. People are built for different roles – the military is the largest proponent of that: job specialization. Infantrymen don’t fly planes and pilots don’t drive tanks.

Another source offered this with regards to the potential repeal of DADT:

” We need to recognize the mistake and subsequently recognize the contributions and valor of those openly gay service members who have served with distinction.”
-(anonymous)

Do what it is that you do best, U.S. military folk – keep on keepin’ on with the specialization of labor and let servicemembers be servicemembers – they all serve and swear to protect the same way.

Now, some of you might think I’m a fag hag, what with this being the second post in three weeks on gay rights issues. Truth is – I don’t see gender.

Yes, I’ve slept with another woman.

Yes, I’ve been married twice.

No, I’m not divorced because I’m gay/bi/confused/a bitch.

I like men and am a straight female.

When I look at people, I see people. Shining personalities, skills I don’t have, adventures I admire, relationships that suck, partnerships I’d kill to emulate, children I’d love to have and above all…spirit. It’s the spirit of a human – something that every Presidential candidate preaches yet few politicians understand – that makes this life worth living. Do I pity those who feel that lifestyles different from their own pose a very threat to their ability to live a wholly fulfilling life? Indeed. Those are the kind of people who spend more time worrying about what others think than tending to their own backyard. A colossal waste of time, but hey – the world needs zealots, too.

It’s about time that the U.S. military starts acting like a more progressive nation – the nation it strives to be: inclusive, encouraging, supporting and an incubator for human potential seen in no other nation. And y’know what? That little bundle of testosterone Colin Powell even agrees with me.

So here’s the bottom line: with as brilliant as the U.S. military is with training and programming and their ability to turn Joe Punk into Joe America in 13 weeks of basic training, how about a little educational overhaul? Add tolerance training to the bill. Hell, if you’re able to overcome a little punk’s disdain for his mother’s authority and turn him into a leader, can’t you overcome the backwoods and unfounded fear that they gay guy with a machine gun standing next to you is going to bend you over and fuck you in the ass? Gay servicemembers stand next to straight ones, ready and willing to defend this country of ours. Same oath, same uniforms, same guns, same training. I thank each and every servicemember for who they are and what they do. I see people who protect my country.

I don’t see gender, sexual preference or religion.

Again, I see people. People who need to be thanked. And I can only imagine the next impending shit storm that will ensue: when gay marriage is finally legalized and the federal government is faced with extending benefits to gay servicemembers.

There will be a blog post about that issue as well. I can hardly wait.

What say you, ToyWithMes…where are the challenges with the potential, seemingly impending repeal of DADT? Anonymous comments welcome – those reeking of hate are not. Fire away…

End note: I tried desperately to get anyone on Twitter (out of HOW many million users?) who was AGAINST the repeal of DADT to offer a quote and even messaged using the #TCOT (Top Conservatives on Twitter) tag. No takers. Huh. Guess everyone’s changed their mind or are too pussy to put a face with their thoughts.

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

The End Is Near For Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

No related posts.

I began listening to another story: during this year’s Super Bowl, CBS will air an anti-abortion commercial sponsored by Focus on the Family. Dubbed as “family-friendly,” the gem will star Tim Tebow, Heisman Trophy winner and evangelical Christian, along with his mom. The angle? Had she followed doctor advice and had an abortion, her precious Tim wouldn’t grace the football fields of today. (Note: if you don’t know the story, Tebow’s mother contracted amoebic dysentery living in the Philippines and the medication threatened the well being of the fetus. Hence, the advice to terminate the pregnancy.)

Family-friendly…

Rip the needle off the record and insert a hearty WHAT THE DEUCE?!

Question number one: is there any man reading this blog who will be watching the Super Bowl for its “family-friendly” content AND wants to talk about abortion on the holiest day of the year in sports?

Answer: Well, it sure as shit isn’t Gregg Doyel of CBSsports.com. “If you’re a sports fan, and I am, that’s the holiest day of the year. It’s not a day to discuss abortion. For it, or against it, I don’t care what you are. On Super Bowl Sunday, I don’t care what I am. Feb. 7 is simply not the day to have that discussion.”

Question number 2: if we’re going to see an anti-abortion ad, where’s the pro-choice ad?

Answer: We’ll never see it. Especially since CBS squelched a Super Bowl ad by the United Church of Christ in 2004 that extended a welcome to gays and others shunned by popular Christian faith.

The entire #tcot thread and conservative media realm is using word-spin and alchemy to say that those who advocate choice and are against this ad are “offended that Tim Tebow is alive.”

Seriously?

That’s like saying that lessons taught to kids over the decades by a big yellow bird and talking frog are invalid regardless of content because the characters are puppets (ok, Muppets).

But hey – Focus on the Family is an extremist and conservative collective dedicated to a strict interpretation of the Bible. Do I expect rational, free-thinking thought? No. So your expectation that I’ll go off on Focus on the Family this week won’t be met, as I feel they’ve got a right to believe what they will and promote such.

I am not anti-Christian. I am not anti-conservative thought. I am not anti-penguins in purple tutus dancing around with AK-47s singing In a Godda Da Vida…until they point one of those guns at me or those I love.

I am firmly against, however, the telling of only one side of a story. That’s a penguin aiming an AK-47 at me.

On a complete side note, I don’t post without having done my research. It’s no secret that I’m of the spiritual-not-religious bent and find faith and support in my friends, family and a great daily feeling that I’m in sync with the universe. But I did pop over to the Focus on the Family website to do some reading. Nice site design, easy to navigate (what do you expect from me? I’m a web geek!)…and I located their resources on Marriage and Sex. I’ll go ahead and concede the fact I’m (apparently) going to hell:

We May Never Use Another Person as an Object, Sexual or Otherwise

The members of the Trinity never relate to each other as objects, to be used for their own good. They relate to each other in love, seeking to serve the goodness and glory of the other. Love is a self-donation. It never uses others as things or an end.

When we use others, we diminish their dignity as well as our own. Animals do this. People shouldn’t, because it’s not what we were created for. It’s not what sex was created for. This is why pornography, masturbation, and rape fall outside of God’s intentions for us.

The only intention I have to answer to is the one I have built for my own life and the one that serves my friends, family and loved ones. I masturbate (regularly). I look at porn with complete fascination and personally adore the little porn flick that runs through my head every now and again. But I do agree – rape is The Suck. And it prompts me to ask: If rape is outside of God’s intention, is it God’s intention for women who become pregnant through rape to have no recourse? Another question for another time.

(By the way: I also fail to grasp Tebow’s whole “saving himself for marriage” angle. If you look at marriage as a nice meal, I’m not going to save myself for a nice meal at a restaurant where the most the head chef has ever cooked is Kraft Mac & Cheese. He practices for football. For the love of all that’s holy, man – practice for your future wife!)

But I digress…

Understanding that Focus on the Family runs a conservative, non-progressive Christian agenda means you have to accept their platform for exactly that. No more, no less. Do I like it? Heavens to Betsy, I do not. Brian Sabean, General Manager of the New York Giants, had his own quip about Tebow’s antics. But the bigger issue this upcoming Super Bowl Sunday is this:

Should CBS be airing a politically charged, divisive ad on the holiest of sports days?

And to continue, I’ll ask the following.

Would CBS run:

• A pro-choice ad (because having the right to choose is immoral)

• A pro-gay marriage ad (because homosexuals are immoral)

• An anti-persons with disabilities ad? (because those goddamn ramps and automatic doors really piss people off and raise development expenses)

It’s difficult to say in the current economy. If an advocacy group for one of the above ponied-up the $2.5 million going rate for a Super Bowl ad spot this year, who’s to say that CBS wouldn’t take the dough? ABC News offers a particularly interesting take:

“CBS is doing this for the money,” said Alex Jones, director of the Joan Shorenstein School of Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University. “It will indicate that a policy has changed. The networks have traditionally not put these kinds of ads on during the Super Bowl. This has been an area that has been kept relatively squeaky-clean of highly polarizing politics. There is no way to be putting in an anti-abortion ad without prompting the pro-abortion side of the debate to get their message across. This may be a new profit center.”

Money talks, discretion walks – that’s nothing new when it comes to advertising dollars in high-profile arenas like the Super Bowl. Erin Kotecki Vest (@QueenofSpain), former broadcast journalist, Huffington Post contributor and Director of Special Project for BlogHer weighs in:

“Screw Focus on the Family. Despite what CBS should or shouldn’t do, money talks. I say we talk with OUR money when that ad airs during the Super Bowl. Donate to Planned Parenthood when you see Tebow’s crybaby face on your TV come February 7th.”

We’ll circle back to Erin’s damn-skippy idea in a moment. But for now, the issue of broadcast integrity:

During Presidential races, networks air ads representing all walks of political thought. News broadcasts report the goings-on in particular campaigns. Commentary programs delve deeper into the issues, hosting guests who can speak intelligently (or not so intelligently) and offer their viewpoints and investigate beyond the facts. What I find to be so curious is how CBS has voluntarily put their network’s ass in a sling by opting to take $2.5 million in hush money to let this anti-abortion ad run during what is possibly the highest annual viewership instance with a projected 100 million viewers. Focus on the Family is simply befuddled about all the hubbub surrounding their ad:

“There is nothing political or controversial about the spot. It’s a personal story about the love between a mother and son.” ~ Gary Schneeberger, spokesperson for FOF

Hey Gary and CBS advertising execs – here are some thoughts to chew on:

1. On Super Bowl Sunday, I want to watch funny commercials and a fucking football game.

2. Correction: my boyfriend wants to watch funny commercials and a fucking football game while I cook up something delightful in the kitchen and run in when a funny commercial airs.

3. Some dudes spend the entire year planning their Super Bowl party – do you really think they want to hear about abortion between downs and dips in the chili con queso?

4. There is NO ONE who tunes into the Super Bowl to hear “a story about love between a mother and a son.” They tune in to watch football, for the ritual, hang with friends, drink a shitload of beer and fart in a room so full of people that no one notices.

I’m disappointed simply in the poor marketing decision made by FOTF and the equally polarizing decision made by CBS. At $2.5 million a pop for Super Bowl ad time, wouldn’t their ad met with less resistance, more acceptance and reach a more tractable audience had they chosen a prime time network show with an agreeable viewing demographic? If you’re looking to drive brand or message affinity, why do it in a way that you’re going to piss off the most people possible during an event meant to unite, not divide? And CBS – you’ve finally come out of your discretionary shell, pimping one side of the God ride on this one. If I were another advertiser on this year’s Super Bowl Sunday, I’d be pissed. No one’s even going to watch my ad. They’re going to be waiting for the God Bomb. If I were Anheuser Busch, I’d be digging through my advertising agreement and telling CBS to get fucked in a very out-of-wedlock way.

I sought-out the thoughts of a marketing and public relations pro to see if I happened to be behind the door they handed out the “good glue” in marketing school. Shelly Kramer of V3 Integrated Marketing out of Kansas City offered both personal and professional thoughts on the matter:

“The Superbowl is an All-American pastime. As such, can’t we manage to leave things like politics, religion AND things like abortion out of it altogether? I am confident when I say that if it were a pro-abortion ad, it wouldn’t even be considered. But it shouldn’t be about what you believe or about what I believe, any more than it should be about whether I believe in gay-rights and you don’t. What it should be about is the appropriateness of the forum. And for a major network to align themselves with this kind of message and air it in this kind of forum, is, to me, a dangerous strategic move. The backlash could be significant. If I were on their marketing or PR teams, I would be advising strongly against it. In fact, if I were a member of their legal team, I would be equally vehement about its inappropriateness.

It’s the Superbowl, for pete’s sake. Let’s leave it about sports – as it should be – and let the other issues remain out of it. Where they belong.”

As a marketing professional, writer and free-thinking woman, I want to hump Shelly’s leg. But let’s get to the bottom line already, shall we?

Do I care if Tim Tebow’s mom had an abortion or not? NO.

Do I care if he’s a kickass football player? NO.

Am I “offended” by the ad (seen or unseen)? A preemptive NO.

Does Tim Tebow’s presence in this world make my life better? NO.

Am I disappointed by the choice of a network to interrupt my upcoming Sunday filled with more junk food and camaraderie than you can shake a stick at by dropping the abortion elephant in the middle of my fucking living room? YES.

The elephant is going to eat all of my cocktail peanuts and that pisses me off.

It’s a Focus on Fuckery. I’m not surprised that money talks or that CBS has conveniently broadened their horizons with regards to “inoffensive” advertising content. Who knows how long the talks have been in the works on this particular ad – as the others they’ve recently aired on health care may have simply been laying the groundwork for the current high-profile debacle. I’m downright pissed that this huge, uninvited elephant is going to sit amongst MY family and friends on February 7^th. Focus on the Family? How about focus on your own damned family, CBS: your viewers, advertisers and those who are tuning in to celebrate the holy trinity of football, beer and funny commercials.

Amen, pass the queso. And let’s take Erin’s advice to heart: on Super Bowl Sunday, make a donation to Planned Parenthood.

And tell that uninvited elephant to stay the fuck away from the cocktail peanuts.

End Note: As a tie-in with last week’s discussion on “family,” Cara Ellison Halbirt (mother of 2, blogger, jewelry designer) has this to say about the stink: “Focus on the “Family?” I hate that we can only focus on one model of family as ‘right’. Families don’t fit so neatly into boxes. Why can’t we view love/families/people through a kaleidoscope? Lots of colors, angles and choices. Not one single model can be forced to accommodate everyone. ‘Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life’ is a wonderful concept practiced by all kinds of families in all kinds of ways. It’s a shame to saddle it with a single, rigid view of family.”

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

Focus on the Fuckery: CBS Aborts Good Judgment

Related posts:

1. CBS Abortion Ad A Classic Bait And Switch

Mr. Pugno ~

Erika Napoletano here – no relation to Janet or the other plethora of political Napoletanos running around out there. See, I got the name in the divorce. (Yes, the D-Word.) It was fancy, had a ring to it. While I didn’t want the relationship that went with the ring, I kept the snazzy name. I can already tell I’m your worst nightmare. I build broken homes.

I’ve been following your shenanigans for a while now and I have to say that I’m disappointed you played the “for the children” card. While I’m legally twenty years past being included with the children, I can remember what it was like growing up in a home with heterosexual parents.

They were divorced. Damn them and their selfishness, refusing to stay together for the children. My mother worked and went to school, my dad held a civil engineering job. My brother, sister and I were latchkey kids, microwaving after school snacks and learning to cook on nights mom got home late. We spent every other weekend at Dad’s, playing with model trains and running around his tiny little apartment until he told us to simmer down since people lived below him. Christ – kids really can’t run quietly. It was a bit of a buzzkill, but hey – those were the rules.

I’m not going to give you a story about wanting love, needing love or yearning for an intact household that my parents, who couldn’t find a way to live together, so unjustly deprived us. My brother, sister and I all graduated Summa Cum Laude from Nimitz High School in Houston, Texas (with little sis eeking out a class rank of 7^th ahead of my brother’s and my kindred score of 9^th in our class years…the pipsqueak) and equal honors from college. I went off to college on a full scholarship. My brother is currently pursing his Masters in Psychology and my sister a Masters in Library Science (in addition to being an ordained Lutheran Children’s Minister). They’re awesome kids – people I’m proud to call my brother and sister.

And my parents – my divorced parents – are pretty damn awesome as well.

See, children don’t need an intact, heterosexual household to succeed. They need love. Fellow blogger Sinclair Sexsmith (@MrSexsmith) took the words right out of my mouth when she so eloquently said:

“Children are best raised by folks who love them, care for them, provide their basic needs, nurture their creativity and strength, support them and believe in them. Though there is one dominant narrative for how families “should” look – the nuclear two-parent heterosexual household – there have been plenty of studies supporting family units that look different from that are just as valuable for the child. Aunts, uncles, grandparents, step-parents, foster parents – the structure doesn’t matter so much as the content.”

Content, my dear Mr. Pugno. Not context.

If I had been raised in the context of heterosexual parents who so obviously despised one another, who would I be today? Would I be an outspoken social media consultant and blogger-for-hire…write a weekly column for a website about sex toys and exploring sexuality…climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro…discovered a love for cycling…be wrapped in the daily embrace of friendships I’m proud to have earned and am learning to nurture more and more each day.

Would I?

My parents, heterosexual in their own right, gave me love and support as they knew how. The context of a single parent home gave me the opportunity to become self-sufficient and embrace the fact I had two parents who loved me – they just lived in different places. The content? Love. Love, love, love.

Mr. Pugno, Fuck You

But Mr. Pugno – fuck you and every one of your Protect Marriage supporters for saying that my childhood is worth less because I didn’t come from an intact heterosexual home. And double fuck you for condemning those who choose to live a life that doesn’t fit your “ideal” of a “marriage.”

I’m twice-divorced. Why? Well, it’s not because I’m a lesbian or that I don’t believe in marriage. I’m a die-hard romantic, believing strongly that, as the person I’ve come to be, I have a better set of tools today to build a successful marriage than I did when I was young, ignorant and stupid and decided to walk down the aisle with two men I truly loved and initiate unions that would ultimately not last.

Marriage didn’t fail me: it was the failure of the human relationship.

What you’re telling me is that a heterosexual relationship has more value than a same-sex relationship. That one version of love is more important than another. Actually, I’m willing to entertain that notion, but here’s the rub:

A Challenge

If you can tell me that heterosexual couples are able to feel and live with love more deeply than two people of the same sex (and substantiate your case) – I’ll suck your dick on national television. Now, before you get all hot about the blowjob, I get to counter you arguments. I will introduce you to Amy and Cindiman, Cheryl and Kate, Elisa and Megan. These are six women I’m very lucky to have in my life – and they’re lesbians.

And they all visibly experience a love for their partners – their wives, if you will – that makes my heart skip a beat each time I see them. And once you meet these beautiful women, then we’ll go on a field trip to Walmart. There, I’ll show you some really awesome heterosexual couples with children. If we’re lucky, we’ll get some, Shut the fuck ups and I’m gonna beat yer asses while we’re there.

It’s the Content, Not the Context

Then I’ll take you to an egg donor agency (Gifted Journeys in Studio City, CA), one run by my best friend, who actively and openly works with same-sex couples. See, they’re in the Building a Family business. On a daily basis, they see people who want children more than many people who end up with them the old fashioned way. Many of their recipient parents are gay, lesbian or transgendered. They understand that it is the content of the family, not the context, which creates supportive and loving households. For the children.

The Facts

I was fortunate enough to be provided a link by a social media acquaintance and (gasp) lesbian Mari Kurisato. It’s a pretty kickass study performed by the Australian Psychological Society (2007). Not only does it indicate that same-sex parenting relationships typically share the child-rearing burden more evenly, but that even gay male couples exhibit more active parenting roles than their heterosexual counterparts. (Wanna dig, Pugno? It’s on pages 17 and 18 of the study. Though since the study is all “gay,” I’m sure you wouldn’t dare bring it up in a browser window for fear of your computer catching the Gay Virus.)

Heather Cornwell was also gracious enough to share with me her thoughts on the beauty of an intact heterosexual home: she’s the product of one.

“Regarding the argument that children are best served by an intact male/female marriage, I would just point out that environment is only a partial determiner in the outcome of a childhood.  If we extrapolate that theory, then I should be a perfectly balanced, straight, Christian female.  Instead, I am a balanced, gay, agnostic female. My parents are still married, and demonstrated a great deal of affection towards each other, and to my siblings and myself.  I am a happy lesbian, my sister is a single, divorced mother and my brother is a single, divorced father.  Whether or not my parents were in an intact heterosexual relationship had little to no bearing on how my siblings and I have developed into adults.”

Your organization purports the following:

“Traditional marriage is the foundation of society and has served our state well for centuries. California’s constitutional marriage amendment exists to strengthen society, encourage monogamous and loving marriages and to provide the optimal environment to ensure the well being of children.”

Ensure the well-being of children. How noble. I’ll start heading towards a close with some interesting examples, all of which blow your reasoning more effectively than a $20 hooker:

• Edward Albee (gay) – Adopted by a heterosexual couple. Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright (and one of my professors in college)

• Patricia Cornwell (bisexual) – Product of a broken home, adopted. Best-selling author and former Medical Examiner for the State of Virginia.

• Truman Capote (gay) – Abandoned by his parents (along with the rest of his siblings). Literary icon.

• Dalai Lamas (celibate) – Once recognized, boys are removed from the home of their birth parents to be trained for their future station. While they do not lose contact with their birth family, they are not raised by them.

• President Barack Obama (married, heterosexual) – Parents divorced when he was two. Last I checked, he holds the highest political office in the United States (much to your chagrin, I’m sure).

• Menendez Brother (killed their parents) – heterosexual married parents.

• John Wayne Gacy (serial killer) – heterosexual married parents.

Your rules fail you, Mr. Pugno. If heterosexuality is the stepping stone to familial and developmental perfection, you need to get to work on doctoring the history books ASAP.

Legislating Morality Makes Me Queasy

Mr. Pugno, the thought that your group of a mere 100-some-odd thousand folks who feel that they can drive to legislate morality makes me queasy. Considering the pro-Proposition 8 campaign raised $39.9 million in 2008 and continues to spend taxpayer dollars by tying up the court system tells me that there are a lot of people, while entitled to their beliefs, aren’t secure in them enough to nose the everloving fuck out of everyone else’s business and tend to their own families. And Heather, whom we met earlier, backs that up:

“In my opinion, this country was founded on NOT allowing the government to make our choices for us. Granted, the pilgrims were fleeing religious oppression, but I think that any oppression goes against the founding principles of our nation. If I choose to marry my partner, have children or not have children, the government should not be given a say in that decision. More to the point, the government should not DEMAND a say in that decision.”

The way I see it is this: you’re telling me there was almost $40 million available (in addition to the $43 million raised by anti-Prop 8 forces in 2008) in our economy to support the persecution people for being who they are instead of helping people become who they want to be? I’m speechless. And I’m sure the State of California, in its dismal financial state, is appalled as well. We’re a country that sings the hymn of human potential yet you fail to realize that this song is comprised of varying voices.

Stay the Fuck Out Of My Bedroom

In closing, I don’t think everything you and Protect Marriage are doing is bad. You’ve done one amazing thing that few others have been able to achieve: showing the world what is possible when an overzealous herd gets a little cash and begins substituting the word “government” for “religion.” I’m not on board with that. I’ll kindly have the government stay out of my bedroom, out of my vagina and out of the affairs of people with whom you wouldn’t deign to share a dinner table. “The children,” as you say, need protecting from people and organizations like you and yours, not from same-sex couples. Close-mindedness is a blight on the development of mankind. And the children – the future of this nation, the reminder that anything is possible and the glimmer of hope that winks over the horizon with each sunrise and sunset we’re blessed with witnessing.

Sincerely,

Erika Napoletano aka @DearRedhead/@RedheadWriting
Writer, Disruptive Presence, Devil’s Advocate…

PS: the offer for the blowjob still stands. Line up your case studies and I’ll line-up mine. If it’s a tie, we’ll have a kiss-off to determine the winner.

End note: The Executive Board of The American Anthropological Association, the world’s largest organization of anthropologists, released the following statement on February 26, 2004 in response to President Bush’s call for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage as a threat to civilization:

“The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.

The Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association strongly opposes a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples.”

Yeah. Suck it.

Special thanks to the following people who shared their insights with me:

Sinclair Sexsmith (Sugarbutch Chronicles and Radical Masculinity)

Natalie Hjelsvold

Heather Cornwell

Mari Kurisato

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

Proposition H8: An Open Letter to Andy Pugno

Related posts:

1. Open Letter to All The Men Who Maybe Want to Sleep With Me
2. An Open Letter To Blackberry – Quit Being Such Stuck Up Prudes
3. The End Is Near For Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

“I like simple pleasures, like butter in my ass, lollipops in my mouth. That’s just me. That’s just something that I enjoy.” ~Floyd (Boogie Nights)

Whatever Santa brought you for Kwanzaweenkuhmas, it’s time to bring those gifts along into a new year. My resolution for 2010? I’m keeping my kinks. Gone are dairy and gluten, fast food and Fuddrucker’s. Also out the window are those delightful little jalapeno poppers filled with cheesy goodness.

But my kinks? Fuck you, fuck me – they’re here to stay.

Have you ever been in bed with someone and they seem totally appalled by something you like? It’s a huge turn off. And not only that, it kinda makes you feel like an ass for asking in the first place, right? Whether it’s oral sex, a “toy night,” spanking or dressing up like a schoolgirl and being taught a lesson for being a very, very naughty girl some back door action, why do there have to be kinks that a lover calls out of bounds? Or…have you done it to someone?

Of course, we all have our limits. Not everyone is into midgets in lederhosen or peeing on one another. But isn’t that what communication is for?

I have a new year’s resolution that perhaps you can help me with:

Can we make 2010 the year where we talk to our lovers instead of bitch about them to our buddies and girlfriends?

Novel fucking concept. Literally.

Me? For all that’s holy, honey – pull my hair, spank my ass and talk dirty to me. In exchange, I’ll do all those little (and not so little) things you like. Those things that make you make those noises. When it comes to our lovers, it’s those noises were all after, aren’t we? Maybe I’m talking out of my ass here (and guys, please feel free to chime in), but what gets you off more: going down on someone or going down on someone and hearing them respond? Moan with delight…arch her back a little…watch his knees quiver. That’s what communication is all about.

From The Redhead, here’s your Top 5 List of Things to Do (in bed) for 2010:

1. Try something new. Something you’re not sure if you’ll like. But try it. You know you want to…
2. Get some tools. You know, sex toys. It can be something as simple as a vibrator or some lube, but if you don’t already have a treasure chest…start shopping. Intercourse is one thing. SEX is something completely different. And in my opinion, when you bring love into the equation, it can be mind-boggling to combine the two into something completely and utterly exquisite.
3. Go ahead – ask. Take a minute out of your predictable sex play and ask your lover: what can I do for you? And don’t take “You’re doing it” or “I’m fine” for an answer. You’re intimate with this person. Trade secrets. My philosophy on fantasies is that you need to make them realities every once and awhile…it makes room for new ones. 
4. Listen a little more. As I alluded to before, we’re all in search of those noises. Do you really know what makes them? Take the time to listen to your partner’s body instead of your libido. What makes his balls jump a little bit? What makes her clit wink at you? Does she tense up when you touch her there but moan when you touch her here? Does he like nibbling? How do you know? Take an audible inventory and couple it with your tactile approach. I guarantee – your lover will thank you.
5. Define your fucking vocabulary. Does your lover prefer it if you say “dick” or “cock?” Is it her “hoo hoo” or her “pussy?” When you talk to your lover about their body with terms they appreciate, you’re telling them: I listen and I want to please you. You’re also opening the door for your lover to get their fucking vocabulary in order as well. Need some help? Just say, “I love it when you tell me how much you like my dick,” or, “I love the way you eat my pussy.” There. Explained. ‘Nuf said.

Got a question for The Redhead? You can get in on the column action by using my anonymous submission form or find me daily on Ask Dear Redhead on Formspring. I’d love to chat with you…and I’ll answer anything. Well, most anything. A girl’s gotta have her secrets!

This week’s question is all about resolve and becoming the master of one’s own domain (a brilliant way to start the new year, I say!).

Dear Redhead~

I’m thinking about taking “Choking the Chicken” to a whole new level. I don’t want to be found asphyxiated because the chair slid out from under me doing that whole auto-erotic asphyxiation thing. My roommate already gives me enough shit. I was thinking more along the lines of cock rings. Any advice on where to start?

Choked Up

Dear Choked Up~

Well, it sounds like Rosie Palm and her five sisters already have a fine working relationship with Captain Fantastic. Cock rings are more designed to make you last longer during intercourse, so if you’re looking for ways to make “alone time” a bit more fun, how about something like a Fleshlight? Innocuous enough, it’s the number one-selling sex toy for men. Easy to use (I’m told – see, I don’t have a dick), moderately priced and available in many models, you can avoid the whole choking side of things and just get jolly by jerking off in a new way. And if you get one, do tell us what you think – after all, I’m The Redhead and you’re the dude. I’ll take your word on a Fleshlight over mine any day! Happy new year to you, Rosie, the sisters and the Captain.

And now…this week’s contest will help you with Step 2 above: win a shiny, sexy OhMiBod Freestyle music driven vibe! Check out Crissy’s Hilarious review here.

Riddle me this: what’s YOUR sexual New Year’s Resolution? Make it good and we’ll rise to the occasion and reward you appropriately. Winner will be announced on Thursday January 15th!

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

Top 5 List Of Things To Do (in bed) For 2010

Related posts:

1. The Top Six Types Of Lousy Lovers
2. The Redhead Is Coming

And this week, in all honesty: I’m completely unsexy.

Aside from having a “fat” day, my head seems to have meandered and found its way back up my ass. I just feel…meh.

There’s nothing different when I look in the mirror. Well, aside from what appears to be the inkling of a pimple on my chin. Having turned three-seven last week, you’d think that the acne would have left for teener pastures. Wrong. Hello, zit zapper cream – my name is Cougar.

There’s nothing different about the way my jeans fit. Matter of fact, they’re one pair away from my skinny jeans. Any other day, that would be fucking awesome. Today – it’s meh.

Having (recently? Not really) ended something that should have ended much sooner, I’m fairly sure my mood begs the question: am I soup? Soup is runny and fills the space it’s given. No matter what kinda chunks you put in it, soup remains soup. It’s never really divine. Not really interesting. More of something to warm you up or tide you over until whatever’s next arrives. And damn. That’s unsexy.

When something ends, the questions begin.

Was it my fault?
Is it me?
Am I fat?
Was I clingy?
Did I talk too much?
Am I fat?
Was it the sex? Was it not good enough? Am I not open enough? Am I too open?
Did I leave the iron on?
How do I believe anything he said?
Was it a lie?
Was I lying to myself?
What the fuck is the matter with me?!?!

That whole laundry list of questions – well, it’s pretty unsexy, too. Filled with self-doubt and lacking the sass and self-confidence that I carry around like a purse dog. The fact of the matter is I’m up to my nostrils in Tit Soup and I can’t seem to drink my way out.

I know I’m a sex, dating and relationship advice columnist – but how do I serve my readers when I’m sitting here in soup with Green Day lyrics running through my head:

When masturbation’s lost its fun
You’re fucking breaking

Where my head is at – I’m not even thinking about the hey, diddle diddle. And what’s worse: I’m not a “moper!” For fuck sake, I’m a doer and a shove-it-up-yer-arse if ya hates it, Preeeeeeecious kinda gal.

I can’t even shove something up my own ass since my head is currently up there. Awesome.

So there it is, my readers: Dear Redhead is in the soup. I don’t wanna diddle my way out, I don’t even want to go on a date. Today, at least. Someday would be nice, I’m sure. But that’s the thing when you live your life in words in the public eye: it has to be honest. If someone would please grab the Cat and the Fiddle (along with an OhMiBod Freestyle) and jump (or GET jumped) over the moon for me, it’d be appreciated. I’ll be out of the soup soon, but today…well, it’s tomato basil bisque (and that shit is going to stain).

Here’s where I shift focus from my soup to someone else’s stew…you’ll see what I mean:

Dear Redhead~

HELP HELP HELP – I need an expert opinion and quick!

It started innocently. A night out that ended with three-way nakedness. The suspects: me, my husband (together 10 years) and a mutual male friend.

Since the first incident happened, it’s happened again, to the point where it is almost IMPLIED if we see each other, we’ll sleep together.

On top of that, our mutual friend has started escalating our communications. He sends texts, videos, pics, emails, calls, etc. He knows my hubby’s schedule and tends to get in touch with me when I am bound to be alone. At first I played along, thinking it was just us bull-shitting and joking around. Now, he even asks to see me alone.

What do I say to my friend to stop it without harming the relationship? I’m fine with the threesome part, since my DH is a consensual partner. But with the texts, emails, pics – I feel guilty about it happening. He is also in a committed relationship and she probably doesn’t know about this.

I’m not ready to stop being friends. Are we destined to be stuck here? Can we ever go back to ‘just friends’?

Signed,

Threesome Conundrum

Dear Threesome Conundrum~

Well, m’dear Threesome…that’s some stew you and DH have cooked up! Waaaay beyond my soup du jour, I’ll say. Let’s get down to the broth, shall we?

First – this is done. And there’s a very simple reason it’s done: your male friend is cheating on his partner. Using only the info you’ve given, there’s a fourth party that needs to consent to your three-way frolicking: his girlfriend. Many couple swing, and many not even regularly. More often, even, it happens with friends as they’re perceived as “safe.” While there’s nothing inherently wrong with your three-way fun, what bothers me the most is the absent “fourth.”

And YOU are the one to define the parameters of this relationship, not your “friend.” If he was truly your friend, all sex aside, he’d respect the fact that you’re in a committed relationship as well – with your husband – and not try to cross the lines from threesome into a twosome without DH’s input. Swinging dynamics are very personal and require consent among all parties. Otherwise, someone is going to cross the line, which appears to be what’s happening now.

And you’re doing nothing to ruin your friendship – it sounds like your friend is doing all that himself. Sit down and have the talk – about the none-the-wiser girlfriend and about YOUR lines for propriety. And then…you need to decide what you will and won’t share with your husband about the situation.

This week, you’re cordially invited to sit on the rim of my soup bowl and tell me: what’s the longest you have gone without the Hey Diddle Diddle and why? Log your comments below and your abstinence could win you a sexy OhMiBod Freestyle (see the Hilarious review here)! We will decide the winner and results will be posted on…Monday December 21st at 5pm.

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

When Masturbation’s Lost Its Fun, You’re Fucking Breaking

Related posts:

1. Breaking Up Can Get Downright Ugly

A story behind this week's Naugh-Tee: This shirt ended a relationship (term used loosely, standby). I went ice climbing with a group of friends and guy I was dating back in 2007. I had this tank in a tee at the time and wore it to a big dinner one night at the Ouray Ice Festival. When I took off my coat, my date says, "Why you gotta advertise?" And I'm like, umm...it's a t-shirt and last I checked, you weren't complaining about the Mouth Hugs. Anywhoo, he was bent six ways till Sunday and we ultimately broke up. But that's OK since HE FORGOT TO TELL ME HE WAS FUCKING MARRIED! *WHOOPSIE!*

The stories aren’t uncommon: an airport luggage search that yields a…well…one of those. Mine was a day back in 1999 on a trip to Guam from Japan. A military wife at the time, I usually avoided most of the “additional search” rigamarole but I guess they had my number that day at Narita Airport in Tokyo. The look on my face as this slight Japanese man held my Eager Beaver in his latex-clad hands was nothing short of mortified. In a country where owning a firearm is illegal, I’m confident that my possession of the Eager Beaver was nothing short of a national security threat. Then again, this was a country with vend-o-porn and love hotels. Perhaps that’s why Slight Man in Latex Gloves gently put it back in my luggage and waved me onward.

I never told my then-husband about the incident. Or about my tendency to be a bit hard on The Beav while he was deployed.

Now that we live in a day and age where you have two shitty choices when you travel:

Leave shit you need at home (sex toys, shampoo, hair mousse, shaving cream) and fly with a carry-on bag only

or

Check a bag and take it all with you at the risk of never seeing it again.

Fuck that. Travel with The Redhead. I pack light and I’ll make sure you never have an embarrassing (or unwanted) body cavity search from the Friendly TSA folk. Now, ToyWithMe visited the issue of sex toys and travel back in June, but not with The Redhead twist.

There are two things always in my carry-on luggage:

An Oral B Battery-Powered Pulsar Toothbrush and a Neutrogena Wave.

Here’s an equation to help you understand my line of reasoning.

The toothbrush is, without a doubt, the most inexpensive little basket of sexual goodness I’ve ever experienced. It’s never in question going through airport security and operates like a champ. I’m not talking bristle-side down, if you’re wondering. Flip that puppy over to the flat side behind the bristles. Yes. Yessssss, preeeeecious.

And the Wave. Brilliant. Neutrogena has long been a favorite of mine as a manufacturer of pseudo-sex toys. I’ve had this little number for years and it’s outlived many of it’s purpose-driven accomplices. Really, Neutrogena: what were you thinking? Two speeds. An ample, well-proportioned vibrating surface. Easy-to-clean exterior. I’m thinking you made a vibrator and called it a facial cleansing tool.

Just like you did with the Wave. Purse and carry-on friendly, the Wave will fit anywhere and go anywhere you go. Now, the flat surface of the Wave is covered with Velcro (ummm…NOT comfy), so you’re going to want to cover that with something…like one of the super soft cleansing pads. Or a sock if you’re in Chicago and forgot cleansing pads. Just sayin’.

Forget the “body massagers.” Forget going without because the trip is “only three days.” If your family is anything like mine, you’re going to need a little “happy ending” when you close the doors this holiday season and climb into that twin bed in your old room. I don’t know what led me to explore any of these things, but hey – I masturbate with toothbrushes and you can, too. Kinda makes you look at that Orbit gum chick in a whole new way. Clean! (ding) Awwyeah.

I don’t know what brought that to mind, either. Come to think of it. I’ve met many-a-dude who would bend the Orbit Gum chick over the closest available whatever and do his own drilling. Right. OK. Stopping now. Let’s move on to this week’s contest:

You guys really loved the fact that I’d love to have a mouth full of Joanie Pie. (Note to self: more girl-on-girl action in Dear Redhead.) Thanks for all of the comments on your never-to-be-had movie and TV crushes – we’ll be announcing the winner of the OhMiBod vibe at 5pm EST today!

For this week’s contest, riddle The Redhead this: What’s your naughtiest apparel incident? It can be something as innocent as this week’s Naugh-Tee story or something more tawdry. Do tell! Whisper sweet nothings into The Redhead’s ear…I’m a voyeur by nature and love to eavesdrop. While you’re whispering, you can whisper me a happy birthday (it’s today!). OMFG. LOL. The Sweater Kittens and I thank you in advance and will be delighted to line up for our spanking!

Leave your answer in the comments section below and the Holy Fucking Trinity (@DearRedhead @ToyWithMe and @Mr_Puck) will announce the winner next Thursday, December 17 at 5pm EST!

And now…this week’s Dear Redhead question:

Dear Redhead~

Why is it OK for girls to have sex toys but not guys? I feel as if a girl finds out I have a Fleshlight or a cockring, she’ll think I’m a freak but her stash of vibrators is AOK? Help a guy out here.

Double Standard

Dear Double Standard~

You’re completely right and it’s completely wrong! Why is it that girls can keep a toy chest and men seem only entitled to their own chest? It’s bullshit, through and through. There are a ton of fun toys for guys out there. The Fleshlight, Lelo Bo cockring, bondage accessories and anything you might like to use with a partner. Guys like gadgets! Holy shit. With the whole ‘teledildonics’ thing coming onto the scene, men actually have cooler options than women do for…er…going solo. (If you don’t believe me, check out the Real Touch.)

I’m wondering if you’re more weirded out by telling your girl that you think toys are cool or by the fact that you have them. I’ll address it in three bold strokes (heh) and hope that maybe I can answer the unasked part of your question:

1) There is intimacy. And then there is fucking. You can use toys with both, but when it comes to intimacy, you’re not going to whip out the keys to your Secret Stash from square one. Intimacy takes time. Fucking, on the other hand…well, you may as well wear the keys to that drawer around you neck when you’re out trolling for girl scouts.

2) All great sex play involves communication. If you can’t talk to your girl about what you like and want…why is she your girl? As I said, intimacy takes time to develop, but don’t you want to be on a path of developing a meaningful relationship with someone who feeds your kink instead of squashes it?

3) Some toys isolate. Others bring you closer. If you’ve never used a sex toy with a woman, it provides a really intimate opportunity for a guy to see how their girl gets off. We masturbate just like you. And just like you, we know how to take surface streets or the highway to get where we want to go. There’s no shame in going solo or sharing. If you let them, sex toys can help you discover things you didn’t even know about your own sexual preferences. Those discoveries lead to better sex. Period.

Bottom line: build your toy chest to suit your preferences. Build relationships that support healthy lines of communication, both inside and out of the bedroom. Screw the societal stigma that says it’s OK for girls to have toys but not boys.

Guys. Dig. Gadgets.

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

Get Off and Take Off: How to Sneak Sex Toys Past the TSA

Related posts:

1. Traveling With Sex Toys
2. When Children Find Your Sex Toys
3. Dear Redhead’s Sex Toy Poll

I remember three seasons ago when I first laid eyes on Joan Holloway. Yes, my inner lesbian screamed. YES! Porcelain skin, auburn tresses and hips that would bring an aircraft carrier coming into port to a halt a clear mile away from the pier. Now THAT was a woman, I thought. I wanted to kiss her.

Moreso, I wanted to run my fingertips across her cheekbones. Down her neck. Feel her breasts stashed inside a Playtex bra underneath her feminine frock-du-jour. Run my hands over her hips and celebrate the fact that she had hips and was shaped more like an hourglass than Pete Campbell

There have been moments throughout the past three seasons that I have wanted nothing more than to have Joan Holloway (now Harris since she’s gone and married some dipshit wannabe surgeon. I applauded when she smashed that vase over his head in season three. If you haven’t seen the episode, sorry I fucked that up for you…). I am a girly girl who is a flag-waving fan of the good ‘ol Texas Hangdown (read: dick), but I’d totally hit for the same team if I could have Joan.

Call me crazy, but I think there is something completely luscious in dressing for dinner and putting on your good pearls for the evening. Dabbing on a shade of lipstick in a gold, ridged tube that stains your lips even after a man’s kissed it off completely. I wonder what it felt like the first time a man’s hand slid up past your hemline, feeling the tops of your stockings. Hormones ranging and society shouting whore! as you pushed his hand away and your heart settled from your throat back into your chest beneath a bra shaped more like a straitjacket than a piece of lingerie.

Joan’s got it: the sex appeal, the moxie. The body that would turn a priest to male prostitute. She has what porn is lacking: a package. Pictures are pretty, but when Joan’s red hair tumbles down from her pent-up ‘do, I have no shame saying that, with every ounce of my heterosexuality, I want it to fall on my face. Strands, in my mouth. I want to bite them. Bite her, the ample apple she is. You can’t tell me there’s not something…wickedly sweet…about the prospect of messing up something so pretty as one of these ladies. And knowing you were the one who did the deed. It’s possession, pure and simple. To have something so feminine and seemingly delicate and remove her from her shell by its back zipper and garter belt. It’s private – that’s what attracts me. I can imagine a bedroom or boardroom, the door slammed closed as the frantic undressing begins.

But this, I know: Joan would probably bite me harder than I’d ever dare bite her, the naughty, naughty little bitch. In the morning, I’d send her a hand-written Crane thank you card.

My lust for Joanie Dear is the perfect occasion for announcing: Dear Redhead has a new column sponsor AND a new contest this week to win an awesome prize! If you tell me about your number one never-to-be-had TV or movie crush (and the scene that “had you at hello”), you’ll win the sexy OhMiBod iPod-compatible vibrator! Just plug this baby into your iPod or iPhone and you, too can have the music in you. Oh My. Leave your comment below and I’ll announce the winner on Thursday December 10th!

This week’s question for The Redhead:

Dear Redhead~

My boyfriend grew up in a very sheltered home. I understand this and try and explain stuff to him as best as I can when he asks me about things relating to sex. The other day though…he struck me speechless with the question: “So what actually happens when a guy masturbates?” Now, I’ve answered his queries about periods, tampons and wet dreams to name a few but this one totally threw me…a guy who doesn’t understand masturbation? Do you know of a website, book, or something I could show to him to help him out?

Sex Ed

Dear Sex Ed~

Sounds like you’ve got a real project on your hands, sister! First, you must really care about this guy to spend the time being his sexual guide. It’s no simple undertaking. There are a few thoughts I’ll put out there as you work with your guy on putting out. I hope they help:

1. Does he have many male friends? It sounds like he might be flying pretty light in the dude department. Encouraging your guy to pursue more male friendships could do wonders for having some “guy input” on his sexuality AND lighten the load on you to explain every little detail.
2. Don’t know a gentle way of saying this, but have you ever jerked him off? I think that simple act alone would answer his question. If he’s new to masturbation, you’re probably going to be waiting in line behind Left Hand and Right Hand for awhile once he gets a grip on the concept!
3. I’ll be the asshole here and say that you need to embrace the concept that you’re this guy’s first. And you probably won’t be his last. You don’t need to feel obligated to send him off to the Land of Strange with a matching set of luggage and a new sofa.
4. As for books, why don’t you try the Good Vibrations Guide to Sex and perhaps Sex for One? They could be excellent places for a beginner to begin his sexual journey (and lighten your teaching load in the process!).

Post from: Sex Toy Reviews

I’d Totally Hit For The Same Team If I Could Do Joan Holloway

Related posts:

1. When Masturbation’s Lost Its Fun, You’re Fucking Breaking
2. Dear Redhead – You’re Offensive