THE MASCULINIST BLOGOSPHERE EXPLODES OVER GIVING WOMEN ORAL SEX.

How does the average masculinist stand on giving women pleasure directly on the Spot? Do they hate women if they don't like oral sex? Are masculinists women haters? Are they gay? Are they bull-gay masculinists?

Hate to give oral sex? Hate the smell and the taste? A Guide to Your Inner Hatred of Women.

She doesn't like oral sex? How to get through the lies she tells you.

What is it about women expecting oral sex these days? Did you know that sex for teenagers is defined by the boy giving the girl oral sex? He says it ends the date quickly. After she comes, he's off the hook! What is it about women grabbing the back of men's heads and pulling them down? What happens your lady wants oral sex, but never regular sex? What's wrong with men that won't give oral sex

Women write in and thank men who give good head and enjoy it! Thanks for all of womenkind!

Men: 10 Techniques for Giving Good Head to Your Woman. How to get better at oral sex. Oral Sex for women (it's just expected now).

If some people had a few more things to worry about, they would not be overanalyzing BJs.

Litmus-testing feminism with this subject is trivial. Even arguing that it has something to say about women's empowerment is trivial. When women have assured access to birth control, the choice of work or staying at home with kids, protection from rapists, the guarantee that if they kill their rapist it will be seen as self-defense, and a number or other things, all around the world, then I will entertain trivial discussions on this kind of upper middle class sexual freakiness-as-equality dumbass analysis. We don't have equitable divorce laws, stronger protections for children, better protection for workers, and some people are left out of health care, clean water,etc. Just why is this subject important in the larger scheme of things?

But right now, most normal women have more important things to think about. The adults are worrying about paying bills, not the existential meaning of the BJ.

This is an example of the excesses that give feminism a bad name.

Sorry domini, that’s pretentious, condescending bullshit. The essence of the secular humanism that emerged from the Enlightenment is the recognition that every area of human conduct and belief is a legitimate subject of critical inquiry. People spend far less time contemplating such high-minded concerns as employee safety regulation and equitable divorce statutes than they do their next blowjob, which more than justifies the intellectual curiosity lavished on even such “trivial” matters. The cosmopolitanism of this worldview is precisely why a hatred of secular, liberal education is characteristic of extremist political ideologies of every stripe, from Maoism to Republicanism.

A few people seem to be arguing that this was all a joke by Twisty to start an argument. Ok, bad joke, good argument. Sorry if I'm not "familiar" enough with Twisty, but hey, she's the first comedienne I've ever heard of who I needed a warning going in that she's a funny.

As for the lady (jenn I think) who doesn't think that men's magazines obsess over pleasuring women, you don't look at the "Lad Mags" very often. If you did you'd know that your satire, while damn funny, is also rather truthy.

Well I'm not a poor reader. I read your post just fine. I never thought you were critizing lesbians and certainly didn't take you task for doing so. I did respond to what you said. You said that lesbians are not interested in having sex with men and would prefer that no one else did either.

As a lesbian and a woman with a large group of lesbian friends I think I have a much better idea about how lesbians feel about sex than you do. I simply pointed out that me and the majority of lesbians I have ever known don't care what women and men do together as long as it makes them happy and we certainly aren't advocated an end to all sex with men (I assume that would leave both gay and straight men pretty unhappy.)

There is nothing inherently oppressive about the blow-job. The circumstances surrounding it *can* be oppressive - that loathsome hands pushing down the head thing, which, if any male did to me, I would promptly bite down hard on his dick - doesn't mean that it *is* oppressive. Heterosexual sex and rape, mechanically speaking, are similar - but heterosexual sex is NOT rape because the circumstances are different. If, in your relationship, you resent giving head and you feel like you are being made to do something you don't like doing and aren't getting anything in return for it, of course it's bad. But that doesn't make the act itself bad. And that sort of issue can be solved with communication. So don't you dare try to tell me I'm a bad feminist just because I have a healthy and enjoyable sexual relationship. Why is it that people who claim I've been brainwashed are the ones demanding I always think exactly the same way as them?

Then say, "Let's start a debate," instead of lobbing bullshit and then calling it fertilizer.

"Sorry domini, that’s pretentious, condescending bullshit. The essence of the secular humanism that emerged from the Enlightenment is the recognition that every area of human conduct and belief is a legitimate subject of critical inquiry."

No, it's not. It's navel gazing. Secular humanism and the Enlightenment did NOT argue for nitpicking and dissecting the trivial. Rousseau did not sit around nitpicking the trivial. Secular humanism and the Enlightenment argued that human rights flowed from humans, not the state, and dicussed what those rights and the condition should be.

The Voting Rights Act is held up for renewal, birth control access is under attack in several places, soldiers are dying in Iraq. Wasting time on this is not legitimate, it is a distraction that keeps progressives from converting ordinary people to their vision of security, equality, and economic progress. It makes progressives look trivial and obsessed with trivia. Why should anyone allow progressives control of national security, or even take progressive discussion of such seriously, when it is conflated in importance in discussion of private sexual practices?. This kind of inquiry is why people legitimately ask "what are these people thinking" and "why should I be a feminist"? It's exactly this kind of stupidity that allows authoritarians on the right and the left to argue that liberty = licence, and that they know "Best" for us. After all, the puritans who also navel gazed blowjobs in the 90s thought it was a "legitimate sunject for critical inquiry". That navel gazing allowed Al Qaeda to grow while the government and the public was wasting time and energy on this exact same stupid subject. Navel gazing about blow jobs kept the public and government officials from paying attention to the Nigerian embassy bombing, the bombing of the Cole, and a number of important events. Sometimes people, sex is just sex. Far too often in America, we become so mesmerized by sex that we allow important things (like our jobs) to be destroyed. "My job went overseas because of corporately owned politicians, but no one is getting oppressive bjs or abortions". Are you seeing the practical problem now?

While you fiddle, Rome burns.