Geeez. People are kind of sensitive, and rather poor readers. I didn't criticize lesbians at all in my post. I have nothing at all against lesbians.

I merely criticized radical feminists, and pointed out the awkward fact that a statistically improbable number of them happen to be lesbians.

Such as, apparently, Twisty. Personally I don't think this is merely coincidental. But rather believe that radical feminism is an ideology that lesbians may find particularly appealing.

I agree that Twisty is a joke, and kind of appreciate her talent for subversion. But I do think that people like her are ultimately not terribly funny, because they are just promoting intolerance and prejudice towards men. And using a mumbo-jumbo pseudo marxist ideology to try and legitimize their views.

The story goes that Tallullah Bankhead agreed to a date with a English nobleman who was, as they say, beautiful on the inside. The following day, a friend asked her about the evening out with Lord Henry.

"As early as possible, I went down on him," Miss Bankhead answered. Her friend was shocked, "Why, Tallullah, why?"

"Anything, darling...anything to get away from that face!"

"Feminist blogosphere explodes over dick" is catchy, but rude and wrong. Some bloggosphere, somewhere maybe, but feminism doesn't give a rats ass about sucking cock.

Feminisim is concerned with one thing only -- and that is that Equal protection under the law shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex....where sex means gender.

Feminism is about my vote, my money and my rights under the law as a female being equal to that of a male, no more and no less. Feminism has no opinion what-so-ever on my fun under the table. It's mum on hummers, hand jobs, who picks up the check, lipstick, skirt lengths, or bikini waxing.

Broadsheet knows better than to echo an ill-concieved link between feminism and amusing opinions on something so irrelevant. Smoke 'em if ya got 'em is fine, but the bloggers who profess to be speaking as feminists should shut it on bj's. Shame on them for even entertaining the notion that feminists don't/won't go down. Of course we do, just like some of us are right handed.

Look, y'all. this whole thing started on Twisty's blog in typical twisty style. Anyone who reads her knows what she was doing: Using hyperbole to make a point, start a discussion, and vent some rage at the same time. And a woman seriously asking how she can do away with an important reflex just so she can meet an abstract goal of blow-job authority needs to be analyzed.

So many of these responses remind me of my freshmen when they first have to analyze a book or poem. "Why can't we just read it and enjoy it, huh? Why do we have to think about it, huh? Why make it so hard?"

Take this reaction to 10X when you even suggest that people THINK about what they do (or want to do) in bed.

The answer is that the ability to analyze and apply that analysis to all texts (and that includes sexual acts) may be the only way that we can uncover societal prejudice and PERSONAL prejudice.

Sorry, kids. The personal is political. Yes, you have the right to make whatever decision you want. That doesn't ,however, mean you should turn your brain off and never go beyond the surface.

And, no. I'm not anti-sex or anti-male or anti-hot sex. I give SO blow jobs, we have anal sex, we do BDSM in which I'm the bottom. But, I fully understand where those desires evolved, and why I do them. I don't clothe them in the guise of "It's FEMINIST" to act like a slave and have my master beat the crap out of me while calling me a slut.

NOT FEMINIST.

Blow jobs can be very much so NOT FEMINIST. There is no problem with bringing to the surface the cultural freight and ideological baggage associated with them. ("Suck my dick" as a pretty rude insult strike a bell?). They, like any other act, can be neutral, but that doesn't mean the strings that attach them to a cultural web never existed.

Despite her failure to provide a firm endorsement of the relevant act, Rebecca has been of tremendous service to mankind. As a direct result of this article and the posted letters, thousands of Salon-reading women, no doubt, will attempt to rediscover the joy that comes from providing joy in the manner specified. Thus, courtesy of Salon, thousands of men are about to have a wonderful evening and thousands of homes and businesses will be a little more relaxed and happy tomorrow.

On behalf of all of mankind, thank you.

I made a post at the beginning of this discussion that criticized the original comment about "no woman ever liking to give head", but I'm certainly not opposed to analysis of sexual behaviors, and I don't think most of the other posters on here are either. I think most people will agree with you about that, as I do.

But Twisty made an offensive comment, and if she was intending to rile people up it's not fair to complain that the people she was poking fun at got defensive. Maybe she is just a funny person, and didn't really mean what she said literally, but in her comments section there were several people who actively defended, seriously, the idea that blowjobs are inherantly oppressive and unfeminist.

I'm not going to the other extreme and claim that bjs are feminist acts, or that they're empowering. I mostly saw those points of view given as strawmen by the anti-bj types, and never actually used by a person who was objecting to Twisty's comment.

Analysis of our sexual behaviors in the context that you describe (a cultural web that we can never truly detach our behaviors from) is so, so important. But there was a commenter on Twisty's blog who made a quip along the lines of (and I paraphrase) "is there really a woman whose soul is so dead, that she actually enjoys giving head?" However lighthearted she might have intended that to be, it's a hurtful thing to say and objection to it is legitimate. I don't see how that kind of thing advances a real analysis at all.