<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Sexist &#187; stds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/tag/stds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist</link>
	<description>Sex and Gender in D.C.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:08:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Sexist Beatdown: &#8220;So I Was Inserting The Female Condom Into My Vagina&#8221; Edition</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/03/19/sexist-beatdown-so-i-was-inserting-the-female-condom-into-my-vagina-edition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/03/19/sexist-beatdown-so-i-was-inserting-the-female-condom-into-my-vagina-edition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Beyond DC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AIDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anal sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contraception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FC2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[female condom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sady doyle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[safe sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexist Beatdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tiger Beatdown]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=9328</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
It's all female condom all the time this week on the Sexist. Female condom in a rubber vagina! Female condom in the anus! But despite the exhaustive orifice coverage (do not insert the female condom into your mouth!), questions remain. Like, what does illustrious ladyblogger Sady Doyle of Tiger Beatdown think about putting the female [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/files/2010/03/FC2-1.jpg" alt="" width="420" height="280" /></p>
<p>It's all female condom all the time this week on the<em> Sexist</em>. Female condom <a href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/03/17/is-500000-dollars-enough-to-get-anyone-to-use-the-female-condom/">in a rubber vagina!</a> Female condom <a href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/03/18/the-female-condom-goes-anal/">in the anus!</a> But despite the exhaustive orifice coverage (do not insert the female condom into your mouth!), questions remain. Like, what does illustrious ladyblogger <strong>Sady Doyle </strong>of <a href="http://www.tigerbeatdown.com">Tiger Beatdown</a> think about putting the female condom into <em>her</em> vagina? And so on. In this edition of <a href="../tag/sexist-beatdown">Sexist  Beatdown</a>, join Sady and I as we wipe off our female-condom-pre-lubed hands (<em>pictured</em>), prep our vaginas for FC2 landing, and get down to ladybusiness.</p>
<p><span id="more-9328"></span></p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> Sorry I'm late: I was inserting my female condom in anticipation of having sex up to eight hours from now.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> Amanda, you know how much I value our friendship. Which is why I want you to understand something. PLEASE NEVER SAY THE PHRASE "I WAS INSERTING MY FEMALE CONDOM" EVER EVER AGAIN.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> Deal. But the next 30 minutes of this female condom chat are going to be <em>excruciating</em> for me.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> It's hard for me to think of "female condom chats" WITHOUT thinking "excruciating." I know I am judgey and a poor former condom merchant and/or safe sex advocate for feeling this way.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> Hey Sady, we're just two ladies hanging out talking frankly about our vaginas. The most natural thing for two women to talk about! (Actually we have talked a lot about vaginas, I am realizing, in this series).</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Well, I guess we... have them in common? Okay, let's talk about something that is NOT vaginas. Let's talk about dicks. Because here's how I feel about dicks.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> I'm listening.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> HERE'S HOW I FEEL ABOUT DICKS! Dicks don't get pregnant. Dicks don't get their periods. Dicks don't get ANYTHING except boners, and also occasionally hilarious Hits in the Crotch on old episodes of<em> America's Funniest Home Videos.</em></p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> Haha, yeah!</p>
<p>[youtube:v=0zGLas2q31E]</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Dicks have like one responsibility in the world, which is to put condoms on themselves when they are having the penetrative intercourse. AND NOW THEY'VE PUT THAT ONE ON US TOO?</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>Yes they have! And women around the world are as skeptical as you are. The thing about the female condom is that it's really great for women who can't force their male partners / clients whatever to use the male condom, and so they need a first line of defense.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> Yeah. Fair enough.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> For women who don't have that very terrible problem, though, I'm not seeing it really catching on? However, I have this idea that I would like to sell to the female condom manufacturers, which is that they give a grant to porn manufacturers who will work to eroticize the female condom in their work. So then one day like 10 years from now, old people will be like, "what are these 'money shots' and 'bikini waxes' and 'female condoms' the young kids are using nowadays?" And then there will finally be gender equity in condom sales.</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Wow. Porn truly does solve everything! But can we go back to that "you won't put on a condom and we need a barrier/STD-preventing method" thing?</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>Sure.</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Because here's my theory: You, A Dude, want to sleep with me. I, A Lady, am not sure if we are monogamous and/or STD free. You are like, "but baby, why can't YOU put this bag up your bits?" I am like, "this is the quickest I have ever lost interest in a sexual encounter. See you later, dude!" Like: If you are not responsible enough to wear the condom, you're not responsible enough to be having sex with me, basically.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>Yeah. I have never heard of a man who would prefer the lady coat her vagina with a bag? But I did speak to one man who has sex with men who has used the female condom, and he had this to say about it: "When I’ve been a top&#8212;the insertive partner&#8212;what I’ve liked about the bottom wearing the device is that my penis wasn’t wrapped in plastic.” So, there's that.</p>
<p><strong> SADY: </strong>I mean, okay. Sure. I get that. Did your interview subject mention the fit issues? I mean, I hear it fits well, but the thing I have always admired about condoms &#8212; the skinny jeans of the birth control world &#8212; is that they are so specifically tailored. Does the female condom, according to your journalistic research, share this virtue?</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> OK, so I'm not going to repeat the phrase that must never be repeated.</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>OH JEEZ.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA</strong>: But I did shminshmert the shmemale shcondom the other day, when I was, you know, just hanging out and bein' a lady, and it does, like shconform to the insides of your shvagina.</p>
<p>[youtube:v=mnyC_v0-DQ4]<br />
<em>How to shminshmert the female condom </em></p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Okay, so here's the thing: you like put it in and then hang out, though? Like, actually that might be a virtue! Because you don't have to go through that "oh crap where are the condoms rummage rummage rummage HANG ON additional rummaging" deal.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>Well, you don't have to hang out, but you can hang out. (Up to eight hours before intercourse!) I mean, personally, I never really stopped feeling it so I wouldn't exactly suggest it. But maybe you get used to it. The thing is, nobody like, actually <em>prefers </em>sex with a condom, but it's a necessity in a lot of sexual situations, and it's conceivable that some couples might prefer the female condom. I just think it's really difficult to get that trend to pick up enough speed that those specific people a) actually try the condom and b) feel comfortable using it.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> Oh, sure. And let me respond to your very serious and useful and responsible point with this: I am one of those people who occasionally gets all "OH WHAT THE CRAP WHERE ARE MY GLASSES," and looks for them for about fifteen minutes, and then looks at A MIRROR, and is like, "oh." I have looked for my headphones whilst wearing my headphones. If I ever shminsmerted the shmemale shmondom, basically it would be in there for life, is what I'm saying. I would seriously forget about it.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> Yeah, the other thing is, like, peeing? You will have to pee at some point.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> Oh, yeah, THAT.<br />
<strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>AMANDA:</strong> Because it's really a full-coverage device, so I imagine it would get some pee on it? Perhaps there is some sort of accessory you can buy that aids in that process.<br />
<strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> God. Somehow this ends with people getting like a female condom and one of those Shenis things you pee through and vajazzling ALL OF IT and... So yeah, I think we've established that I am one of those backward ladies that is like, "a FEMALE condom? Never!" Although, yeah, new barrier methods are good. That's undeniably true. And now, based on my reactions, I can see what it would be like to be one of those "I hate condoms" dudes. I HAVE BECOME THE THING I HATED.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>And now I know what it's like to walk around with a condom in my vagina. Minimum rustling, I must say!</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> Okay, like, I have to say... Nobody is making these dudes put the condoms on over their lunch breaks so that they can come and have sexy dates with us later.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>That's the weirdest thing about the female condom promotion, to me: They say that because you can pre-insert it, it "doesn't interrupt lovemaking." But it interrupts, like, other shit? Like my lunch break, or my peeing schedule, or what have you.</p>
<p><strong>SADY:</strong> Yeah. I mean, I think your idea for a line of Female Condom-Centric Porn is actually a good one. Because right now this is like the least erotic idea in the world. But... dude condoms weren't initially perceived as a great idea, EITHER?</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>Right.</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Like, I read this old issue of I think<em> Cosmo</em> from the sixties or seventies once, for a feminist media project, and it had this "revolutionary" article about all the different kinds of birth control there were. And condoms were mentioned. And the article, AS I RECALL (I am not quoting) was like, "I know you think these are for prostitutes, but you can use them too," and also they interviewed a guy who had tried this Strange New Birth Control Method, and he was like, "OMG so unnatural! Like having sex with a garbage bag!" And now it's just like... condoms, you know? They're at Duane Reade, they're understood to be commonplace, and nobody wants to hear you whine about them. Like I said: The very NOTION of a condom that I myself might wear has somehow transformed me into a person who thinks like a gross-ish dude.</p>
<p><strong>AMANDA: </strong>Yes. And either you'll look back on this moment 30 years from now and say, "That is the moment I officially became an old person who is resistant to change," or, "That is the moment I officially became an old person because I even know what a female condom is, and no young people have ever heard of that shit, in the Future." Time will tell!</p>
<p><strong>SADY: </strong>Right. When we're all wearing our Holo-Helmets and having Virtual Sex on our Google Entire Fake Universe Dates, the female condom, and indeed the male one, will be unnecessary. I for one look forward to that day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/03/19/sexist-beatdown-so-i-was-inserting-the-female-condom-into-my-vagina-edition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Feminist Implications of Male Reproductive Health</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/24/the-feminist-implications-of-male-reproductive-health/</link>
		<comments>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/24/the-feminist-implications-of-male-reproductive-health/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 18:59:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Beyond DC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adina nack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anal cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gardasil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genital warts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hpv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[men's health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ms. Magazine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reproductive health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[safe sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STIs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=8977</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As women continue to fight for control over our own bodies, we're also faced with a parallel battle: Advocating for men to share responsibility for the physical, emotional, and financial burdens of reproductive health.
I'm currently working on a story that touches on a lighter side of this problem&#8212;sex partners who don't quite understand how your [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As women continue to fight for control over our own bodies, we're also faced with a parallel battle: Advocating for men to share responsibility for the physical, emotional, and financial burdens of reproductive health.</p>
<p>I'm currently working on a story that touches on a lighter side of this problem&#8212;sex partners who don't quite understand how your birth control method actually works. If you've ever heard any bizarre theories about how exactly that pill stops babies from popping out of your ladyparts, please <a href="mailto:ahess@washingtoncitypaper.com">let me know</a>.</p>
<p>But the tendency to place the burden for reproductive health on women reaches into far more serious territory. Case in point: Gardasil, the vaccine that prevents against HPV, was initially exclusively developed for use in young women, even though the virus affects 75 percent of men and women under 50. What's up with that?</p>
<p><span id="more-8977"></span></p>
<p>In the new issue of <em>Ms. Magazine</em>, Dr. <strong>Adina Nack </strong>of California Lutheran University attacks the issue of the HPV vaccine's inconsistent application among men and women. According to a <em>Ms</em>. press release:</p>
<blockquote><p>The CDC recommends “routine” vaccination for females ages 9-26 but, last October, after the FDA approved Gardasil for prevention of genital warts in boys and men, the CDC voted in favor of a lesser recommendation of “permissive” use in males that is likely to make the vaccine less affordable for men.</p></blockquote>
<p>Translation: While the CDC <em>permits</em> use of this vaccine among both men and women, it only<em> recommends</em> that women receive the vaccination. The effect is that men will be less likely to elect to receive the Gardasil vaccine, and that health insurance companies will be less likely to provide adequate coverage for that use.</p>
<p>Gardasil is chiefly advertised as a method of preventing cervical cancer among women, an approach which glosses over the serious medical problems that HPV can cause in men&#8212;including genital warts, anal cancer, and oral cancer. There have been a few recent developments in providing access to the vaccine to young men. Today, in light of a Gardasil study that found the vaccine "successfully prevents deadly anal cancer in men," the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) met to consider the <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/acip/downloads/agenda-feb10.pdf">expansion of the HPV vaccine in men</a> [PDF]. Yesterday, Health Canada <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/02/23/hpv-gardasil-males.html">approved the vaccine</a> for use in Canadian men aged 9-26 in order to prevent genital warts.</p>
<p>Why have we been slow to recommend this vaccine equally to both men and women? Men's reproductive health has not traditionally been medicalized like women's bodies have been. Women are accustomed to being subjected to annual medical check-ups on the status of their sexual health, including what sort of damage HPV may be looking to exact on their cervix. Men aren't. So while I'm forced to receive my annual pap smear and raft of STD tests in order to receive a refill on my birth control prescription, my male sex partner is subject to no such requirement. When you start considering the possibility of injecting young people with three doses of a vaccine that, like all vaccines, holds possible side-effects, women are the natural recipient of such a remedy. Their bodies have already been engaged in these issues, while male bodies have so far been kept at a distance.</p>
<p>As Nack notes, advocating for men to take control of their reproductive health can only help women:<em> </em></p>
<blockquote><p>“Feminists have a vested interest in advocating for policies and circumstances around the world that shape men’s ability to develop healthy sex lives, which, by definition, has to include respect for the rights of those with whom they partner, regardless of gender,” says Patricia Rieker, Ph.D., a sociologist at Boston University and Harvard Medical School and coauthor of Gender and Health (Cambridge University Press, 2008).</p></blockquote>
<p>Nack's piece<em> </em>is entitled, "Why Men’s Health Is a Feminist Issue." And women's health is a men's issue, too. As Nack notes, we can't be solely concerned with how STIs will affect our own bodies when we're responsible for spreading these viruses to each other. "Women’s health—especially reproductive health—is usually the focus of sexual-health discussions but men’s health also deserves women’s attention—and not just because women care about their sons, male partners and male friends," she writes. "It almost goes without saying that women can also be infected by their intimate partners, and since the great majority of women primarily have heterosexual relations, that usually means by men."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/24/the-feminist-implications-of-male-reproductive-health/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does Wearing an Extravagant Condom Belt Mean You&#8217;re Down For Sex?</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/18/does-wearing-an-extravagant-condom-belt-mean-youre-down-for-sex/</link>
		<comments>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/18/does-wearing-an-extravagant-condom-belt-mean-youre-down-for-sex/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:55:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Beyond DC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AIDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condom belt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condoms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contraception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LOVEBUCKLE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OhMiBod]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[One condoms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prophylactics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rape]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[safe sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[short skirts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[victim blaming]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=8905</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Though the most dedicated rape apologists may disagree, clothing choices like miniskirts, low-cut shirts and high heels are not reliable indicators of a woman's sexual availability. Inanimate objects don't consent to sex; people do. But is there any sartorial choice out there that does announce to the world that the wearer is down to fuck?
Enter [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/files/2010/02/condombelt.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-8913 aligncenter" title="condombelt" src="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/files/2010/02/condombelt.jpg" alt="condombelt" width="258" height="185" /></a></p>
<p>Though the most dedicated <a href="../2010/02/16/on-short-skirts/">rape apologists may disagree</a>, clothing choices like miniskirts, low-cut shirts and high heels are not reliable indicators of a woman's sexual availability. Inanimate objects don't consent to sex; people do. But is there any sartorial choice out there that<em> does</em> announce to the world that the wearer is down to fuck?</p>
<p>Enter The "LOVEBUCKLE," a product of sex toy retailer OhMiBod (<a href="http://www.ohmibod.com/lovebuckle.html">suggested stylings here</a>). This leather belt features a brushed metal buckle with "circular cut-out window" for displaying "uniquely designed One® condoms." Basically, it's a big 'ol condom belt, and it retails for $85.</p>
<p>It's pretty clear that the LOVEBUCKLE is the rare clothing accessory that's specifically designed to send a sexual message. But what exactly is it saying?</p>
<p><span id="more-8905"></span>Are you one of those people who still believes that women wear short skirts in order to secretly signal that they want to have sex with you? Consider this:  Even prancing about with a prophylactic strapped to your pubic area by an extravagant leather belt can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Possible messages sent by wearing a LOVEBUCKLE:</p>
<p>a) <strong>Have sex with me now! </strong>Last night, I strapped on my sample LOVEBUCKLE and asked some co-workers what it all means. "You're wearing a condom right above your vagina," one co-worker explained. "It means you're ready to get freaky."</p>
<p>b) <strong>Don't have sex with me!</strong> I consulted a trusted friend to get another opinion on the meaning of this LOVEBUCKLE. This is what a giant condom belt means to her: "It's one step up from a giant torso tattoo that says 'I NEVER WANT TO GET LAID.'"</p>
<p>c) <strong>I want you to know that I am committed to safe sex</strong>. According to the OhMiBod presser, the LOVEBUCKLE is perfect for the safe sex partner who cannot be bothered with the hassle of accessing a condom that's not directly above their genitals.<strong> </strong>"Never again find yourself digging though your wallet or purse to find a condom when the mood strikes," The press release reads. "You’ll always have one handy when wearing the practical and stylish LOVEBUCKLE."</p>
<p>d) <strong>I do not want you to know that I am committed to safe sex</strong>. In the next breath, OhMiBod recasts the LOVEBUCKLE as the pinnacle of discretion. "I find the LOVEBUCKLE a handy way to inconspicuously be prepared on-the-go," an OhMiBod representative told me over e-mail. The LOVEBUCKLE's promotional materials include the following travel tip: "Spare yourself the embarrassment of packing condoms in a carry-on or purse that may be searched. The LOVEBUCKLE allows you to discreetly carry artistic One® condoms in the buckle, and makes a great fashion statement at the same time. With the LOVEBUCKLE, you'll always be inconspicuously prepared for safe sex on-the-go." Until your gigantic brushed metal belt buckle sets off the metal detector, and sends you over for a more intimate inspection.</p>
<p>e) <strong>I want you to know that I'm committed to condom wrapper art</strong>. According to the OhMiBod press release, the LOVEBUCKLE can be filled with "200 different graphic [condom] designs . . . giving wearers hundreds of ways to express themselves, and making the idea of safe sex fun, hip and stylish." My LOVEBUCKLE sample condom was illustrated with a photograph of Yellowstone National Park's volcano-heated Old Faithful Geyser, which I can only assume means that the wearer is scheduled to erupt <a href="http://www.yellowstone.net/geysers/geyser11.htm">every 35 to 120 minutes</a>.<span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"><strong> </strong></span></p>
<p>f) <strong>Or, something completely different</strong>. According to an OhMiBod press release, "When the LOVEBUCKLE is empty, an engraved 're-load' message shows through the circular window, reminding wearers to refill it with One condoms, or leave it empty, giving off an entirely different type of message and showing a alternate fashion style."</p>
<p>So which is it? Is it a gigantic metal buckle dedicated to displaying your collection of designer condoms? Is it a discrete accessory that allows you to carry your safe sex accessories undetected? Is it a handy signal that you can take on or off depending on your level of horniness? Or is it a belt that carries an unnamed but "entirely different" message?</p>
<p>What's that old phrase? When you assume, you make an ass out of the extravagant condom belt. After all, even if the LOVEBUCKLE is meant to signal that you're "ready to get freaky," it does not automatically signify that you're willing to de-belt for just anyone who happens to spy your LOVEBUCKLE. For me, at least, strapping on the LOVEBUCKLE indicated only that I was conducting some field research on the meaning of strapping on a LOVEBUCKLE. Results were inconclusive.</p>
<p>Because seriously, this thing is hard not to notice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/18/does-wearing-an-extravagant-condom-belt-mean-youre-down-for-sex/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>University Sex Columns, Reviewed: Chivalrous Hook-Up Edition</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/10/27/university-sex-columns-reviewed-chivalrous-hook-up-edition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/10/27/university-sex-columns-reviewed-chivalrous-hook-up-edition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:48:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Beyond DC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[college]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Washington University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex columns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university of maryland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university sex columns reviewed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=7175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
The fight for ideological dominance of D.C.’s college sex column “movement” rages on. Are our local campus columnists on the forefront of radical sex writing, or are they bringing back the good old days of valiant male chivalry&#8212;only drunker? This week: G.W. student fucks Marine; UMD students are bitches, dicks, or pussies; American University issues [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/files/2009/02/marines-1.jpg" alt="" width="420" height="280" /></p>
<p>The fight for ideological dominance of D.C.’s <a href="http://www.campusprogress.org/opinions/4657/the-problem-with-the-campus-sex-column-movement">college sex column “movement”</a> rages on. Are our local campus columnists on the forefront of radical sex writing, or are they bringing back the good old days of valiant male chivalry&#8212;only drunker? This week: G.W. student fucks Marine; UMD students are bitches, dicks, or pussies; American University issues a Very Special sex column. It must be sweeps week:</p>
<p><span id="more-7175"></span><strong>GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY:</strong></p>
<p><strong> Sex Tips:</strong> In <strong>Layla</strong>'s <a href="http://media.www.gwhatchet.com/media/storage/paper332/news/2009/10/26/Life/Sex-Column.Supporting.Our.Troops-3812792.shtml">latest heterosexual female romp</a>, G.W.'s resident sex columnist extols upon the virtues of fucking servicemen. She also floats a revised idea of traditional courtship: Men are still confined to the rules of chivalry, but everyone gets drunk and you can do it whenever you feel like it. "Leaning against the bar, I spotted Prince Charming, an incredibly sexy combination of chivalry and a hint of danger, walking down the stairs," she writes of a random Marine she spots while sitting alone, "double fisting" drinks at the bar. "Having stubbornly worn my three-inch heels, I literally stumbled into his arms and swooned at how valiantly and easily he caught me. In my opinion, there is nothing sexier than a man with an accent, especially if its southern and he happens to call me ma'am." They decide to get it on. "Prince Charming grinned and pulled out an umbrella, proving that even in the face of a certain hookup, chivalry is not dead."</p>
<p><strong>Life Lesson: </strong>Layla insists there is "something scandalously orgasmic about making out with a marine in the middle of a bar to bad 80s music," proving that people are into some freaky shit. Side-note: Layla may needs to take some life lessons from <a href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/10/02/sexist-beatdown-buster-darkhole-and-the-conservative-college-sex-column/">the <strong>Buster Darkhole</strong> school of sex column euphemisms</a>. Her target is called "Prince Charming." Her friend? "GI Jane."</p>
<p><strong>Progressive Meter:</strong> I count six references to "Prince Charming," two to "chivalry," and one each to "swooned" and "valiantly." Layla's column describes a thoroughly modern tale&#8212;they meet at a bar and hook up&#8212;but the vocabulary is stuck in another century.<strong> Three.</strong></p>
<p>&#8212;</p>
<p><strong>THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND:</strong></p>
<p><strong>Sex Tips:</strong> This time around in UMD senior<strong> Esti Frischling</strong>'s regular advice column, she tackles the problem of a third-wheel friend who <a href="http://www.diamondbackonline.com/opinion/advice-time-to-stop-snitchin-1.795902">knows that one of the coupled-up friends is cheating on the other</a>. Frischling's advice&#8212;don't snitch, but encourage them to break up, and if they don't, go ahead and fuck the one who's getting screwed over&#8212;isn't as memorable as the way she tells it:</p>
<p>- "You better not rat either way (bitch)."<br />
- "I mean, he can’t possibly see her as marriage material if he’s having all this premarital sex with all the sluts, right?"<br />
- "approach the guy and say something along the lines of (and feel free to quote me directly) 'Dude stop being such a dick — your girl is hot, lay off the adulterous pussy.'”<br />
- "I say—and this is my final answer by the way—blow up his spot and f&#8212; his girl. Yeah."</p>
<p><strong>Life Lesson</strong>: Apparently, bitches, sluts, dicks, and pussies are A-OK in the <em>Diamondback</em>. But in the end, all we get is a "f&#8212;."</p>
<p><strong>Progressive Meter:</strong> While it's difficult to discern a political bent in decisions over snitching, I do find the emphasis on "marriage material," "premarital sex," and "sluts" a bit off-putting here. You're in <em>college</em>. Stop rating the validity of your relationships on whether or not you're planning to get hitched to the person you're currently doing. On the other hand, the advice that the advice-seeker "f&#8212; his girl"  seems to be applied with no concern as to whether the advice-seeker is male or female. Cool. <strong>Five.</strong></p>
<p><strong>&#8212;<br />
</strong></p>
<p><strong>AMERICAN UNIVERSITY:</strong></p>
<p><strong>Sex Tips: </strong>This go-around, AU's trio of porn-named sex columnists&#8212;<strong>Amber Sparkles, Buster Darkhole, and Maxwell Hillcrest</strong>&#8212;have teamed up to deliver a Very Special sex column about <a href="http://www.theeagleonline.com/scene/story/planning-ahead-helps-ease-worries-in-bed">personal responsibility</a>. This conversation&#8212;how to avoid unwanted pregnancies, STIs, abuse, and disappointment&#8212;is important. But Sparkles, Darkhole, and Hillcrest may be biting off more than they can chew here. The column is a little bit about pleasure: "Many people enjoy sex without condoms—scratch that, nearly everyone enjoys the sensations of sex more without condoms." A little bit about shame: "it is your life. It is not the life of the girl who might yell 'slut' at you when you walk home from a fantastic evening." And a little bit about dying of AIDS: "imagine two boys at Apex going home together. They may have amazing sex, but if it is unprotected, the consequences can be fatal."</p>
<p><strong>Life Lesson: </strong>Sex undertaken without "planning ahead" can lead to babies, disease, and unhappiness.</p>
<p><strong>Progressive Meter:</strong> The column is titled "Planning ahead helps ease worries in bed," but the three-author treatment focuses entirely on sexual anxieties, and not on the peace of mind that can come with entering into sex fully prepared and ready to go. The intended take-away here&#8212;when you're having sex, you should be concerned with satisfying your personal needs and taking care of yourself, not conforming to societal expectations&#8212;is a fine one. Unfortunately, the message gets lost in a sea of downers about the possible outcomes of doin' it: campus shaming, misogyny, blood tests, abortion, and death. <strong>Four.</strong></p>
<p><em>Photo by <strong>Darrow Montgomery</strong></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/10/27/university-sex-columns-reviewed-chivalrous-hook-up-edition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sexist Beatdown: Wherever to Ejaculate? Edition</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/07/31/sexist-beatdown-wherever-to-ejaculate-editio/</link>
		<comments>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/07/31/sexist-beatdown-wherever-to-ejaculate-editio/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Beyond DC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[condoms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contraception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ejaculation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guttmacher institutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pre-cum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pre-ejaculate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pulling out]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rachel k. jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexist Beatdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the daily beast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tiger Beatdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tracy quan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[withdrawal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=5715</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
So ... ejaculation. It turns out that where you do it can greatly affect a woman's chances of becoming pregnant. Like: If you ejaculate straight up into her vagina, she's more likely to become pregnant; if you ejaculate into a condom or anywhere else in the world, she's less likely to conceive. Every 16-year-old boy [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/166/423037281_b9c4359e19.jpg" alt="" width="420" height="420" /></p>
<p>So ... ejaculation. It turns out that <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-28/the-push-to-pull-out/">where you do it</a> can greatly affect a woman's chances of becoming pregnant. Like: If you ejaculate straight up into her vagina, she's more likely to become pregnant; if you ejaculate into a condom or anywhere else in the world, she's less likely to conceive. Every 16-year-old boy knows this to be true, and now <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/21/health/21cond.html?_r=1">those 16-year-old boys have grown up</a> to become the Guttmacher Institute's Lead Pulling-Out Researcher, <strong>Rachel K. Jones</strong>. Jones published her findings in the June issue of <em>Contraception </em>magazine [via <em>NYT</em>]:</p>
<blockquote><p>“If the male partner withdraws before ejaculation every time a couple has vaginal intercourse, about 4 percent of couples will become pregnant over the course of a year,” the authors write.</p>
<p>For condoms, used optimally, the rate is about 2 percent. But more significant, the authors say, are the rates for “typical use,” because people can’t be expected to use any contraception method perfectly every time. Typical use of withdrawal leads to pregnancy 18 percent of the time, they write; for typical use of condoms 17 percent of the time.</p></blockquote>
<p>Hey, that's information that helps us become better informed about our sex lives. Great, right? No. <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-28/the-push-to-pull-out/">IT'S BAD</a>, says the Daily Beast's <strong>Tracy Quan</strong>, who calls the study's results "folk wisdom" with a lack of "supporting evidence" and infers that the Guttmacher Institute is no longer "sane" for publishing this no good very bad information. Why? Because withdrawal is "caddish," "insulting," and it's FOR BOYS, NOT GIRLS. And we all know we can't trust boys to do anything. What else can't we trust? Science, for one! And while we're at it: We can't trust <a href="http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/tracy-quans-anti-withdrawal-argument-gives-women-zero-agency">grown women</a> in mutually monogamous relationships to make this choice for themselves, either, even though it's free, accessible, and feels better than a condom. THERE I SAID IT.</p>
<p>But enough about ejaculating outside of vaginas. Oh, wait, no: It's time for <strong>Sady </strong>of <a href="http://tigerbeatdown.blogspot.com">Tiger Beatdown</a> and I to discuss ejaculating outside of vaginas some more! Join us!</p>
<p><span id="more-5715"></span>AMANDA: 9:23 a.m. is a great time to talk about the ups and downs of not ejaculating into vaginas.</p>
<p>SADY: yes. personally, when i heard that not ejaculating into vaginas was a "reliable" form of birth control, i had my suspicions! i was like: apparently all of the dudes i have argued with about birth control have become scientists! who knew?</p>
<p>AMANDA: published in the renowned peer-reviewed journal of medicine, <em>Maxim.</em></p>
<p>SADY: right. it strikes me as some flawed science, is what i am saying! for, even if withdrawal is a semi-effective method of "birth control," it strikes me as a highly ineffective method of Not Getting Various Diseases Such As The Herp Control. which i think is what Tracy Quan is saying, which is good common sense.</p>
<p>AMANDA: of course, but at the same time, real scientists who are not your ex-boyfriends have worked very hard to come up with dozens of methods of birth control that also don't prevent STDs</p>
<p>SADY: fair enough! the scientists, they do these things! i suppose i am a person who likes a certain modicum of control over these situations. and withdrawal as birth control, TO ME, relies on your partner having (a) really good timing, and (b) a solid commitment to not getting distracted or losing track of whatever he is supposed to be doing, during a moment that (AS I UNDERSTAND IT) can be kind of distracting! (I AM REFERRING TO THE MALE ORGASM. In case my incredible tastefulness and subtlety are working against me.)</p>
<p>AMANDA: this is a point that Quan made as well, and I agree that for a lot of people withdraw would not be a good option for this reason. But all forms of birth control come with a degree of human error, or in some cases, shit ripping inside your vagina error. say you're a couple who doesn't want to use condoms. and the woman takes her birth control pills, but the man, like you, can't trust her&#8212;for whatever reason&#8212;to take them at the same time every day. maybe she forgets sometimes!</p>
<p>SADY: fair enough!</p>
<p>AMANDA: he might not want to rely on her, either. and so if you forget a birth control pill, or a condom breaks, or you ejaculate into a vagina, you know, you can take emergency contraception as well. one of the interesting things to me about this study&#8212;and i'm just going to assume the study is accurate for argument, because i don't know anything about methodology with these things. is that it placed withdrawl slightly below condoms, right? and still, most of the response has been, 'there's no way this could ever work, this is some frat dude conspiracy.' and so perhaps what this study reveals isn't that withdrawl is a very good option, but rather that we have a bit too much faith in condoms</p>
<p>SADY: a fascinating point! and i agree, some of this may have to do with the fact that, as long as i've been alive, anyway, Birth Control has been less important to the discussion than Safe Sex. and most of the sex ed i have ever received has been like, "USE CONDOMS, also there are other methods but seriously just USE CONDOMS." and i'm still a fan of the condom, because it is cheap and does not require a prescription and has a lower failure rate and higher disease protection rate than other things! the withdrawal method, to me, requires what is (in many or most circumstances) a perhaps unrealistically high level of trust for one's makeout partner. but maybe this just has to do with the fact that i have been culturally conditioned to trust other people less than i trust the Trojan corporation.</p>
<p>AMANDA: of course. and the method is really counter-intuitive, because pulling out is something that irresponsible 15 year old boys are supposed to do, when really it's something that would be more appropriate for, say, mutually monogamous STD-free old people.</p>
<p>SADY: right. it is odd for me that something which is the centerpiece of much heterosexual porn is now a meaningful expression of committed monogamous trust. NEXT UP: how having sex on a bus can keep you from getting cancer!</p>
<p>AMANDA: hhahaha. yeah. i heard if you put a donut on it and then seductively bite it off it lowers the risk of kidney failure, or something</p>
<p>SADY: WOW. a doughnut, you say! i guess i've been doing it all wrong with the bagels.</p>
<p>AMANDA: i'm with the critics of Quan with this one, though &#8211; something that PEOPLE DO turning out to be less sexually risky than we thought is probably a good thing. she says a bit of anxiety is good, but i actually have a lot of that! and so reducing that is probably a good thing for a lot of people. maybe not for Quan, but it's not like we're getting rid of condoms! The Trojan lobby (sponsored by Tiger Beatdown) would never allow that.</p>
<p>SADY: true enough. i guess i am just concerned with the fact that there is already pressure on girls to be the "cool" ones who don't "make" the dude use condoms. i do not know why i think that the sort of dudes who apply that pressure are all going to show up with scientific studies and go through a careful risk-benefit analysis! yet i do. in conclusion: withdrawal is totally fine, if you want to do that and are reasonable about it, and not fine if you do not. CONTROVERSY!</p>
<p>AMANDA: agreed. DON'T LET HIM NOT EJACULATE IN YOUR VAGINA IF YOU DON'T WANT HIM TO NOT DO THAT, KIDS.</p>
<p>SADY: there, problem solved. everybody does what they want to do. the real winner? the paper towel industry. hurrah!</p>
<p><em>Photo by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/archisculpture/423037281/"><strong>amorphity</strong></a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/07/31/sexist-beatdown-wherever-to-ejaculate-editio/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

