As you may (or may not) have heard, Playgirl is folding — and with its demise, a few dreams die. Dreams of a (semi)mainstream naked dude mag that was (theoretically) aimed at women. Boinkology friend, and now former Playgirl staffer, offers the following sentiment :
I think that Playgirl, had it listened to some much needed advice since I’ve been part of their pages, could have been something beautiful. There is so much potential for a magazine that appeals to women (and men who like looking at men, and reading about women), but for some reason, in the United States we can’t seem to execute the formula of naked men + intelligent sexual conversation + interesting topics that appeal to women = happy magazine.
Could — or should — Playgirl have filled a much needed gap? Are women crying out for a world with more naked dudes? And if they are, what could — or should — the next generation of Playgirl look like? If straight women want porn of men, what kind of porn might they enjoy?
-
What is Boinkology?
Insightful analysis of sex, relationships, dating - and everything in between.
Popular Posts:
Teenager Goes Through Puberty, Media Suspects Boob Job
Yes, I Did Pick Up Your Daughter. And She Was Lovely.
Breaking Up In Public: Noble Or Pathetic?
DADD : Dating Attention Deficit Disorder
A Word For Vagina For Every Occasion
Quote Of The Day: Sexiness Vs. Professionalism
Sex Toy Storage Solutions
Your Definitive Guide To The Latest Fameball Breakup
Tweenophilia: New Horror Or Business As Usual?
Would You Remove Ex From Your (Photographic) Memories?
-
Most Discussed:
Your Definitive Guide To The Latest Fameball Breakup Breaking Up In Public: Noble Or Pathetic? Yes, I Did Pick Up Your Daughter. And She Was Lovely. Sex Toy Storage Solutions Quote Of The Day: Sexiness Vs. Professionalism Would You Remove Ex From Your (Photographic) Memories?
Park Slope Moms Put The Baby In Babeland
Enough With The Hooker Chic! Teenager Goes Through Puberty, Media Suspects Boob Job
Commenter Of The Week
RSS
Comments
We already know what it would look like. Women already have their porn… it’s called paperback fiction. We men want the visuals (hence the gay following of Playgirl), but women want the fantasy.
The truly sad thing, though, is that in the grand scheme of things, there are laws and stigmas and public shame attached to men’s pornography — it’s hidden behind black wrappers on high shelves in stores with no windows — whereas women can pick up their smut at any corner drug store.
What does THAT say about a patriarchal society?
August 5th, 2008 at 3:37 pmI think you’re oversimplifying the matter quite a bit. Frankly, the women want stories/men want visuals argument is pretty tired — especially since most visuals are created with an idea of what works for men, what men want, etc, and not with women in mind.
What does that say about a patriarchal society?
August 5th, 2008 at 3:43 pmThe reason I would never buy Playgirl? Because it had no erect penises in it (here in the UK, anyway). If I’m wanking and fantasising, the last thing I need to see is a picture of an unaroused man; I want to know (or imagine, in the case of fantasy) that the man I am getting wet over is also turned on. There’s nothing like a soft cock to dry a girl up and throw her off her stroke.
August 5th, 2008 at 6:53 pmdefinitely erections! flaccid penises have their place: before and after and erection. there is only so sexy you can be without being hard. (sorry guys).
i like stories -and- visuals. i don’t see why those would be mutually exclusive. and the idea that women read those books because it’s what they most want vs. what is culturally ok for them to consume is kind of ridiculous.
honestly, for me, i’d like to see not gross men doing not gross things with not gross women. that doesno’tm ean they have to be stereotypically attractive. just, you know, not gross. of course that’s subjective, which is exactly why there should be a huge variety of people in porn, but there isn’t.
also, i just don’t like -looking- at naked men. i like to see them having sex. i know that’s pretty out there, since so many people seem to want to just look at naked people but naked people (especially without those precious erections) don’t say -sex- to me. they just say, naked.
all that said, my brother, who makes very specifically gay male porn, had some kind of contract with playgirl tv and i a- wonder what this means for that and b- wonder wether playgirl has ever really thought about what women want?
August 5th, 2008 at 9:19 pmI don’t think American women, collectively, really care that much about sex.
There will always be the fringe female group that is intent on resisting social engineering but they seem to be far and few in between, from my experience.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:43 pmmaybe AC, they just aren’t interested in you.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:47 pmMaybe, AL, you should procure an additional smidgen of your cognitive capacity to read paragraph two of my post.
In which case, I make clear that, from my EXPERIENCE, women that are less dependent on fitting into a conventional social role (which makes them less sexually repressed) are far and few between.
There is little sense in being a vacuous turd here, AL.
My extensive exposure to women, married or otherwise, comes from a highly conservative section of the country. Of which there are a fucking ton of (conservative sections, that is) in the states.
August 6th, 2008 at 2:20 pmbeing sexually repressed is not hte same thing as not caring that much about sex. conservative people are often overly concerned about sex, actually, and it’s caring too much that ends up making people repressed.
what is your relationship with all of these women? are you a therapist? the thing about sex and women in the US, ac, is that they lie often. we say we’re virgins when we aren’ts and vice versa, depending on what we think is expected of us and what we think will keep us safe.
in my experience with lots of women, they are generally very interested in sex, until it starts to suck becaues they are with men who don’t care to learn what they need. or various other societal factors.
August 6th, 2008 at 5:35 pmYou obviously have had little exposure to uber conventional women who absorb much of their sexual intelligence from social support structures that are heavily dependent on moral absolutes springing from religious or ultra-conservative world views.
The fear of crossing, or rubbing the edges of, moral chasms established by these rigid world views does, in fact, stem interest in sex, leading to a lack of care and desire for the act (sexual repression). A subtly coerced inhibition that does creates a certain apathy.
Sucky sex and the ensuing emotional result of creating a lack of interest is totally irrelevant to my particular context. I don’t disagree with your assertion, it just has little to do with my specific approach.
A conservative woman coming from a highly conventional background is not going to read Playgirl no matter how the material is presented.
So, indeed, in the end a lack of care for sex may well be a certain driving force that precludes interest in prurient materials WHICH makes it totally un-fucking-related to whether or not woman are interested in me, AL.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:06 pmAgreed about the erect penis appreciation. Also prefer a variety of body types - straight porn for women usually involves really muscly guys, who don’t really do much for me. And a little sexual ambiguity wouldn’t hurt.
August 7th, 2008 at 5:35 amI read some research lately that said women are far more attracted to images of activity. So a beautiful nude man standing on the beach did little, while a hotty doing jumping jacks worked a lot better. Interesting!
I agree with “Girl with a one track mind” up there - the guys weren’t aroused! I don’t know about legal issues, maybe there were some, but that would have been better to me. Also, the unrelated PlayBoy has some really solid articles and Q&A features. Granted, they also have a lot more budget. At any rate, some more of that would have attracted me. I liked the parts of PlayGirl that reviewed products, and some of the articles - more of that would have helped.. and more availability at mainstream stores, too!
In response to Randem: As for romance novels, they don’t do it for me at all. I liked them when I was in high school and early undergrad, but they lost their shine for me after a while. They are popular though, I now. I seem to remember PlayGirl offering erotic fiction, too, like most adult mags I’ve “read”.
August 7th, 2008 at 8:59 amac, my first comment was facetious, and i didn’t mean to offend you.
that said, the assertion that conservative women are the bulk of american women and that the rest of us are on the ‘fringe’ and are ‘intent on resisting social engineering’ is also really offensive. i’m not strange. i’m not intent on resisting social engineering. my interest in sex isn’t a political statement.
the more porn there is that appeals to straight women, the more straight women will look at porn.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:00 amAL, I shouldn’t have viewed your first comment so ardently.
Liberal female sexuality (precluding the kind endorsed by radical feminism) is a fairly recent trend spanning only the last few decades.
The notion that there exists this vast (vast enough to outnumber conservative women) liberal collective of sexually free women, married or otherwise, is not something I am seeing in relation to my unique perspective.
I am sorry my stated observations of what I perceive in my environment relating to female sexuality (collected over many years) makes you feel strange or on the fringe. That wasn’t the objective I was aiming for.
Unfortunately, though, you actually may well be on the fringe in some parts of America. This could be a rather unsettling fact for some who are of the sexually expressive persuasion. A persuasion I fully support.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:33 amGirl with a one track mind has my vote for comment of the week
August 8th, 2008 at 10:52 am[...] For her delightful and open insight on the sometimes over simplification of woman’s porn. I think you’re oversimplifying the matter quite a bit. Frankly, the women want stories/men want [...]
August 8th, 2008 at 11:47 am[...] Yes, it does - here [...]
August 9th, 2008 at 7:31 am[...] has all the porn for straight women [...]
August 12th, 2008 at 12:43 pmI’m sure free porn on the internet has dipped into sales for whatever.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:08 pmI love this magazine! i dont want to see it go
for all the people saying women dont like visual porn, i say you musnt know all of us.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pmThe Playgirl of the future will not have men like the one one the cover gracing this post. I can’t articulate why, but that looks like a magazine for gay men.
And ditto the previously stated interest in erections, images of not-gross men actually having sex, or doing SOMETHING, rather than just staring at you all come-hither like.
August 12th, 2008 at 7:01 pmMy favorite comment here is from AL OOF: “the more porn there is that appeals to straight women, the more straight women will look at porn.”
I think Playgirl was playing it too narrow, and that they didn’t adapt to the changes the market. The internet gave women the ability to see lots of things in the privacy of their home, and this has expanded what appeals to us. In the past we may have been excited by the style of Playgirl, but now that we can watch really naughty porn in secret, we want a lot more hardcore, kinky stuff than what most people think we want.
Oprah did a recent show called ‘237 Reasons to Have Sex’ and reported that “In the $12 billion adult entertainment industry, $1 out of every $4 is spent by a woman.” If that statistic is even close to true, then women, straight or otherwise, are lurking on sites we all thought were visited only by men. If this is so, then there is a huge untapped market for porn for women, and Playgirl just couldn’t tap it.
August 12th, 2008 at 7:55 pmI think women need to be exposed more to porn, the only thing is we only see in movies (etc…) boys and men joking around about how they need to look at porn. Women need to masturbate and orgasm too, and we need porn that is made moreso for us. I think, want, and dream about sex just as much as guys, so that whole attitude that “guys want it more” is total bullshit. Women get horny everyday too. And when many women do they feel they should suppress or don’t know how to masturbate. When I google search ‘porn for women’ I still get thousands of more websites targeted for guys, and when I do see something for women its something cheesy, like a dinky little love story. I don’t want that! I want to see hot straight guys fucking average looking women with average sized breasts and not a ton of make up on. I want stuff targeted for women to orgasm. I want to see hot guys with tattoos or piercings, not clean cut, non-erect men.
August 13th, 2008 at 3:00 pmLets educate women through the media to masturbate and demand good, raunchy porn that is made exclusively for us!
If anyone knows where I can porn like that online please let me know! No corny couple fairytale porn for me.
try youporn.com
August 15th, 2008 at 12:38 pmMandy,
The proof that women’s sexual need are far different than men exists in the marketplace.
You need look no further. You can’t find porn for your rather wonderful type of female because the market that requiring porn specifically geared toward female orgasm is too fucking small.
This is pretty much not even debatable.
August 16th, 2008 at 9:48 amAgile Cyborg,
So by that logic, there’s no affordable health insurance because people don’t want it?
August 16th, 2008 at 9:55 am@Agile Cyborg
You can’t find porn for your rather wonderful type of female because the market that requiring porn specifically geared toward female orgasm is too fucking small. This is pretty much not even debatable.”
Oh really? Allow me to present a different perspective. I’m female and write a popular sexblog about my sex life. Forgive the self-trumpeting I’m about to do, but some stats are needed here, I think.
My blog’s had over 6 million unique visitors; I’ve received tens of thousands of emails and comments from women, all over the world, expressing to me that, like me, they are frustrated that their experience, desires and fantasies are not represented in the marketplace.
I’ve also written a memoir, based on the blog; the book is a bestseller in 15 countries. On my book talks have had tens of hundreds of women coming up to me, thanking me for speaking openly about my sexlife and my love of sex. All of these women, without exception, have voiced frustation as to how their sexuality is represented; that their desires are somehow irrelevant in comparison with mens; that they are ignored as consumers of porn; that they are sick of being objectified and seen as passive, because they want to be able to assert themselves as active participants and consumers. And all of them have said things need to change; women need to gain confidence in expressing their desires, wants and needs.
Not debatable? Only if you choose to ignore the voices of the many, many thousands of women who’ve been silenced by the ignorant, narrow-minded opinions which reinforce that womens sexual needs are somehow less important than mens. I refute that view - and so do the thousands of women who have contacted me - so feel free to step aside and ignore us: we’re going to continue making our voices heard.
August 16th, 2008 at 10:02 am@Lux
Your post is totally unrelated to my view on porn markets. Using your scant approach to logic the entire human race may as well cease all forms of communication due to the useless positing of irrelevant linguistic extremes that end up nullifying human expression.
At least post a remark that can somehow address this specific issue for fuck’s sake.
@Girl With a One Track Mind,
A blog receiving a disproportionate amount of hits is indicative of really not much of anything other than just plain interest. Interest spans a mighty fucking wide gamut.
Your blog is fascinating therefore it receives hits (I’ve read it in its infancy).
Interest is NOT necessarily agreement or desire to partake.
Tens of hundreds (in your experience) is NOT indicative of a vast market needing porn fulfillment.
What you state may well be true, in terms of your experience. I am not refuting your experience I am merely stating that what I see in your post does not indicate a huge untapped market of females requiring a specific type of porn.
I do think, without debate, there IS a small market of women with high sex drives that would eat up porn geared specifically to them. Are these women normal when compared to the whole or do they cover vast stretches of the female collective? I think not.
Porn producers would LOVE nothing more than to serve an additional market.
The way you’ve approached me smacks of an assumption that I am somehow narrow or ignorant. You are talking with a sexual liberal here. I am completely supportive, understanding of and cogent on modern sexual issues relating to the females, particularly the women with a high sex drive.
I am part of an interesting environment relating to the conservative sexual angle and without a doubt the internet wobbles under the weight of WOMEN (not just men) who scorn the idea of image-based porn developed for females.
August 16th, 2008 at 12:03 pmI totally agree with Girl With A One Track Mind. What is the name of your book? It sounds like something I’d like to check out
August 19th, 2008 at 1:55 pm@Aglie Cyborg
August 19th, 2008 at 4:10 pmif you are correct and “American women, collectively, really [don't] care that much about sex,” then the best thing that could come out of this thread would be a list of things we can all do to remedy THAT problem. (can someone please leak the Obama sex tape already?)
@CC
August 20th, 2008 at 7:53 amAn additional remedy would be to encourage the radical feminist movement to shut the fuck up and leave porn alone.
@Agile Cyborg
August 20th, 2008 at 7:57 amChip on your shoulder, dearie?
@Girl with a 1 track mind
August 20th, 2008 at 8:02 amResearch the feminist anti-porn movement sweetie. There is no need for an intangible shoulder chip.
@Agile Cyborg
I’m more concerned with how my sexuality is presented and oppressed by misogyny and sexism in conservative society, thanks. “Radical feminists” may have opposed pornography for reasons you may not agree with, but at least they highlighted the sexism in porn - alongside fighting for women’s rights. And if it’s a choice of them, or the right-wingers, I know who I’d be batting for.
There are some radical feminists out there (eg. Feminists against Censorship), who continue to fight the good fight, and who hope and wish that we can see a better, more inclusive porn where women are accepted as subjects, desiring men, rather than just as objects for men to view.
I’m proud to call myself a feminist - and the more people that tell me to “shut the fuck up”, the louder I’ll shout, because I know I’ve got the (silent, for now) majority on my side.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:14 am@Girl with a 1 track mind
I am just as concerned about misogynistic oppression and sexism as I am with radical feminism and its oppression of anything porn.
Radical feminism can be just as insidious as the patriarchal system it is challenging.
Vanilla feminism is more about female assertion and power enhancement rather than seeking to destroy the very foundations of manhood in an awkward, bumbling and atom-bomb-fashion as evidenced by the litany of ‘radical’ feminist agitprop skewering anything with balls littered all over the net.
I certainly have much to say about patriarchal and misogynistic social corruption through the many past centuries and up into more modern times. But, at the present, anti-porn radical feminists are much more likely in today’s society to impact a ‘modern’ (not the conservative religious set) woman’s view of adult entertainment.
Nothing worse than being so sold out to a cause that you cannot see your own dirty laundry. Radical feminism contains a buttload of dirt laundry. Much like the weakening fucked up male-centric system it claims to be foisting change upon.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:41 am@Agile Cyb0rg
seeking to destroy the very foundations of manhood…”
What, like killing every first-born son?
Please, I’m all for porn (better, non-sexist porn), but like I said, if the choice came between sticking up for feminists - who seek EQUAL rights, not female supremacy, contrary to the propaganda that portrays the movement - or supporting the “weakening” male-centric system, as you put it, I know who’s got my back - and it ain’t the status quo, mate.
There’s a backlash against feminism in general - one which I refuse to partake in, because much of my freedom as a woman has been due to this very movement - so I do resent the idea that radical feminism is this huge monolithic anti-male machine. It’s not; rad fem is a small faction of a larger civil and equal rights movement that wants positive change for men as well - they too suffer the sexism that exists in society.
I’m not sold out to any cause, but I will speak up for the women that don’t (the aforementioned thousands, who’ve contacted me), because our voices need to be heard.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:55 amAC - are you implying that making more porn for straight women is somehow anti-man and/or has anything to do with the anti-porn movement? or are you saying that straight women don’t like porn because of the anti-porn movement?
your insistence that radical feminism is trying to ‘destroy manhood’ shows that you are either confused about what radical feminism really is (and it’s ok, i was too once) or you are confused about what manhood is (ditto).
vanilla feminism (and that’s a fun flavor to choose, considering the majority of vanilla feminists are white) is notoriously racist, classist and heterosexist. any argument against a social justice movement that isn’t from the perspective of it not caring enough about social justice is flawed. there have been anti-man anti-porn feminists in this world long enough for us to realize that they have had very little impact in ‘destroying manhood’ or even weakening anyone’s straight white male privilege so why the beef? meanwhile, the white-supremacist patriarchal power structure in this country, which has been operating much much longer, has actually hurt generations of people, white straight men included! so yeah, whatever i might disagree with anti-porn feminists (which, btw, is not what makes someone a ‘radical feminist’) fighting them is not worth a whole hell of a lot of energy as compared to the folks actually holding power in this country/society.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:49 am@Girl with a 1 track mind
Your freedom as a woman is due to every woman who consistently stood up against male oppression in her own personal way throughout the centuries and up until now.
The tide just recently turned in your favor simply because of a natural tipping point that feminist groups like to lay claim to.
The tipping point of social justice was initiated in small spurts here and there, to be sure, but once momentum gains traction you don’t fucking need a ‘Movement’ to maintain a sense of freedom.
Change occurs quickest and most ideally on the broad personal level within social microcosms that span decades.
If you want positive change the only sure way to achieve this is exactly your approach. Sharing strong objectives with as many people as possibly in a way most cogent.
The Movements just take the glory for the results while soldiers in the field are the ones who’ve really created surges of favor.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:53 amGosh, I just love it when men tell me what, and to whom, I should be thankful for. Reminds me of my place in the world. Hooray!
August 20th, 2008 at 9:56 am@Girl with a 1 track mind
‘Gosh, I just love it when men tell me what, and to whom, I should be thankful for. Reminds me of my place in the world. Hooray!’
Ditto- as in:
‘- they too suffer the sexism that exists in society.’
Whatever in the hell this means… but thanks, anyway, for reminding me of my current victim status.
August 20th, 2008 at 10:07 am@AL
You must be reading every third word I post. I have no idea where in the hell you got such a twisted view of what I think about straight women’s porn.
White, straight supremacist power structures are just one of many global entities that exist to self-engorge and dominate. I don’t see WHITE, STRAIGHT supremacists as owning the patent relating to blueprinting tyranny.
As a WHITE, STRAIGHT male I would find great pleasure in experiencing some of so-called privileges supposedly existing for my class of person. Never experienced this and, more than likely, never will.
Everything I’ve gained is the result of scratching my way up a very steep incline.
August 20th, 2008 at 10:24 am@Girl with a one track mind
August 20th, 2008 at 5:12 pmYour voices have been heard. GameLink.com (the ‘Amazon.com’ of porn movies and toys) just published a list of 100 porn movies for women in their reviews section. Something must be changing.
AC: the logic you employ is circular, and you can say i don’t understand you, but i think maybe you don’t understand yourself. you say that straight women aren’t interested in porn and that is why there isn’t porn for them. then you say the proof that they aren’t interested in it, aside from your experience, which for some reason you believe is more valid than my own, is that that there isn’t porn for them.
and why did you even bring up radical feminism if you don’t think it’s related to the dearth of porn for straight women? where exactly did i misunderstand you? because you specifically said that radical feminists were trying ‘destroy manhood’. all i’m saying is that for that to be true, your definition of radical feminist or manhood needs to be fairly off base.
and as for your straight white male privilege, you have it every time you walk a street at night without fear of rape. you have it every time someone describes you by what you’re wearing or what your hair is like instead of the color of your skin. seriously, google ‘white privilege’ and you’ll learn a lot.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:00 pmEverybody, there’s a Troll amongst us.
Hence, I’m leaving this discussion.
Boinkology: keep up the good work.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:03 pmIt is interesting to not how convenient the term Troll has become in the online world to define someone who is merely offering an opposing opinion.
AL, I am simply stating that, in my view, there is not a large enough market segment of straight women who are interested in purchasing porn. It wouldn’t matter a hill of beans if the porn is actually created specifically for them or not.
Now, I may have taken liberties with assuming they are not interested in sex. Point is, ’sex’ in this regard was referenced as a connecting device to pleasuring by mag.
This is, in my view, is WHY porn designed for straight women IS such a niche market. And probably always will be.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:22 pmThere are just not enough consumers (straight women requiring a specific type of porn) to interest porn producers to focus on this segment.
Sorry, misspelled ‘note’ above in the first line.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:23 pm@AGILE CYBORG
You’ve stated your opinion. You don’t think there is a large enough market segment of straight women who are interested in purchasing porn. We get it. But repeatedly stating your opinion does not an argument make.
Given that sex is absolutely necessary for a species to survive I find it hard to believe that women are so uninterested in sex as you would suppose. If that were the case, evolution would have weeded out homo-sapiens as a species a long time ago. I suspect that it seems that way because society has taught women that they aren’t “supposed” to be interested in sex, and so they act like they are not. Plenty of conservative religious men watch pornography (albeit behind closed doors and with much guilt). I know. I used to be one of them. Their religious indoctrination obviously wasn’t strong enough to trump their biology–so why should it be any different with women? Until I see some hard science that says womens’ sex drives are inherently weaker than mens, I am inclined to be skeptical about this stereotype. Until societal attitudes change and careful science is done we won’t know for sure what the true differences between men and women actually are. But I’ve seen enough in my own experience to be convinced that women are a lot more interested in sex than they are letting on.
Regarding feminism–What have you got against the feminist critique of pornography? If it results in better quality porn, I’m all in favor of it. And seeing as how feminists generally hold to liberal values, I do not expect them to try to censor porn or sexual expression. That’s the domain of the religious right. Right now it seems porn is like the fast-food of the erotic media. And like much of fast food, a lot of porn is utter crap! I’ll satisfy your hunger, sure. But it could be so much better than most of it presently is. You also seem to think women’s lib is something that would have happened “naturally” all on it’s own. But we’ve waited for homosexuals to “naturally” become accepted by society, for religious extremism to “naturally” die out, for peace to “naturally” happen in the Middle East, etc… and it isn’t happening. A small but vocal group of people committed to an ideal CAN change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. I don’t buy your theory of “natural” social reformation. If we wait for society to change “naturally” we’re going to be waiting right up until the day the human race finally obliterates itself because of it’s own violence and stupidity.
As a white, straight male, I too was once just as incredibly ignorant as you are about the privileges we take for granted. Since you are apparently too ignorant to realize you have even experienced them, allow me to enlighten you as to some of these privileges: As a white person, when I see a cop late at night I feel safer, not less safe. I don’t worry about being harassed by him or interrogated about what I’m doing out late at night. As a man, I don’t worry about being raped when I walk home alone at night, I don’t worry about being judged a “slut” by my coworkers if I wear the wrong clothing, or getting lewd insults hurled at me from people on the street. I don’t have to wonder if the salary I’m making is as much as I could make if I were the other gender. As a heterosexual, I don’t worry about who it’s safe to tell my sexual orientation to. I don’t worry about being excluded from various organizations or being blamed for the moral collapse of society and the family. People don’t harass me to repent of my “perversion” lest I burn in hell. You and I have no idea what it is like to be in these people’s shoes, but the least we can do is acknowledge the shit they are taking and maybe try to change it rather than denying it exists.
August 20th, 2008 at 10:57 pmIt appears that Boinkology is reflecting its own prejudices… The dichotomies abound.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:07 am“It appears that Boinkology is reflecting its own prejudices… The dichotomies abound.”
hehe, what?
August 21st, 2008 at 11:55 amIt appears as if my response to Nate has not made it past the mods.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:02 pmLeave a reply :