It grosses me out too. Thank heavens for condoms is all I have to say. WHether needed for the BC feature or not.

Nope, we needn't ALL be precious about sex fluids, only people whose job it is to study and teach about sex, as I say.

The gross-out attitude perpetuates a sex negative culture, which facilitates all kinds of negative health outcomes. I believe that leaders in the field of sexuality have a responsibility to help create positive change.

But we all do what we think is best.

Oh, and technically it's Dr. Nagoski, but call me Emily.

So, being grossed out by waste fluids that are secreted by a woman makes one "sexist" and "gynophobic"?

Since shit is produced by both sexes, and I consider it rather unappealing, does that make me a misanthrope?

Yes, Patrick, you're a misanthrope, a misogynist, and whatever else, and so am I. I made it through about the third paragraph before thinking, "Eww! Why am I reading this?" and went to the comments to see if anyone else felt the same way.

My first thought was.... How broke do you have to be to need that $10 or whatever for squatting over a beaker after sex? And if they did it simply out of a dedication to science, than God bless them.

I don't know. If you're going to be provactive and edgy, sometimes people are going to take offense. The cost of doing business.

So I'm wondering if the Hell's Angels initiation rites make them some sort of anti-misogynistic heroes to her?

...and this is why I refer to feminists as idiots, insist that I have never met a smart feminist, and will never ever go out with a feminist, all rolled into one.

Its ironic, women (in the general sense of the word) have rarely been treated with great seriousness intellectually for the first 12-18 thousand years of civilization, with the exception of royal women or intrepid individuals. Then suddenly society is in such a state that women are able to participate in intellectual capacities in every area of academia, they get the opportunity to BE treated seriously, to be listened to and heard, to create valuable intellectual insights into the human condition..and what do we get?

Read what passes for feminist scholarship
Watch a few episodes of Oprah

And then it becomes a lot harder to take women seriously collectively.

Ladies, a piece of advice, if you want to be taken seriously by the men in your life, coworkers, bosses, boyfriends, etc, do one thing and one thing only:

Look at what feminist scholars and their oprahesque adherents say, then say, do, and be, the opposite in virtually every regard.

Oh, and technically it's Dr. Nagoski, but call me Emily.

Easily insulted, looking for slights at every turn. Not surprising.

Jesse is also "Dr. Bering."

When women get all prissy about such stuff -- the mucus and the non-use of the exact proper title in a blog post on advicegoddess.com -- it's hard to think of them as serious researchers. One automatically sees them as typical feminists, looking for victimization at every turn. And one surely wouldn't be wrong.

Google yourself much? I guess that's how you can best seek out all the slights against you and wymynkind.

Hilariously, Nagoski, who's all prissy about sex fluids, swears like The Advice Goddess (you can call me Amy or "sugar tits" -- whichever works best for you):

"under the flag of Scientific A-fucking-merican"

And post-sex excretions are gross, and I want to read the blog of somebody who mentions it and not that of somebody who goes around looking for who's insulted them by not pretending they aren't gross out of some perceived misogyny.

But, thanks -- hilariously entertaining that you dropped by to continue the huffing and puffing.

Ew. Emily, would you be just as critical of a woman who said she was grossed out at swallowing semen? There are many out there, so why aren't you addressing that "sexist" problem?

I think you know why - your feminists supporters would skewer you. If you had an ounce of fairness, however, you'd write about that with equal fervor.

I'd like to also add that women who are squeamish about swallowing are usually talking about that of the men they love. He's talking about anonymous secretions in a vial, which is not nearly as bad as finding your lover's secretions repulsive.

On the list of life's important issues, I'd say this ranks about equal with how many hos LeBron James will have in his new posse. I will say that I'm the person normally grossed out by biology, but I don't have much trouble dealing with sexual excretions -- it's only what's supposed to happen. However, thinking about having to go through procedures involving laboratory glassware afterwards does seem like a sure-fire way to kill the mood.

Rejectulate?

Frankly vegetarians are less odorous (more tasty?) than meat eaters which when we're talking about getting that close to genitalia is an interesting dilemma...

Was there a time parameter? Day one, day two...

There is definitely something fishy about the incompleteness of the study to me...

Bodily fluids are gross - this must be the LEAST controversal topic I've ever seen someone outraged about. Of course after-sex vaginal excretions are nasty; anyone enjoy sleeping in them? And it's not just an snti-sex attitude. The same goes for snot, pus, urine and feces, and even blood and saliva if they aren't your own. I don't have much of a science background, although I've learned a lot at this site. I would guess that we have evolved to find these substances repulsive because of the potential to pass on disease (anything from the common cold to AIDS).

Ahhh baby,I love you, get ready to excrete me.

Hehehehe. I ran across a blog afew days ago and have been having a wonderful time wandering through the archives. He skewers teh stupid of the academic feminsts pretty regularly.

www.davidthompson.typepad.com

My favorite so far was the post titled the "flow of ideas" mocking a professor who did a paper on tampons being 'artefacts of control'. hehehehe. These women are batshit crazy.

Dr. Emily Nagoski is a racist!

(There, i said it first and now i own the moral high ground. Racism out ranks sexism, I win the academic game of being the most offended! Hurray for Our Side! (No, i cannot explain the charge, but I am shrieking hysterically so it works.))

WTF? Who the hell likes any sort of post sex secretion? Even their own? It doesn't stop you from having sex, but you don't go around praising it and putting it in a frame on the wall. Doesn't make you sex-negative either. I love lasagna. I *don't* love having to dig it out of between my teeth at the end of the day. Sheesh. It's just exactly like that.

Dr. Prissypants needs to get over herself.

Wow. Some people have to get up pretty early in the morning to be offended.

If this is "Emily's" biggest problem, she's got a pretty sweet life. Just sayin'.

And now you menfolk know why women run to the bathroom so fast after sex.

Has studying after-sex secretions saved any lives, found a cure, or even a post-sex cleaning formula? Probably why Emily is so touchy about the "Doc" thing. PHD THIS BABY!

I'm puzzled by all the negative press about feminists here. By your own admission, Miss Alkon, you say that the scientist in question "made the mistake..." of saying what he did. So it seems that in a Freudian slip of a way you're in agreement with what the "feminists" are saying. He made a mistake. Oooops!

I consider myself a feminist and I'm disheartened by all the negative press that word is getting these days. What's wrong with wanting equal rights? What's wrong with honouring our mothers who fought hard to win some basic rights that we enjoy now, rights most of your readers are probably too young to remember even involved a fight?

And so what if the woman in question, Emily, makes an response on your blog. Surely as a journalist you must welcome this sort of thing instead of blaming her for googling herself? Never mind the hysterical feminists, Miss Alkon, you just ound like the negative photo-image: equally nutty and hysterical.

It's easy to go after feminists instead of looking at the boneheaded comment the guy made.

I work in an academic environment and his statement would be akin to my walking into a department meeting and announcing I don't like toilet paper. It's just that stupid. And, I wouldn't expect the men in my department to be too thrilled at having that information about me. I doubt, for instance, they'd be lining up to befriend/date me. Looking at me askance would probably be their realistic reaction and who could blame them?

It's too bad this scientist let that information become public, but he did and now he's living with the consequences. It's called being a grown up.

Yes, Another feminist with a curtain in her mind where anything bad said about a woman is automatic misogyny but wouldn't say boo if a man were being falsely accused and put in jail.

Because after all they deserve it don't they!

Feminists are almost never beautiful women. Often they are hideous looking. The ratios are WAY out of proportion if you ever see them gathered. You know something ain't right before you even know who they are.

Coincidence?

Think about it people. People who specialize in being part of a group-based-victim-me-too-club when they *clearly* are not victims almost always have something ELSE driving their "issue". It's anger driven and it's personal - "I suck, am ugly, got abused, am fat, could never get the man I want even though I'm smart", etc. And not about the larger group they claim to represent(women).

I consider myself a feminist and I'm disheartened by all the negative press that word is getting these days.
then do something about it

What's wrong with wanting equal rights?

Nothing, but you already have equal rights. And as you already have equal rights feminism can no longer be about equal right, because if it were it would have nothing to do.

Remember in the presidntual primaries when Kennedy threw his support behind someoneother th Hillary? And NY-NOW's president went on a rant about how Kennedy owed women his unconditional support in everything because they forgave him for leaving a woman to drown to death in a car. Didnt use those exact words but that was the idea.

Psyho bitch went on to proclaim all grade school boys everywhere gang rapists - and those were the exact words she used.
How is calling children gang rapists "equailty"

How about title IX? How many male sports programs have been cut because a simmilar number of women are not as interested in playing collegie sports and the way the laws is written the money mus be split between both sexes equally even if the number of female athletes is half that of males?

Why are there women only gyms to 'protect women from roving looks' but male only establishments are sexist, degrading, and just offend the sensibilites?

Why dont women and men get equal maternity leave?

What about any of that is equal?
You know, the original skin heads lamented the loss of their movement to the crazy fringe and subsequent shift in the definition of their word in the minds of the public.

Feminism jumped the track awhile ago, but no one seemed to care.

To cry foul on those of us who paid attention is a little disingenious lady

Dr Bering suggested a love poem, here is my attempt:

Tho' loves remnants leak her,
To only drop in a beaker,
The beauty is not diminished,
After the coitus is finished.

"I work in an academic environment and his statement would be akin to my walking into a department meeting and announcing I don't like toilet paper."

y'know... excretions of the human body are all pretty nasty, especially if you don't know who made them, and they have had some time to ripen. Saying that they are nasty doesn't change their value, any more than studying cadavers does, but it is still NASTY and not some kind of nectar of the gods'.

Maybe people in academy feel that you can't use such common language to say things like that, because then you won't seem smart anymore?

Since the article was about female secretions, the writer reacted to that. if it had been about male secretions, or whatever, he probably would have reacted to that as well...

But the question is, should we have to always state gender equivalents so as not to potentially offend anyone: "for the record that male fluid turns my stomach as well..." If you are constantly looking to be offended, you will find a way to do so, and this is the agressive part of being a victim. Going out and finding ways to be pissed off about something.

To use an analogy, think of modern Islamists.

They're not merely proud to be Muslims or whatever. They're humiliated because they have such lame societies, lack of achievements, etc...

Having Israel next door is a mirror that shows you how ugly you are. Ditto for the West generally. We're an image of what's possible, highlighting something ugly and lame about yourself. So you lash out, blaming others for it all.

Likewise Islamic men don't abuse and humiliate women because it's Holy; it's about personal control and insecurity.

So it is with modern feminists. It just ain't about what they say it's about. The behavior, illogic, anger, (often) physical ugliness and silliness all betray this fact.

The Misfit Sperm.

That's one hella band name.

I'm having a hard time thinking of someone of less value to society than Dr. Emily Nagoski.

I mean, really - it takes some weapons-grade stupid to come up with shit like this.

This is what happens when political movements refuse to die when they've run their course.

"I'm having a hard time..."

Whoa!!!

You, sir, have just revealed the meta-narrative of male dominance and phallocentric view you're trying to IMPOSE (i.e., rape) on the women here. Please go back to re-education camp. There are speech codes to memorize.

>>I encounter a lot of academics because I go to their conferences. Those who have accomplished something and don't feel they have to prove themselves are the ones who are most apt to describe things without getting all mucked up in complicated lingo.

C'mon, Amy!

There's bullshit complicated lingo and there's expert complicated lingo!

Have you ever encountered Brigid?
Brilliant stuff - but bags of complicated lingo!

(Brigid Hogan, PhD, FRS is the George Barth Geller Professor and Chair of the Department of Cell Biology, Duke University Medical Center. She is also Director of the Duke Stem Cell Program. Prior to joining Duke, Dr Hogan was an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Hortense B. Ingram Professor in the Department of Cell Biology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Dr. Hogan earned her PhD in Biochemistry at the University of Cambridge. After completing her PhD, she was a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Biology at MIT. Before moving to the United States in 1988 Dr Hogan was head of the Molecular Embryology Laboratory at the National Institute for Medical Research in London. Her research currently focuses on the genetic control of embryonic development and morphogenesis, using the mouse as a model system. She currently has a particular interest in stem cells of adult endodermal organs, including the lung and esophagus, and their role in organ turnover and repair. She was President of the American Society for Developmental Biology and is President-elect of the American Society of Cell Biology. Her service to the scientific community has included being a member of the National Advisory Council of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Co-Chair for Science of the 1994 NIH Human Embryo Research Panel and a member of the 2001/2002 National Academies Panel on Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Cloning. Dr. Hogan is a Fellow of the Royal Society of London and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences, USA.)

"It's easy to go after feminists instead of looking at the boneheaded comment the guy made."

Once again, you wouldn't find it "boneheaded" if it were about semen. No feminist would critcize a woman for her squeamishness about male secretions - much less declare that she should love ejaculate because it's from a man - but it's ok to cry sexist in reverse.

Lujlp does a good job detailing why we don't think you're for equality at all. And I'm a woman. This kind of stuff embarrasses me. If you want to know why feminism has been given such a bad name, this is a perfect example.

I was going to say, "Now, now, folks. Let's not throw food at Ms. Nagoski, Ph.D. after she stopped by. Good for her. She was polite, if a bit stuffy. And it is poor form to treat visitors to the board like, well, regulars to the board." But then I read her self-description:

"Emily is a college health educator in Massachusetts. In 2006, she completed a Ph.D. in Health Behavior with a concentration in Human Sexuality. She also holds a MS in Counseling Psychology and a BA in Psychology with minors in Cognitive Science and Philosophy. She’s worked for well over a decade in the field of sexuality education and has grown into an impassioned advocate for social justice through sexual fulfillment. Politically progressive and unapologetically atheistic, Emily has strong opinions and a big vocabulary, and she’s determined to use both to make the world a better place for human sexual expression."

/Groan

Need I explain further? I thought not.

Ms. Nagoski, Ph.D.'s cliche collegiate-town narcissism bores me, so I am shamelessly thread-jacking now: I offer the idea that the "Dr." title for social science Ph.D.s is simply too much. We should not grant it to social science doctoral holders. If a Ph.D. is a hard science (physics, chemistry, etc.) degree, which takes uncommon ability to obtain, perhaps then we could find some middle ground. But social sciences? No. (And don't get me started about philosophy or history degrees.)

Ms. Alkon is displaying the nose-negative attitude that prevails in our alimentary-centric society.

I would expect someone who is versed in the research and mores of the nose should better conduct themselves than refer to nasal membrane expulsions as "boogers". Unprofessional.

Those Who Have Been Credentialed (/genuflection) refer to them as "nasal nuggets". Remember that, woman! (/hardstare)

--Dr. Spartee

"I had a "big vocabulary" when I was in my early 20s, and boy did I sound like an asshole."

When I was at University in my early 20s, I would use phrases like "integrated conceptual framework" (in assignments and speaking to other students) in an attempt to sound intellectual. Years later I realized how silly I was.

>>No feminist would critcize a woman for her squeamishness about male secretions - much less declare that she should love ejaculate because it's from a man - but it's ok to cry sexist in reverse.

Lovelysoul,
I'm a feminist (not always a very good one!), and I'd find it bloody cringe-making if a female researcher blogging at ScientificAmerican.com made squealing gah-puke-yuck!!! comments about male ejaculate.

I'd absolutely wonder who she thought her audience was - and why she didn't keep her jokey cracks for, say, any safely like-minded chums in private.

ypetterson you know fully well that contemporary Feminism is not simply the desire for equal rights and honoring our mothers (I'm guessing you mean Feminist forbearers). It's become like a vendetta and has been poisened by exactly this sort of aggressive narcissistism, evident in the weird fixation on vaginas ( let's imagine how we'd perceive penis worship among men ). In the US, Feminism is like a depraved therapy cult.

"So I'm wondering if the Hell's Angels initiation rites make them some sort of anti-misogynistic heroes to her?"

We-ellll, as long as we're talking about boogers and sperm and all our loverly fluids...

Just saw an article about the origin of the term "red wings" that I was going to mention but Mbruce beat me to the reference.

Anyway, certain feminists took exception to the thought of menstrual blood being considered anything but a natural, beautiful, product of a natural, beautiful process. And oral sex should be acceptable during any time of that natural, beautiful process.

To which I can only say bleeeaarrggghhhh! Just call me a female misogynist, I guess.

"an impassioned advocate for social justice through sexual fulfillment."

can I get a grant for that? I would surely advocate for social justice, er... after I was fulfilled.

seriously, it is hard to write such self descriptions. On the other hand, as a scientist, doesn't it seem a bit of a problem to make claims that certainly show partiality to one opinion? Or would she consider herself a scientist?

Clearly Dr. Emily Nagoski has a thing for "cream pies".

Eww! Yuck! Gross, Sio! (whoops, there goes my job at scientificamerican).

Well, the guy is entitled to say what he's saying because it's his blog after all. But I wouldn't consider befriending or dating a man like him. (And before everyone jumps on me, this is hypothetical and I know he's not seeking me out for either of these things.)

The whole feminist issue aside, he just doesn't come across as a very likeable human being, even if he has a point.

What's wrong with wanting equal rights?

If that were what feminism was about, I'd agree.

Only an academic could argue that social justice is accomplished by sexual behavior in any form or fashion.

There is a reason why the expression "Its academic" means "its irrelevant".

I have to agree with earlier assertion that being called "Doctor" for a degree in social sicence is ludicrous. I enjoy studying the social sciences, I had a professor call me a "natural anthropologist" because of the quality of my work.

But I'm not about ot pretend it is the same as being a chemist or a medical specialization.

A good friend of mine went to a private college chock full of lesbians and feminists like Dr. Emily. I'm just glad my good friend lived and worked in the real world first, b/c she could've ended up like one of her friends I met--i.e. some dour-puss idiot from DC who remarked, while I was listening to the MC5 in MY car, that one of her professors claims Rock and Roll is oppressive. I'm nice so I switched to some Nina Simone. I didn't even bother arguing, what I felt most was pity. These young gals don't even realize that they're just being juiced in the system. I'm about as far as one can get from being sex-negative (Hello! I work as a pro-domme), I've worked will all manner of fetishes and I can tell you that there are lots of men out there who would've paid good money to have front row seats (or just a spot on the floor) in that lab. Most women I know would pass.

"Oh, and technically it's Dr. Nagoski, but call me Emily."

Technically how? Technically in some patriarchal notion of argument to authority? Technically legally? Technically how?

@Sio HAHAHAHAHA Clearly!

Why cant more feminists be like camille paglia?

@anon "patriarchal notion of argument to authority"

Touche!

I have been tooling around the archives on the blog I linked above and saw this... I really felt the need to share since it really is giggilicious and who cant use a giggle now and again? the info-sales blurb is priceless too

We make many different types of feminist body positive products: beautiful, hand sculpted vagina pendants, uterus plushies, vulva portraits, vagina pillows, and reusable cloth menstrual pads.

http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidthompson/2009/11/hug-your-inner-organ.html#more

"(Hello! I work as a pro-domme), I've worked will all manner of fetishes"

Interesting, Gspotted. Can I ask you, do you do that just because it's a job, or do you enjoy being dominant?

This reasearch Robin Baker was the basis for a very fascinating book he wrote called Sperm Wars. As disgusting as researching bodily fluids may or may not be, it was important and yielded some interesting information in the area of fertility and how it works.

I'm not a fan of any bodily fluids or waste and find them all disgusting. That doesn't mean I'm against scientific reasearch on it. In fact, in college I actually had a part-time job for class credits working in a lab type setting (fertility center) where I had to handle certain bodily fluids. Yes, I found it a bit "icky" but considering containers, gloves, et cetera I fortunately didn't have any actual contact with it. I found the job quite fascinating.

I don't think it's anti-woman to find vaginal and cervical fluids disgusting to have on you or play with it. Same with semen. That doesn't make me anti-man. I also don't want urine, feces, snot all over me either. Does that make me anti-living creature?

Snot? Aggh. Somebody ELSE'S! Aaaaggghhhhh!!! Wipe it on flaming wood if you have to!

(Thanks, George)

@lovelysoul: I have a day job, my number one passion, but I like playing and I can get paid for it because I'm still young and hot! It's also really fascinating b/c I get to meet all sorts of people who have this really intense energy about them. Some of their fetishes and fantasies are rooted in childhood or early dating experiences; flashbulb memories. Some people don't realize their kink until they're forty, but I've seen some very young people at play parties. It can be very healthy and fun but like anything there is a dark side-- that usually has to do with an erosion of all boundaries. Having boundaries is a good way to stay safe, sane, consensual and all that jazz. That's sex positive! Pretending to think or (feel) anything is just regressive. If Bering's grossed out, so be it. If some guy wants his face to be treated like the beaker in the lab, so be it! And to answer your question, Yes I LOVE being a dominant.

Emily reminds me of my ex. When we had first met, my ex was soo sex positive, so flirtatious, so sex is fun and naughty and fun and interesting and all is good.

It later turned out that Ms. It's all good and nothing is gross had major hangups and judgments about EVERYTHING.

@anon: It sounds like you're still in it. Good luck finding someone better suited for you.

"Some of their fetishes and fantasies are rooted in childhood or early dating experiences; flashbulb memories."

I would bet almost all of them are. I was married to an S&M guy, but I wasn't into it, and I wonder why he would've picked me when he could've so easily found someone who was into being dominated, rather than manipulating me into playing that role.

I came to the conclusion that this was, in fact, the whole point. If I'd liked it, he wouldn't have enjoyed it.

Just interested in your professional opinion on that.

Ah, remember the days of blogofamous feminists (but not sex researchers) and their famous funk filled bratwurst posts?

"There's a reason that deep-throating a funk-filled bratwurst makes a person retch.* (*Reason, it's fucking gross.)"

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=funk+filled+bratwurst

And yes Doctor Emily, Twisty Faster, who first wrote that is a dyke, so maybe her misandry is explained by her heterophobia.

@lovely soul: I'm sorry you were topped like that, try getting topped from the bottom (that's a real mindF***). There is a thing that some tops do when in a relationship that I find kind of creepy. It's called "planting a seed" in the bottoms brain. It's a kind of power of suggestion boundary pushing. Like suggestions on amazon.com --If you like nipple torture you might also enjoy______. Then before you know it you've got all manner of stuff in your cart that you didn't originally sign on for. I don't get down like that.

I always wonder why people don't put the kinky stuff out on the table before they tie the knot. This letter from a cuckold's wife to Dear Abby is a good example

http://www.uexpress.com/dearabby/?uc_full_date=20100623

For the record lovelysoul, let me first say I agree with you.

If it were a woman talking about semen, nobody would have said a thing.

But, while I agree with your sentiment, I think it is important that we stay focused, and not put up anything resembling a straw man. The real topic, I would suggest, is the otherworldly level of offense that the aforementioned feminists take the the slightest hint that everything they produce, whether it is literature or bodily secretions (sometimes not that different from one another) is something other than the very gift of the gods.

How this "incident" if you want to call it that, made it out of some lab room jokes to become something worth feeling oppressed or offended about, is beyond me.

Just goes to prove, chicks are nuts. ;) Love yah though, its part of your charm for the best of you.

(before you ask, yes men are nuts too, but in a different way. VIVE LE DIFFERENCE!)

A sadist and a masochist go out on a date, the masochist is overjoyed, thinking now she's found what she was looking for, well the public date ends, she brings the sadist into her home and then with a sultry smile, the masochist says to the sadist, "Hurt me."

To which the sadist replies:

"No."

That about sum it up lovelysoul?

Gross. Congealed gizzy mucous getting qweefed into a beaker?! That sounds about as appealing as getting shitting during childbirth. Or hemorrhoids.

Anyway. Lots of far grosser stuff gets excreted from the human body, male and female (I won't elaborate). But the real question is this:

Who the fuck volunteered to participate in this study?

Wow, you nailed it Gspotted! You're good. The seed planting came first, for a long time, just getting me comfortable with being topped, as you call it. Making me feel that I'd be extremely narrow-minded if I didn't at least "try" this or that. Boundary pushing.

I'd read that Dear Abby, too, and thought it seemed very similar.

Cute joke, Robert.

I suppose, to draw this back on topic, this PHD, Emily, envisions a world where we all have a fetish for bodily fluids...and I bet Gspotted can attest to how messy that could get.

>>Who the fuck volunteered to participate in this study?

Gretchen,
I read a very in depth interview ages ago with women who volunteered themselves as patients for trainee ob-gyns. That is, they weren't troubled/squicked out/embarrassed at submitting to multiple pelvic exams by newbie docs - under supervision - for technique teaching purposes.

They sounded such a lovely, forthright lot of broads. Totally steady, glad to be able to help, great sense of humor - and rather more knowledgeable than average about their own bodies. There didn't appear to be a nutter among them!

@Robert: TEE-hehehehehe good tease and denial joke!

@lovelysoul: Seedplanting isn't for the faint of heart or the dabbler, it's hardcore! You didn't "sign up for it", but when you ignored your feelings of discomfort you kinda did. It was no coincidence that you two found each other. "Making you feel" Tsk tsk...Never forget about your power, your energy, and your feelings; bring it back to you.

I was 19, Gspotted. It wouldn't happen now, for sure. Someone can "make you feel" a lot of things when you're that age, which is why a sadist would go after the youngest woman he could.

It's a sick world. Fascinating though. You should write a book.

Dr. Nagoski If You're Nasty is on fire lately. She recently perplexed Bacchus over at Eros Blog because she celebrated the FDA's rejecting an application to market flibanserin to women with low libido. Bacchus was wondering why a progressive feminist would be so happy to take choices away from other women. He must not know many feminists. Dr. Nagoski If You're Nasty doesn't want women to want to fuck until the whole world changes to suit her:

>>Globally speaking, it’s not women’s DESIRE that’s broken, it’s the culture that shapes both women’s desires and their perceptions of that desire (“enough” desire, “too much,” “too little”). What needs to be fixed is the CULTURE. You can’t medicate a culture. You can change it gradually through education and various reform efforts.

Also, she's afraid that if women who would gladly pay for this drug are actually allowed to have it, the world won't understand that women's sexuality is SO MUCH MORE complicated than men's. Evidently, raising awareness of this opinion of hers is more important than helping women get horny. Someone might commit thoughtcrime!

This is too bad as far as I'm concerned, because she has a good blog covering everyone's favorite subject from a scientific standpoint. I like to read it. Those in academia can't seem to get far enough out of the echo chamber to realize they are not objective.

Before I finish the article, please tell me it's a joke, only no one could think this one up.
Em, sweetie-
1.We know the men put the "nasty stuff" there.
2. Who wouldn't gag---- man OR woman?

It's a job right up there with male arm-pit-sniffing. I saw a picture as a child in the Na Geo
Magazine. A line of matronly, dominatrix- looking women,armed with clipboards, clumping along sniffing a line of manly armpits. It seared my delicate brain. Now this!
Get a grip, Emily Nagoski.!

UUUh, I didn't post that- "Just Assume " what happened?

What I was trying to say, in my babbling monologue, is that it's not anti-woman to say that it sounds like a disgusting procedure, no matter where it comes from and who's doing it.
Bodily fluids, no matter where they come from, nose, throat, vagina,penis, are fluids I don't want to play with, and our mothers would be appalled if we did.
Most of the comments are hysterical, and make me feel like I'm back in the 8th grade. Not a bad feeling for an "older" woman.
Amy- thanks again for making me laugh.

lovelysoul, I'm complimented by your suggestion that I write a book...hmmmm...Thanks!
But I have to reassert my point about relationships- it takes two. It sounds like you got yourself out of dysfunctional relationship, that's wonderful! You wouldn't credit someone else for the power/strength it took to leave, right? 19 is young and I agree-- most controlling/insecure guys favor younger women b/c of the hypno-factor. The reason seed planting creeps me out is b/c it reminds me of what sexual predators do to children. When two people get together and one says "I want my boundaries pushed" and the other says "great I think that's hot" then I think it's fine. However, it sounds like that wasn't the case with you. Have you ever watched a child in the operational stages of development? They repeat tasks over and over and over. If you're a Mom or a teacher you'll know it can be a real drag doing that puzzle for the fiftieth time, but kids have to do it so they can move on to what's next. Guess what? The same thing happens in relationships when people don't get a fair shake from their parents. People hook up with others and go "oh okay, now I'll be able to figure out this relationship thing that I didn't get to master way back when" The people we choose teach us a lot about ourselves, and that's valuable. Don't give your ex sole credit for that relationship, it was part of your inevitable mastery.

If a Ph.D. is a hard science (physics, chemistry, etc.) degree, which takes uncommon ability to obtain, perhaps then we could find some middle ground. But social sciences? No. (And don't get me started about philosophy or history degrees.)

Spartee, it stands for "Piled Higher and Deeper" no matter what the discipline. Engineers know this and view anyone with one with suspicion.

Ew. Emily, would you be just as critical of a woman who said she was grossed out at swallowing semen?

Lovelysoul, that's one test and I agree with what you're saying about Emily's bias - but to digress a little the real question is how many guys will kiss their girlfriend afterwards? Fair trade-off, but one that took me about as long to learn as it took to find a gf that was willing to swallow. Makes a big difference though as a thank you, and improves your chances next time Mr. Happy is looking for a polish :)

But I was never upset about the one that was happy (or insisted on sometimes) to give me a blowjob but ran to the bathroom to spit afterward. As far as I was concerned, once it left my body who gives a damn where it ends up?

We share a bit too much on this site don't we?