Public Address | Cafe | Up Front: Let's Talk About Sex, Baby

Emma Hart

Mon, 23 Jul 2012 17:23:26 +1200

You're dead to me, Janssen.

Bart Janssen

Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:49:21 +1200

Stuff’s ”the Crusaders only win because they cheat” opinion column

Poor example because McCaw and the Crusaders do cheat. All elite athletes push the boundaries of the rules, all push umpires and referees to get any advantage they can get. If you support the team, then they are playing to…

Craig Ranapia

Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:32:08 +1200

Well, except that, and I really cannot stress this enough, there’s actually nothing wrong with having sex for money.

I'd agree, but Milo knows full sodding well that where he lives and works having sex for money is a crime. Even on the level of moralistic hyperbole, it's a bit…

Emma Hart

Sat, 21 Jul 2012 10:21:21 +1200

Yes there is, Mr. Yiannopolous and I really think you know it.

Well, except that, and I really cannot stress this enough, there's actually nothing wrong with having sex for money.

Craig Ranapia

Sat, 21 Jul 2012 02:30:14 +1200

Is there a difference between writing about sex for money and having sex for money? Not really. What a grubby, humiliating way to make rent.

Oh, Milo, you fuck-knuckle. Let me fix this for you by changing two words.

Is there a difference between writing about murder for money and…

Craig Ranapia

Sat, 21 Jul 2012 02:21:02 +1200

I do love his writing, but he is…..savage.

Yeah, I used to be a huge fan of Savage but there’s been some seriously disturbing shit going on (most recently some really dodgy advice advising a woman to withhold sex to bully her husband into losing weight) that doesn’t sit with…

linger

Sat, 21 Jul 2012 01:43:48 +1200

Yes. I'd note that Dan Savage is usually pretty good about calling in other voices (I'm thinking here especially of his podcasts, rather than in his column) when he fears his contribution on a particular topic might not be entirely useful.

Isabel Hitchings

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:56:16 +1200

The only damage I can see from sex blogging ( assuming a certain degree of non-arsehattery from the blogger) is in not having enough of it or, more specifically, not having a wide enough variety of voices out there.

Islander

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:37:33 +1200

I think female sex bloggers are damaging to men, because they set expectations quite high on the whole communication and self-awareness front, and that’s just not on. Stiff upper lip, chaps, and don’t let them see your fear.

Heh!
Heh heh – o, wait a bit, heh fucking no way-weAGREE!…

Moz

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:21:34 +1200

you see, that there’s an endorsement of making babies. Which creates this kind of logical disconnect: Parthenogenesis? Fully approved, hey, it’s fully What Jesus Would Do. Go for it. Oh, wait, you can’t do that? Well, fuck.

Hey, it worked for Jesus.

I read once a discussion of Christ as…

Sacha

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:35:17 +1200

Be fruitful and multiply

endorsing jam and maths

Islander

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 18:32:33 +1200

Any other sex? Not mentioned, therefore not endorsed

Or blessed in any religious way.
If you are not productive, you’re doomed (sorry, us asex people. Sorry, people who engage in non-productive sex of any kind. And, there is *quite* a lot of that!)

Cant we just shuck off fucking religion…

linger

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 18:06:25 +1200

Oh, you see, that there’s an endorsement of making babies. Which creates this kind of logical disconnect:
Parthenogenesis? Fully approved, hey, it’s fully What Jesus Would Do. Go for it. Oh, wait, you can’t do that? Well, fuck.
Hence: Sex for making babies? Implicitly if somewhat grudgingly approved in an…

Stewart

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:51:20 +1200

It is immediately obvious that Mr Yiannopolous is a complete & utter douchebag. An absolute disgrace to our species and our gender (writing as a man, obv).
The more sex-blogging ==> the less stigmatising of sex and the healthier a society as a result. It doesn't have to follow that this…

Chris Waugh

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:45:43 +1200

Not something God approves of.

"God blessed them, and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply,...'" Genesis 1:28

If that's not a divine endorsement of sex, then.... I dunno, but puritanism doesn't make much sense until seen as a means for preserving social order and the power of a…

Rob Stowell

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:33:40 +1200

Sex bloggers are bad because they encourage women to be something other than virgins before they get married and have babies.
No, much simpler. Sex bloggers are bad because sex is bad. Bad bad bad. Wicked. Nasty. Unmentionable. Not something God approves of. Also, unhealthy, and likely to cause mental…

FletcherB

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:25:04 +1200

"Sexbloggers don’t get to assume the moral high ground. Ever. What they do for a living is incredibly damaging to women”

Which also patently ridiculous because… most of them don’t “make their living” from it…

So, being a scientist, factory-worker, teacher, middle-manager, dentist, garbage collector or whatever, is "damaging to…

Tom Beard

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:43:43 +1200

"Chief Feature Writer, @catholicherald ... I write about technology, culture and religion."

Not to be reductive about Catholicism, but ... actually, I can't be bothered avoiding stereotypes. Sex bloggers are bad because they encourage women to be something other than virgins before they get married and have babies.

JoJo

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:18:03 +1200

"Sexbloggers don’t get to assume the moral high ground. Ever. What they do for a living is incredibly damaging to women”

That line really irritates me. It's the old argument of "Your views/opinions about [issue] can't possibly have any validity because you do [something I disapprove of, which may or…

Andrew Stevenson

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:47:42 +1200

When reading the Milo quotes I couldn't help but recall one of Emma's earlier columns; the one about labelling, in which the labels used are changed to simply say "people". So you get:
"It couldn’t possibly be, could it, that [people] consistently over-promotes [other people], who are often ferociously greedy…

Emma Hart

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:17:38 +1200

That's certainly in the ballpark. You don't get much gayer than Dan Savage, though.

Jackie Clark

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:13:28 +1200

I can't open that Brodie, but that's Dan Savage's stuff, which is less sex blogging and more blogging with quite a bit of sex from time to time. I do love his writing, but he is.....savage.

Brodie Davis

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:10:29 +1200

I don't know if it really counts as blogging as such, but I think http://www.avclub.com/features/savage-love/ does a pretty good job at times. Not sure if he is "straight" as such though (the July 18 column has a very funny opening letter).

Jackie Clark

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:05:41 +1200

Yes. Still, very honest, I think. It would be a fine line I guess, sex blogging for men.

Emma Hart

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:00:02 +1200

Reading the work of these women (I haven't read any male ones)

I'm not familiar with any straight men who sex-blog the way that, say, Girl on the Net does. If anyone does, please for linkies thnx. Through her I have found the painfully funny [[http://impresswomen.tumblr.com/|Things I've Done to Impress…

Lucy Stewart

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:56:58 +1200

The only charitable assumption here is that this guy is a Poe. Because otherwise, he's scum. And I hate to have to assume people are scum.

Jackie Clark

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:53:52 +1200

I'm first? Oh well if the rest of you buggers aren't going to say anything.....(always the worry of those of us who talk too much). I think sex bloggers are very brave for a number of reasons. Not least of which is that they talk about sex in a way…

Public Address

Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:53:52 +1200

Discussion from blog post.