Archive | The bloody Daily Mail RSS feed for this section

Ten Rules for Managing Your Vagina

8 Aug


Following Suzanne Moore’s excellent and very informative article for men on how to manage their penises, published in the Guardian, I thought I would do all the ladies a favor and offer some suggestions on how to manage their vaginas.

suzanne moore

This is Suzanne, by the way.

Let’s recap Suzanne’s article quickly.  The very definition of delightful, no?


How to Manage Your Penis


1.            Don’t take pictures of your penis and don’t share them 

2.            Wash your filthy penis, please

3.            Do not use small appliances on your penis

4.            Do not urinate in public.  Gross!

5.            Don’t forget not to rape anybody with your penis

6.            Do not name your penis

7.            Do not share your penis with other men

8.            Do not decorate your penis

9.            Do not attempt to change the natural shape of your penis

10.          Do not mistake your penis for your brain

Excellent advice, Suzanne.  You really have a handle on the psychology of the average male.  The love just shines through!  A rainbow of affection for a dreary day!


How unfair of you to leave the ladies out, though.  Surely, some vagina love is in order, to complement this Ode to LoveRockets?

Let me help you out.  Here are Ten Rules to Manage Your Vagina.

1.            Don’t take pictures of your vagina and don’t share them 

And if you plan to ignore this excellent advice, try to find out whether the recipient of your largess would care to see your vagina in the first place.  Don’t be this girl, sexting members of her high school lacrosse team, who didn’t particularly care to go visually spelunking through the lady cave of their friend, and had her, oops!  Expelled!

See?  Bad things can happen if you sext your muffin to guys who have already had lunch, thanks.

Never worry, though.  You have Feminists™ to come to your defence and wonder why the BOYS didn’t get expelled for failing to worship the Kodak Yoni.


Ha ha!  Silly vagina owner.  Not everyone wants to see it.  Keep in it your Calvin Kleins.

Oh, oops. My bad.  She only sent pictures of her boobies.  No naughtybit shots. Well, let’s try this one, then.  Let’s try all of these!

You see, ladies, when you take explicit pictures of your naked body and send them to people, they are no longer your private property, and if you happen to go full bore cunt on the lucky recipient, plan on seeing your bits plastered far and wide on the internet.

Oh, boo hoo.  You want to shame, humiliate, mock, deride and snicker at MEN who have made the mistake of sharing their XXX camera roll, but when it happens to YOU, that’s a felony?



Pot, let me introduce you to kettle.

There is one surefire way for BOTH men and women to ensure they are not publicly exposed by their own selfies – don’t take them.  If you can’t abide that, then accept you are taking a risk.  YOU took the shot!  YOU pressed send.

And you will face whatever consequences there are as a result of YOUR own decisions.  Welcome to being a grown-up.

2.            Wash your filthy vagina, please

Sweaty, bloody, occasionally yeasty, and dripping wet when aroused – ladies, please take some steps to keep your vagina clean.  You know, a daily shower should do it.  A bit of hygiene after a loo run.


You know, Suzanne, this is just gross.  Any attempt to make genitals seem dirty and filthy by the simple act of being genitals reeks of some pretty serious psychological disturbance, to me.  There is even a name for it – a bunch of names, actually.


Phallophobia is the abnormal and persistent fear of a penis, especially if it’s erect.   Those who suffer from this phobia are afraid to look at or touch a penis.  This even includes pictures of penises.  Phallophobia is similar to Medorthophobia, the fear of an erect penis and Ithyphallophobia, the fear of seeing, thinking about or having an erect penis.

A phobia is a strong, persistent fear of situations, objects, activities or persons.  The main symptom is an excessive and unreasonable desire to avoid the feared subject. Other phobia symptoms include shortness of breath, irregular heartbeat, sweating, nausea, and an overall feeling of dread.  Phobias are the most common form of anxiety disorders.

Now, spiders I can understand. Spiders are terrible.  Really, really awful.


But penises?

I really think you need to look into whatever is causing you to believe male genitals are dirty, Suzanne.  It’s kind of not very normal.

3.            Do not use small appliances on your vagina

Especially not any of these small appliances!


Holy Joy Nazi!  Welcome to Suzanne’s world.  The Mayor of NoFunsVille herself.  I think Suzanne should begin an immediate program of applying a LOT of small appliances to her vagina. Okay, technically, not her vagina.  But let’s not get fussed.  It’s in the ballpark. She’ll figure it out. She might feel a lot better, too.

4.            Do not urinate in public.  Gross!

pee 2

pee 1

pee 3

Nuff said.

5.            Don’t forget not to rape anybody with your vagina


And while you’re at it, try to remember not to accuse people of raping you with their penis when that isn’t true. It’s a very nasty thing to do. And after you do it, oh, eleven times or so, you might even go to jail.  I guess the message is that ONE or TWO accusations is okay, but don’t get carried away with it.

Now, now. Don’t get hysterical. I’m not saying NO false accusations.  Moderation, ladies!  Just a little restraint.

6.            Do not name your vagina


Enough with the “Ladybits” and “Pandora’s Box” and “Honeypot” nonsense.  Vagina.  There is nothing wrong with the word vagina. Needing to name your “Midnight Garden” is just immature and off-putting.

Grow up fellow “Yorkshire Pudding” owners!

7.            Do not share your vagina with other women


Uhm, I don’t even know what to do with this one.  Throw in homophobia as a bit of satire?  For what purpose? To highlight the fact that Suzanne’s entire article is a steaming pile of hateful bile?

Well, okay.  I personally don’t care who you issue entrance passes to, but we can play along.

No dykes!  No sharing your vagina with other women!

8.            Do not decorate your vagina


No grooming! And vajazzling? Forget it.  No piercing, tattooing or accessorizing.

9.            Do not attempt to change the natural shape of your vagina

Obviously, actual mutilation during childhood is utterly forbidden. For vaginas.  Penises we don’t care much about.  Mutilating baby boys is okie-dokie, but once that initial butchery is done, never, ever try any other enhancements.


Ladies, stop doing those Kegels this instant.  Nobody cares about a tight vagina anyways. And no post-birth reconstructive surgeries, either.  No rejuvenations!  Fourth degree tearing during a particularly tough labor?  Too bad!

10.          Do not mistake your vagina for your brain

This will be the tough one.  Stop thinking with your crotches, ladies.  There is more to life than cultivating your LadyGarden.  More to your existence than ploughing the fields and planting seeds.  Of course, if you forgo planting, you will probably starve, but that’s neither here nor there.


Ladies, you need to think with your heads, not your ovaries!  Just think where we could be as a human species if more women focused on their education and careers and contributions than on the occupational status of their wombs.


More Barista of Arts, summa cum latte!


More secretaries!


More elderly women alone with no one to care for them!

More of everything we need, no?

In a way, Suzanne’s article is very instructive. The denigration of men and their filthy, rapey minds and penises used to be rather subtle. A little unpacking was in order.  That is no longer true.  If you look at the comments at the Guardian, even average readers seem to be able to detect the scent of desperation.  The rhetoric against men is escalating because the fog is slowly lifting.

How much longer will the Guardian, and other news sources be able to get away with this campaign?  Yesterday’s discussion was kind of interesting.  Is critiquing Cathy Young fair? Does she have a legitimate complaint that the rhetoric of those who speak out in favor of human rights for everyone is just a bit too aggressive, crass, brash, antagonistic?


Complaining about dirty penises in a national newspaper hardly fits the bill for polite, civil conversation, if you ask me.

Maybe we are a bit crass.  A bit belligerent.  A bit over the top.  So what?


We were told our campaign wasn’t sufficiently slick. We regard that as a compliment.

Margaret Thatcher

Fuck all the slick campaigns.  Dirty fights are dirty.

And there’s nothing wrong with getting a little dirty now and then.

Lots of love,


Babies should not be separated from Mommy overnight during the first year of life? How about they should not be separated from their Primary Caregiver, and sometimes, that means Daddy.

22 Jul


carry 2


Here’s a story making the rounds in a number of papers, but I have a weakness for the hyperbole of the Daily Mail, so I’ll use that as my main reference. The story is this: babies who spend nights away from their Primary Caregiver (usually owing to custody agreements) experience reduced attachment to that caregiver.


baby sleeping


Of course, the DM equates Primary Caregiver with Mommy, and while that’s generally true, it by no means HAS to be.


US researchers set out to discover what happens when babies under 12 months old spend a night or more per week away from their mothers, as increasingly happens when separated parents share custody.

They found that such infants had more insecure attachments to their mothers compared with babies who had fewer overnight stays or saw their fathers only during the day.


Let’s turn our attention first towards what the word “attachment” means.


carry 3


Infants become attached to individuals who are sensitive and responsive in social interactions with them, and who remain as consistent caregivers for some months during the period from about six months to two years of age, this is known as sensitive responsiveness. When the infant begins to crawl and walk they begin to use attachment figures (familiar people) as a secure base to explore from and return to. Caregivers’ responses lead to the development of patterns of attachment; these, in turn, lead to internal working models which will guide the individual’s perceptions, emotions, thoughts and expectations in later relationships.


Babies who DON’T experience this kind of attachment to a loving, responsive caregiver can have some serious difficulties to contend with throughout their lives.


Attachment disorder is a broad term intended to describe disorders of mood, behavior, and social relationships arising from a failure to form normal attachments to primary care giving figures in early childhood, resulting in problematic social expectations and behaviors. Such a failure would result from unusual early experiences of neglect, abuse, abrupt separation from caregivers after about 6 months of age but before about three years of age, frequent change of caregivers or excessive numbers of caregivers, or lack of caregiver responsiveness to child communicative efforts.


This new research, as referenced in the DM, seems to suggest that separations BEFORE six months can be just as deleterious on an infant’s attachment to their Primary Caregiver.


Atlanta Birth Photography | | Newborn | Home Birth | Water Birth


Personally, I agree. The idea that infants are tabula rasa prior to six months is nonsense, to me. All three of my children seemed completely in awe when they were first born and heard me speak and could see me for the first time. They did not react to the midwives, who were not familiar, regular voices to them, nor did they react to other people who were not regular visitors or guests in our home.


Aside from me, there was one other person the babies seemed astonished to hear for the first time: their father.




His voice was completely, utterly familiar. Even in sleep, their eyes would flutter when Daddy spoke or sang to them. The two younger children reacted the same way to the voices of their older siblings. They knew those voices. They were already attached to them.


It’s hard for me to set aside my Mommy instincts and try to objectively consider whether some babies might be better off with a primary attachment to their fathers, which is kind of odd, because I also believe at the same time that had I died during childbirth, my children would have been absolutely fine in the care of their father, whom they recognized from his voice.


What I do want to tackle is the idea that “shared parenting” is the ideal way to care for a baby. That the baby is EQUALLY attached to both parents, or to all the people (it takes a village) who help raise the child.


It’s bullshit. Babies need one Primary Caregiver. One person to whom they are deeply, inextricably bonded, and that person needs to be loving and responsive. I firmly believe that normal, well-adjusted women will understand that biologically, they are programmed to be that caregiver. The baby that comes out of their body is best served if they are fed from the same body, and if they bond deeply to that body. It’s a continuum that nature has evolved to ensure the best odds of survival.




There is no question that breastfed babies are at an advantage over their chemically nurtured counterparts. They are happier, smarter and healthier.


Children exclusively fed breast milk for at least three months have up to 30 per cent extra growth in the key parts of the brain which control language, emotion, and understanding, say scientists.


‘What we found was that infants fully breastfed for six months had a significantly lower risk of respiratory infections in the first two years.

‘Specifically, the chance of contracting pneumonia was reduced fivefold, while the risk of recurrent ear infections was minimised twofold.’


I’ve written about women’s refusal to breastfeed before, and just how I feel about that, but when the issue of custody and wellness comes up, I think there is another layer of nuance that can be added to the discussion.


While I will happily say that breastMILK is best for baby, I am now forced to pause to consider if breastFEEDING is really all that important, or if the benefits of breastfeeding can be delivered equally by either parent.


daddy feeding


When our next door neighbor decided that motherhood was actually a shit deal and went back to work when Peanut was five months old, Peanut’s Daddy stepped in and he “breastfed” his daughter. He would tuck her inside his hoodie with her bottle (full of breastmilk) tucked into his armpit, and hold her up high while she “nursed”. It was actually the cutest damn thing in the world. She had all the benefits of skin-to-skin contact, and warmth and snuggling and listening to his heartbeat and it was just lovely all around.


It’s hard to imagine a judge ordering a baby into Daddy’s custody, and simultaneously ordering Mommy to provide the baby with expressed milk. Holy Jesus, could you imagine the headlines?








But why the hell not? We already know that men don’t get to decide if they want to be parents. If they are going to be forced into it, why shouldn’t they be able to take actions to reduce the contact they must have with the child’s mother while sacrificing ZERO of the bond they might have with their children?


One can easily imagine feminists jumping on board with the “no shared custody of babies” argument, based on the idea that it fractures the baby’s attachment to a Primary Caregiver. Fair enough. That would be a new argument: NOW (the National Organization of Women) at the moment opposes shared custody because it limits women’s abilities to sue for child support, but why not add such a compelling physiological argument to the arsenal, too?


sleeping 3



Ultimately, it could end up being a very nice precedent. Baby needs an uninterrupted attachment to a primary caregiver. No overnight visits. Watch all the women nod their heads in approval. Yup. Drop off your checks and don’t plan on any overnights with the baby for a good long time.


Right up until the moment it’s Daddy who wins custody. Then the screaming will begin.


sleeping 2


Fair won’t seem so fair then.


What we really need is a campaign that shows fathers “breastfeeding” their infant children. Ubiquitous representations of fathers as equally capable, equally responsive, equally loving caregivers of infant children. Do I think that’s ideal?


carry 1


No way. But when mothers SUCK, and god knows I have plenty of personal experience with that, then yes, fathers can and SHOULD be able to step in and take over. And needless to say, they should be awarded child support for taking on that task.


I can’t readily imagine that happening. But it would be a step towards equality, wouldn’t it?




Gee, maybe I am a feminist, after all.


Lots of love,




Don’t want to have sex with your emotionless robot drone husband? There’s a pill for that!

29 May



Trigger warning: images of Shona Sibary


Hey, have you guys heard about this little blue pill men can take to produce instant raging boner?




Apparently, the ladies version will be hitting the shelves soon, and boy, has that ever stimulated some interesting conversation! Kelly Rose Bradford and my favorite little cross-eyed child beater, Shona Sibary had separate takes on the issue over at the Daily Mail, and let me tell you, they both suck.


shona 2


Shona, she of the “I would rather mop the floor than fuck my husband” school of matrimony, says the pill will never work because women are so much more emotionally complicated than men.


Sibary said women are more complicated sexually than men, and that the pill would not stimulate females emotionally.

She said: ‘If you’re a man and you want to have sex for the sake of having it, fine, pop a pill and have sex in the mechanical way.

‘But women are different. I’m the type of woman this drug is targeting, and we want to feel desirable and desired: it’s not a chemical thing, it’s an emotional thing.’




Yikes! Perhaps a reality check is in order on the desirability front. Honey, you’re ugly. You simply cannot afford to be overweight and have a shitty haircut, too. Now, now, don’t get mad at me, gentle readers. The fact that Shona is ugly is not news to her.


Let’s hope Mr. Sibary is blessed with very poor eyesight. What I really want to talk about is Shona’s argument that for men, sex is mechanical, while for women, it’s emotional.


Vātsyāyana strongly disagrees.




Probably the move famous book on sex ever written. Kama Sutra means “Aphorisms of Love”. You will note the absence of the word “jackhammer” in that translation.


John Donne thinks Shona is full of shit, too. The greatest love poet in the English language.




Love’s mysteries in souls do grow,

But yet the body is his book.


George Herbert, too.


You must sit down, says Love, and taste my meat:

So I did sit and eat.


Basically the entire worlds of art and literature are against Shona’s assertion that men are rutting pigs who will stick their dicks in anything that moves, incapable of feeling love or profound emotional connection.


Rodin says Fuck You, Shona. The most beautiful sculpture ever created, in my opinion.




Leaving aside her lack of physical assets, compounded terribly by being overweight, dreadful hair and absolutely no sense of fashion whatsoever, is it possible that the lack of desire Shona complains about is the result of her being a fucking bitch? I mean really, after a busy day of slapping her toddler so hard she leaves welts behind, humiliating her teenage daughter by inviting people to call her a slut and looking upon her husband with disgust and the mop pail with lust, what exactly is there to desire about this woman?




What kind of emotional connection is possible with a woman who admits she terrorizes her children regularly with physical violence?


I was talking to a friend the other day, and she admitted — in a guilty whisper — that she had, very occasionally, smacked her two sons. She refrained from doing so more often because she couldn’t bear the thought of them ‘flinching’ when she went near them.

I refrained from telling her that my children not only flinch — they duck, dive and even, on occasion, lock themselves in another room to avoid being on the receiving end of my hand.


Charming. God, I hate this woman. The only pill she should consider taking is cyanide.


So let’s move on to Bradford. Does she make a better argument for why women should take the lady viagara?


Speaking to Dr Dawn Harper and married presenters Eamonn Holmes and Ruth Langsford, Bradford said the pill could help women suffering from a low sex drive to stop their husbands straying.


Now, we’ve discussed before how a lack of sex does indeed push husbands to stray, but unspoken in Bradford’s argument is the exact same assumption as Sibary.


That men just want to fuck. No emotional commitment or engagement is necessary. Pop the pill, roll over, and have at ‘er.




So romantic.


What both these women are doing is assuming a moral superiority over men when it comes to the experience of emotion. The ladies are not just assuming their own feelings trump any feelings men might have, but point blank denying that men have any feelings at all! It’s astonishing that women making those kinds of claim illicit no reaction whatsoever, even from the man sitting in the room with them!




Sex is just mechanics for men. Men don’t feel love. Love isn’t an important determinant of how satisfying sex is for men. Men don’t care WHY their wives are having sex with them, they just want sex.


Hmmm. Such a mystery why these particular women don’t find sex all that satisfying, huh?


Check out this column from Maggie McNeill at the Honest Courtesan (a woman who knows a thing or two about male desire). The idea that “duty sex” is unappealing to men is taken for granted. The exact opposite of what the ladies at the Daily Mail argue.




Loss of libido in women, excepting rare medical conditions, in my opinion, is a direct result of not seeing men as emotionally complex beings. If you’re married, at some point, your husband probably stood in front of you and promised to love you forever. Rejecting him physically is a very wounding thing to do. It hurts. Sex is one of the most important, intimate ways married couples show that they love one another. Refusing to have sex with your husband is telling him, in a very painful way, that you don’t love him. That you don’t care for him or about him.


I guess the only way to justify that is to think of men as emotionless. It doesn’t hurt men to be rejected because they don’t feel anything to begin with.


That’s the ugly little reality behind female viagara. Will it actually boost women’s libido? Who knows. What difference will it make, though, if women are going to continue to see men as less than completely human? That’s the real problem.


i carry your heart with me

by E. E. Cummings

i carry your heart with me(i carry it in

my heart)i am never without it(anywhere

i go you go, my dear; and whatever is done

by only me is your doing, my darling)

i fear

no fate(for you are my fate, my sweet)i want

no world(for beautiful you are my world, my true)

and it’s you are whatever a moon has always meant

and whatever a sun will always sing is you

here is the deepest secret nobody knows

(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud

and the sky of the sky of a tree called life; which grows

higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)

and this is the wonder that’s keeping the stars apart

i carry your heart(i carry it in my heart)



How did we get here? How do we go back? I’d like a pill for that.


Lots of love,








%d bloggers like this: