<![CDATA[Jezebel: sexperts]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/jezebel.com.png <![CDATA[Jezebel: sexperts]]> http://jezebel.com/tag/sexperts http://jezebel.com/tag/sexperts <![CDATA[Old Man, Little Boy Give Equally Bad Dating Advice]]> The Early Show got advice this morning from two dating book authors: that 10-year-old boy who knows nothing about dating and an 82-year-old man who won't stop talking about pushing people off cliffs!

We're all probably familiar with Alec Greven, the fifth grader whose book How To Talk To Girls earned him what seems to be a permanent place on the morning show slow news day booking cycle. The idea of his book was adorable, but the novelty has worn off and we're left with a normal ten-year-old kid who appears to be as bored with the topic of dating as we are with hearing him talk about it. New on the weird-age dating book scene, however, is Howard Eisenberg, the 82-year-old author of It's Never Too Late To Date. This morning, The Early Show decided to throw the two guys together for one interview, even though the challenges they face in the dating world have nothing in common other than, presumably, a lack of penetration.

After some stammering by Alec and a few old-man cliche stories by Howard, the interview got going when Harry Smith asked the guys how they deal with rejection. "You just go home and cry," Howard said, and at first it's like "Oh my god, that is so sad, that poor old man" but then Howard laughed and said "We tell women to push this guy, this loser, mentally off a cliff." Little Alec said simply "Life is hard, move on." (The title of his next book, perhaps!) When the subject of "the L word" comes up, Howard advocated men lying to women and claiming they have a phone call, right in front of little Alec! He also mentioned pushing people off cliffs again for good measure. Clip above.

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5325680&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Does Cutting Your Hair Mean You Don't Want Sex?]]> It's always amazing the questions people are willing to ask in public advice forums. In today's Guardian, a man writes in to the advice columnist to ask whether his wife's new short haircut indicates a subconscious distaste for sex — and, yes, their sex life is bad. Therapist Pamela Stephenson Connolly's advice is okay, but I think we can add to it.

Writes the anonymous person:

Is it true that a woman with a short hairstyle is subconsciously indicating that she does not want sex? My wife had a drastic haircut four days before our wedding and our sex life was a damp squib from the start. The erotic side of our marriage has died completely. My wife considers me childish and says that as all other elements of our relationship are fine, I should not want more than this.

First, a few questions: While the sexual and anthropological importance of hair is well-documented as an indicator of health, beauty and desirability; and while long, lustrous hair is equated with youth, femininity and wanton sexuality; and while short hair is sometimes perceived as either asexually androgynous or I-give-up mom style... really? Is he serious? Second: did they not have sex before their wedding? When did this "damp squib" start? Because if it was pre-wedding, then it seems highly circumstantial to blame the haircut (and maybe they should have addressed these issues beforehand); and if not, there's not much basis for comparison. Is he just looking to the haircut as a means of figuring out whether he can actually blame his wife for this? How long have they been married? Do they have kids? Has her hair grown out or has she continued to cut it? I think it also needs to be asked: was she happy with the haircut, or did it go horribly wrong and make her feel unattractive? Inquiring minds want to know.

The actual advice columnist doesn't seem to be bothered by this lack of information. She says,

Cutting one's hair does not necessarily point to an avoidance of sex, although deliberately reducing one's attractiveness in a spouse's eyes may well signal some desire to push them away. You sound angry and full of longing for a fulfilling sexual relationship - and that is understandable.

Wait, "not necessarily?" I get that advice columnists — especially of the respectable, clinical psychologist variety, probably try not to judge and there are so stupid questions, but this question was idiotic, conveying as it did a certain reductive lack of self-insight and, if you want to go all out, anachronistic homophobic undertones. Besides which, doesn't it seem unlikely that anyone would strive to make herself deliberately unattractive in anyone's eyes at her own wedding? Anyway, does she know he hates her haircut, or is this some weird passive-aggressive thing, where this guy prefers to write anonymously to a stranger and pretend his marriage's deep problems can be summed up by a few inches of keratins? Connolly suggests sitting down and talking — without judging — and find out what's really behind the sexual issues. Sure. But if he thinks the clues to his marital problems lie in a trip to the salon, maybe a set of extensions would be more to the point.

Sexual Healing [The Guardian]

[Image via Moviecritic.com]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5101971&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[This Week Models Got Some Meat On Their Bones]]>

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=391403&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[5 Mistakes That "Sexperts" Make When Giving Advice]]> We know that the only expectation we can count on Fox News to meet is one of disappointment — if not utter, hair-pulling frustration — but its reliable inanity doesn't mean that its immune to critique, particularly when doling out "fair and balanced" sex advice. Today, "sexpert" (if words could be killed off, that would be the first on our hit list) Yvonne K. Fulbright enumerated the "10 Sex Mistakes That Women Make." While Fulbright did provide two tips that we can get on-board with — "the occasional potty mouth can be a passion-inducer" and "don't use sex manipulatively" — the rest is really off the mark. So after the jump, we've compiled the 5 Mistakes That Sexperts Make When Giving Advice!


1. Photographic Representation
Why is it that sexperts are always photographed coyly chewing on the stem of their glasses and showing cleavage? Real writers need their glasses on at all times, and usually type without even wearing a bra. (Or at least, that's been my experience in life.)

2. Employing the term "hot mama."
Telling mothers to not neglect their sexual sides and referring to them as "hot mamas" is the "literary" equivalent of scraping one's nails across a blackboard.

3. Sending Mixed Messages About Body Image
In her 10 Mistakes, Fulbright tells women to embrace their bodies, saying, "Walk around naked. Have sex with the lights on." And that's fine, but within the same article she says, "Strive to stay trim and look your best."

4. Advising Women To Act "Feminine" By Pretending That They Aren't Human
Fulbright says, "Between major weight gain, bodily functions, and divulging daily care habits, a lot of women fail to remain branded in their men's brains as sexy. While self-care and what we do in the loo is nothing to be ashamed of, keep it in the bathroom. Don't talk about shaving, your period, your last bowel movement, etc."

5. Neglecting To Give Women The Most Crucial Piece Of Sex Advice
Nowhere in her 10 Mistakes does Fulbright recommend that every woman own a vibrator. Nor does she say that women should discover their bodies and learn what they like and dislike. Lastly, she completely fails to mention that the biggest mistake a woman can make in bed is ignoring her own desires.

FOXSexpert: 10 Sex Mistakes Women Make [Fox News]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=390149&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Slate's Sex Issue: Incest, Big Butts, Vibrators & Elder Sex]]> Slate, that bastion of current events and culture, tackles all the horny topics one could think of in their Sex Issue this week and thanks to the online magazine's editors and writers, we've learned a lot! Starting with...

Brothers Can Be Sexy!: "The Best of 'Human Nature' Sex Stories of 2007" has us pondering incest and the rules surrounding it. Saletan (again!) writes about everything from the abolition of menstruation to virgin shark births in this roundup, but his last item on a German brother-sister couple is what caught our eye. The couple is challenging the laws which say incest is illegal, arguing that such laws are outdated and that they violate their civil rights. They claim that their incestuous relationship is no different than any other coupling because they were not raised together and plus, they aren't planning on having more children.



There's No Shame In Liking 'Em Young: Slate writer William Saletan's external monologue about what the age of consent should be bounces around from 12, to 16, to 25, depending on physical and emotional maturity factors. Some girls are still making their Barbies hump at 14, while others are getting finger-banged in the school parking lot. The point is, the age of consent varies from person to person but certainly there's a difference between a moderately intelligent 16-year old choosing to have sex with her college football-star boyfriend and her older brother doing the nasty with his 13-year old neighbor. The line has to be drawn, albeit maybe a little bit off from where it currently sits, at 17.


"Big" Butts Are Popular, Have Racist Undertones: Despite what Glamour's Suze Yalof-Schwartz says, women have always wanted bigger, rounder, fatter asses and she should just get with the times. However, Feministing clued us in to a slight problem with the slideshow Oh, That Darling Derriere — it seems that, in addition to not showing any men with plump hineys, they also have included an icon of racism, Hottentot Venus (a Khoikhoi woman who was a sideshow attraction in 19th Century Europe) without giving any context about her place in history (aside from her prominent rump).


Kinsey, Schminsey: He may have been the first sex researcher to pols thousands about their desires, but he wasn't the most accurate, especially since he seemed to choose people who were neither representative of the American population at large. However, this reminds us of what has to be the most thorough pleasure poll we've ever taken (again and again and again) — the Purity Test, that blush-producing fun-filled activity in college dorm rooms everywhere. Take it again and relive the scandal.


Mad Cow Disease Is Not An STD: But the government thinks it is. Swedish sperm is hard to come by in the US nowadays. Unless you're Paris Hilton's mouth, of course.


People Still Think That Gardisil Is A Free Pass To Prostitution: The debate rages on between intelligent people and morons as to whether giving the HPV vaccine to teenagers is a necessary precaution in a cancer rampant world or just another excuse for dirty teenage whores to have sex.


Seniors Are Having Trouble Having Sex: Nursing homes are totally cock-blocking your grandma and grandpa from doing the nasty, even though a survey of 75 to 85 year-olds showed that most of them were still getting it on on a biweekly basis.


Vibrators Used to Look Way Scarier: The Rabbit freaks us out a little, but Not Your Grandmother's Vibrator, a slideshow of vibrators past and present, demonstrates that a frisky little bunny is just adorable compared to the heavy machinery and drill-like contraptions from yesteryear. Note: Vibes didn't always look so phallic!


There Are No (Sex) Answers, Only (Sex) Questions: Or something. Long-time sexperts, from Dan Savage to Dr. Ruth, reveal what decades of doling out sex advice hasn't taught them. Apparently, there's a lot!

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=304506&view=rss&microfeed=true