Oh, cool. It's time for a groundbreaking male journalist to bravely tackle the most pressing issue of our time — that some women are bad at sex, some women aren't, and some women are in the middle. Quelle horreur!
Yes, it's another day, another idiotic Esquire piece. Chris Jones' "Ladies: You're Not as Good as You Think" is part of the same package as this amoral garbage party (plus this weird thing), and the article opens with what I think is supposed to be charming self-deprecation:
On the spectrum of male lovers, I believe I would fall somewhere between "not totally unpleasant, but not totally pleasant, either" and "adequate"...I know that because I've literally heard the words "Let's get this over with."
Hilarious—there's nothing like being reprimanded for something by a person who openly admits that they put zero effort into that same thing. Chris Jones is content to be a mildly unpleasant chore for his sexual partners, but the ladies need to step it up and start pleasing Chris Jones posthaste! He goes on to describe past partners as:
unenthusiastic, uncomfortable, and uncommunicative, the human equivalent of the space between the couch cushions, only without the bonus possibility of my finding loose change in there.
Jones then acknowledges that "there is a spectrum of female lovers just as there is of men." So...what the fuck is your point exactly? If what you're saying is that some women are bad at sex while other women aren't bad at sex, then that encompasses...let me see...everyone at all levels of sexual performance. So essentially your argument is "Hurrrrr, all people do a thing!"
And in that case, the only purpose of this article is to make sexually insecure women feel like shit. Jones compares his sex partners to a couch and a dead deer, then calls one woman a frigid freak because she thought "from behind" implied anal sex (because obviously she didn't know the difference between her vagina and her butthole, and wasn't just inexperienced with casual sexual parlance). Thanks, bro. Like that's going to help.
Look. I'm sure it's 100% true that some women believe they don't have to make an effort sexually because their mere physical presence is a gift from Aphrodite and men should feel grateful for the opportunity to convulse atop them for one divine moment. I'll even go so far as to say that that's some fucking annoying entitled bullshit. But chalking it up to those women being "bad at sex" is a pretty unfair thing to do.
Here's why: If you treat women like objects, then don't be surprised when they behave like objects. Generally speaking, society doesn't tell women that their brains are attractive and they're supposed to forge intimate physical connections with men—it tells them they're a passive commodity, a prize to be won, a teddy bear at the carnival. And then you're going to sit there sputtering with indignation when they act like a stuffed animal in bed? Please.
(For the record, I didn't find this rebuttal at Buzzfeed to be much more productive—it's essentially the equivalent of "Neener neener, well your penis is small and dumb!" Great, now we have two shamey, reductive articles instead of one!)
What Jones is touching on here is just a symptom of the flawed sexual ecosystem in which heterosexual men and women interact—which, I'm willing to argue, has a much more destructive effect on women than it does on men. We should be talking about this—it's interesting and it's important. I'm just not sure that "women should be better at fucking because my penis is bored!" is the most constructive place to start. But what do I know? I'm just a couch cushion. (I'm not a total loss, though: I do keep loose change in my vagina.)