Women Love Big Cock, Says Science!

The news media is particularly bad at reporting on scientific inquiry. Science is complex and doesn’t make for a discussionless, sellable sound bite. But that certainly doesn’t stop the media from trying. It’s exactly like this PhD Comic: 

Here’s the text if you can’t read the picture:

1. Scientists publish in academic journal “Conclusion: A is correlated with B (p=0.56), given C, assuming D and E conditions. Which is translated by:

2. University PR office, and their press release saying “For Immediate release: Scientists find potential link between A and B (under certain conditions). Which is then picked up by:

3. News Wire organizations, which erroneously report “A causes B, say scientists”, and this is read by:

4. The internets, which blogs “Scientists out to kill us again” and every anonymous idiot comments “OMG! I knewwww it!!!”, and the blogging and tweeting gets noticed by:

5. Cable News, which report, without interviewing the scientists, “We saw it on a blog! A causes B all the time! What will this mean for Obama?”, which filters down and is picked up by:

6. Local news affiliates, which says “What you don’t know about A could KILL YOU! More at 11”. Which eventually leads to:

7. Scientists friends and family wearing tin foil hats and telling them is to “ward off A”.

This is so, so true and I’ve seen it so many times, the most recent of which was a study about penis size.

The study was titled “Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness” and was published in Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences.

So like figure 1 in diagram, there are correlations between two, in this case three variables, with certain conditions. Penis size alone wasn’t related to how women determined attractiveness; it was in conjunction with body shape and size. The findings were that women reported bigger penises more attractive to look at (if the male also was was tall and had the desired hip to waist ratio), but it didn’t say women prefer to have sex with men with big penises, or enjoy sex more with men with big penises. Also, it wasn’t a linear relationship, with the women rating the men more attractive the bigger the penis was. And let’s quantify “big”, shall we? Penis size was a factor in higher ratings of attractiveness, but only until a certain point (that’s the non linear relationship). After three inches (soft), penis size stopped mattering. Three inches is the average size of a flaccid human penis. So in combination with height and body shape, women don’t prefer big penises, they just don’t prefer smaller than average ones. And by prefer, I don’t mean to have sex with, I mean to look at, soft. Also, the female study participants were 104 white Australian college students. So that’s what the scientists found and reported. But this is what the news media reported.

AHHHHHHHHHHH!

The anti-intellectualism and lazy, ignorant journalism is astounding. Science doesn’t “prove” things. Correlation is NOT causation. The study didn’t conclude women prefer “well endowed” men- it said they prefer average men! It didn’t even look at pleasure, so reporting “research finds it’s not all about the motion of the ocean” is just LIES!

I just can’t anymore, with the media. I can’t.

We all started as an orgasm :)

I think that’s beautiful. We don’t appreciate this fact enough.

West Chester community production of the Vagina Monologues is TOMORROW!

You do not want to miss West Chester’s first community production of the Vagina Monologues, which will be held tomorrow, April 7, at Jazmine Thai restaurant (344 W Gay St  West Chester, PA 19380)

A $10 donation will get you a ticket. Proceeds are to benefit the Crime Victims Center of Chester County, an organization like the fire department in that you hope you’ll never need them, but boy are you glad that your community funded them and they exist if you ever do need them.

Tickets can be purchased at Feminique (104 N. Church St West Chester, PA 19380) or with a credit card at 610-551-3262. The 7pm show is SOLD OUT (I’m so excited about this fact!), so we added a 3pm matinee. You can buy tickets for the 3pm show at the door as well.

It’s particularly crucial for folks who have never seen the Vagina Monologues to attend the matinee tomorrow. Everyone who has a vagina, loves someone with a vagina, or lives on a planet where vaginas exist, HAS to see this. Yes you, guy from Phoenixville who checks out this blog every once and a while from the Daily Local News link, get your ass to this play! Yes you, ladies who work at the courthouse and usually don’t come back to West Chester on weekends but could really use a laugh, and a reminder that your body, including your vagina, should be a happy place not a place of secrecy and shame. Get your asses to this play! Don’t be shy. You may feel a little awkward walking in but I promise you will walk out feeling completely empowered.

The first time I saw it I was in college. I went with a co-ed group of students from my dorm. Afterwards we came back to the dorm and could not stop talking about it. I remember one of the guys said, in all seriousness, “I wish I had a vagina. If I did, it would be singing right now”.

Yes, it’s really that powerful of an experience.

Gender and Bystander Intervention

Last May, Ryan knocked a guy out to prevent him from further assaulting a woman out front of our apartment. That guy ended up being sentenced to 3-36 months (read: 3 years!) in jail. Last Sunday, as we were driving to Easter dinner, he used a hammer to smash open the windshield of an overturned vehicle on the side of the highway to free a woman who was trapped inside. That’s twice in one year he’s risked his own safety to help a woman in need. He is a good person to have around in an emergency.

It’s been almost a week since but I keep thinking about it. The ordeal, beginning to end, lasted 16 minutes, and yet so much human behavior happened during that time, my mind keeps going back to it and questioning how things like gender, intelligence, and leadership, relate to bystander intervention.  

With all the work I do around sexual assault, I talk a lot about bystander intervention. It’s now ingrained in me. When shit goes down, I intervene. So when I saw the car spin out, roll down the embankment, and land on its side facing the wrong direction, I was geared up. The adrenaline kicked in. The first thing you do, as I was trained, is to empower a fellow bystander by delegating duties. In this case, I told Ryan to call 911 while I pulled over, put my flashers on, and started running toward the car.

Yelling “someone help” or “someone call 911” in an emergency can be ineffective because of the diffusion of responsibility phenomenon, in which no one will act because everyone assumes that someone else will do it, that someone else must be more qualified or better able. But since everyone thinks this, no one helps. Instead, you have to give a specific person a specific duty. Make it their job and responsibility. “You, call 911!” So that’s what I did. And while Ryan was on the phone giving our location, I was discovering a young woman trapped in the car in a panic.

She was bleeding, but moving and crawling around. The car was on its passenger side with the driver side door pointing to the sky. She was out of her seat and crouching on the passenger side window, trying to claw out of the back windshield but the trunk was caved into it, and she couldn’t fit. She crawled to the front and was punching the front windshield frantically.

Here was my thought, from a non-medical expert, admittedly. 1. She was clearly moving and crawling around, so that whole “don’t move them” rule was not relevant. 2. She was in an absolute panic, and I thought it was cruel to leave her in there as scared as she was while we stood and looked at her through the glass like she’s in a cage. 3. Who knows if the car was going to blow up or catch fire or something. For these reasons, I decided we needed to get her out of the car. But another woman who arrived was arguing with me. “We can’t move her! You’re not supposed to move people in an accident.”

But by now many other cars had pulled over and people were getting out to help, and it was like herding cats. All the men agreed we needed to get her out, and were trying to open the door. It would not open. I kept saying, we have to smash the windshield. We have to smash the windshield. We have to smash the windshield. The door isn’t going to open, and even if it did, she is not going to be able to climb out of it. We need to smash the freaking windshield! It’s the only way to free her.

But no one would listen.

My bystander intervention rules were failing me. I was calling the shots, but if no one will listen to my shots, what good are they? Were they not listening because I was wrong? Maybe the windshield smashing was a bad idea? Were they not listening because, being stronger, they were the ones doing the heavy lifting which put them in charge? Were they not listening because my female voice didn’t have the power in that dynamic?

All the while more and more people are pulling over to help, mostly all men except for two women, and they all rushed to try to get the door open. Meanwhile I keep saying, “SMASH THE WINDOW!”

A guy who just pulled up, got out, and came over walked up to me first, before even assessing the scene, and said, “Why don’t you stand over there and stay”, then he went over to help the 8 men were still trying to get the door open. Of course I was infuriated, and was like, “are you EFFING kidding me? Why would you say that to me? You don’t even know what’s going on!” But my yelling was causing a distraction, so I just ignored him and started back in with, “We need to smash the windshield!” He “helped” by standing on the opposite side of the car, such that if it tottered back over it would fall on top of him. So my idea is shushed, and his idea is to get himself killed. Genius.  

Another man pulls over, runs to the scene, takes one look, and says, “We need to smash the windshield”. And everyone goes, “Ok, do you have a hammer?” So the guy runs to get a hammer from his trunk, and then it’s on with Ryan breaking the glass. This takes forever because, holy crap, it is apparently not easy to break a windshield.   

Meanwhile there is still no police. No ambulance. It dawns on we’re going to get her out, but there will be nowhere for her to go except on the muddy, rainy embankment (it was raining the whole time). So I ask yet another person who just pulled up to call 911 again.

The girl is freed. A woman puts the girls’ jacket on her head to try to stop the bleeding, meanwhile she’s shivering cold sitting on the wet ground, so I go to my car and get an extra sweatshirt to give her. As I approach to hand it to her, the woman rubbing her head (yes, rubbing, like she’s drying her hair with a towel), yells (yes, YELLS) at me, “DON’T TOUCH HER! DON’T MOVE HER!” Do you see the irony here?

Then a NJ State Trooper shows up, and overhears me ranting to Ryan about where the hell this ambulance is. I’m standing there SOAKING wet, Ryan is wet and covered head to toe in a million shards of glass, and he has his hands out, palms up, because his hands are all cut and bleeding, and the cop says to me, “Who are you?”.

Who am I? I am the person who called for your help 16 minutes ago, who are you? Geez! (This is what I thought. What I actually said was a slightly less, although somewhat still snarky version of this). The ambulance finally showed up, and the cop told everyone to leave, without taking statements or asking any questions other than, “who are you”? I just felt like most people there were absolutely useless.

So here are my questions about the experience.

1.      How does bystander intervention work when each bystander has their own competing intervention strategies? What happens when there are too many cooks in the kitchen, and you have some people who think she shouldn’t be moved, and other people who think she should? What happens when some people think she should be moved out the door, with other thinking she should be moved out of the window? What happens when you have some people who are making it a more dangerous situation by standing behind the car that could easily fall over on them, while disempowering other helpers by telling them to sit down and shut up? Clearly, there needed to be a leader, but who?

2.      How does bystander intervention work when all the bystanders are lay people (as is usually the case with bystanders- if a crime takes place, odds are bystanders aren’t going to be police. If a medical emergency takes place, odds are bystanders aren’t going to be a medical professional). By definition, most the time, a bystander is not going to be trained in what to do, so it’s quite possible the one with the most powerful voice gets heard, even if they aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed and the best they have to offer is that they learned on some TV special not to move people in a car accident, failing to be able to assess that SHE IS ALREADY MOVING, talking, and is frantically trying to get out! To phrase it another way, what happens when the stupid person is the one everyone is listening to?  

3.      In the chaos of an emergency where 1. Everyone has their own idea of what to do, and 2. No one is an expert in what to do, who steps up to be the leader, and how does gender influence the ability to be heard as a leader in an emergency situation? I’ve been reading into this, and haven’t found much. One study found that men were more likely to attempt to be the leader, but nothing about if and when a woman steps up to be a leader, how she is perceived. My voice was repeatedly ignored, even shushed, but when a man said the same thing, his (my) idea became the immediate solution.

In the end, we got the woman out to safety and she appeared to be ok, although the cop sent us away as soon as the ambulance arrived so I guess I can’t know for sure. But the whole experience has me thinking deeply about how any of the intervention problems we ran into could also happen in interventions of sexual violence, the area I work in, and how to rethink trainings on bystander intervention to address these shortcomings.

Help Me With Sexual Assault Awareness Month

For me, every day is sexual assault awareness day. But there is an official designated time to raise awareness, and funds, for this fundamentally important cause, and that is the month of April!

Every April 1 I donate a percentage of the proceeds from that day’s sales at Feminique to the Men Can Stop Rape charity.

This year, I’m donating 25% of every purchase from my website today to this organization, which works to “mobilize men to use their strength for creating cultures free from violence, especially men’s violence against women.” We know this to be a successful strategy for ending sexually based violence.  

My goal is to raise $250 for them today, so please consider taking a look at the products I have to offer and making a purchase here before midnight tonight. Even if it’s not for you, share the link. Perhaps one of your friends needs a new vibrator or some massage oil, and would like to help out a worthwhile cause in the process.

9 Steps of a Sex Controversy. Now This Sounds Familiar…

In response to a workshop I presented at Yale University, I got a lot of this:

Followed by a lot of this:

and now… hand written notes and money. I can’t help but notice that these were the steps that were followed the first time I had a sex controversy. I wrote a book about it so I remember the steps well. It’s as if there’s a formula:

1. You’re going about your business when somebody decides something you’ve done is “controversial”.

2. People who hear about your controversy and disagree with you pound you with hate at every conceivable angle- emails, tweets, facebook, phone calls, letters, and even in person.

3. You see the controversy go viral before your eyes. One media outlet, then 3, then 10. 2 bloggers, then 60, then 400.

4. Now that the story has more readers, get ready for more hate! This step is round 2 of being pounded with angry, vitriolic messages from strangers. This is not a fun part of the formula. You give up on humanity and decide the whole world is effing insane.

5. People who agree with you find out that there is a controversy over something they find ridiculous, and this pisses them off. They send you lots of support- also through email, phone calls, letters, tweets, etc. You feel things are more balanced now, decide there are in fact some sane people out there, and move on.

6. Supporters find out that not only is this controversy happening, but the center of the controversy is getting bombarded with hate, which pisses them off even more! Get ready for more love! This step is round 2 of being sent uplifting, supportive messages from strangers. This makes you feel overwhelmed! This is a fun part of the formula!

7. Although opponents have long since forgotten the issue and have moved on to harassing the next person at the center of the next “controversy”, supporters are still indignant that you’ve been put through hell and back by their opponents, and continue to rally around you. Here’s where monetary donations come in. This is the point I’m at now with the Yale/bestiality rumors. Today I received a handwritten anonymous note with a $20 bill inside, and a typewritten letter and a $50 check, both with “keep fighting the good fight” sentiments and both sent to my PO Box.

This next two part haven’t happened (yet) with the Yale controversy, but it did happen with the controversy over opening my sex-positive business in the center of a conservative town that launched a national news story and had a fall out that followed the above formula. We’ll see if the formula continues in kind.

8. Days, weeks, months, and years will pass since the initial controversy. You won’t hear a peep from opponents. But supports are still pissed at the injustice you faced, and will not let it lie. They tell their friends. When they see you/meet you, they ask about it. If ever they talk to anyone associated with the side of opposition, they ask them about it too. Finally , the opponents are sorry they ever even brought it up in the first place because they now can’t live it down how prudish they were to start such a controversy in the first place, and how uncivilized they were in the manner in which they expressed themselves.

9. You write a book about the ordeal and present workshops on it to college campuses and community organizations, highlighting topics such as American sexual values, the power of a small vocal minority, the psychology behind a mob mentality, the satisfaction of a good old fashioned underdog story, and otherwise provide an interesting and compelling case study for fellow intellectuals to discuss.

The first time this happened to me, back in 2008, I thought the phenomenon was fascinating. Fascinating enough to explore it in my book. And fascinating enough to look at it objectively through my research dissertation, in which I explored how anonymity and social media played into support or opposition to a sexuality related controversy. Now that it’s happened again and I see the process took on a similar pattern, I’m enthralled. I’m totally going sex nerd on this topic!

PS: Whoever sent me the money and the nice letters, thank you :)

No Outlet?

I was driving to the Penn State Brandywine campus this evening for the Vagina Monologues. I go to campuses for their V-Day productions and build excitement for the event by engaging in sex-positive dialogue with those waiting to buy tickets for the show.

On the way, I took a wrong turn on a dead end street. The “no outlet” road was blocked by a gate, and on the side of the road was a big sign that said “pray to end abortion”.

I had to do a 3 point turn to turn around and continue on my way. Once out,  I made it to Penn State where I had lovely conversations with students, faculty, and staff. They ranged in age from 18 to upwards of 60. They were men and women. Black and white. Vagina Warriors and uncomfortable first-timers just coming into their sexuality. We talked about the word “vagina”, the stigma, the hurt that comes from failing to teach girls about their own bodies. We talked about domestic violence. We talked about sex education. We talked about sex toys, condoms, blowjobs, faking orgasm, and virginity. We talked about body image and love, sexual expression and censorship.

The symbolism was not lost on me.

I’ve been thinking a lot about a new strategy for advancing my mission that sex should be fun and pleasure is good for you. I feel like right now I’m at a dead end street, staring at a “pray to end abortion” sign, and my strategy has been just ramming the gate with my car thinking that it’s going to be an effective method of opening the road and knocking over the sign. Yeah it’ll do the job, but not until my car is destroyed and I’m exhausted and bitter. It’s a method but maybe it’s not the best method. Maybe I need to make a 3 point turn and explore other ways in which my message can be heard. 

My favorite email from Hannity’s fan club

I’ve gotten a number of emails after the Hannity snub yesterday. This one’s my fav.

It’s from Lisa Dalia at delbartonmom2008@aol.com and reads in case you can’t see the screen shot:

Your attitude and incorrect beliefs about sex are just incpmprehensible and mind blowing. That you would actually believe sex is just supposed to be fun is why so many like minded people have std’s as well as a mere casual view about it. Sex is an anatomical function that, like eating food, boundaries for ill or good health (emotionally, mentally, and physically). What a moron to think that sex practices outside of healthy parameters is like non existent according to you. Check out your bible and the word of God as you are promoting such vile immorality in an already decaying world. May God have mercy on your soul.

There was also one from anonymous@yahoo.com (clever) telling me to lick his “butthole”. Classy classy people.

America’s War on Sexual Freedom: Exhibit A

A headline in Canada yesterday:

Meanwhile in the United States, there was this headline yesterday:

I can’t with this place anymore. I just can’t.

That Time I Snubbed Sean Hannity on Live National Radio

Oh this story makes me laugh.

I was minding my own business at work this afternoon when I get a call  from the producer to Sean Hannity’s radio show asking if I’d come on to talk about Beyonce’s use of the word “bitch” in her newest song and the feminist dialogue around reclaiming this word, Snap Chat and use among teens to spread sexually explicit images of their peers without consent, and other sexuality related things in the news. Knowing he’s a little bit of a, shall we say, right-wing looney tune, I deliberately asked her “what’s his angle” before agreeing, knowing I’d been recently duped by the ultra conservative.

She assured me, “there is no angle”. She said while normally they do a political program, this segment would not be political. She said yesterday they got to talking about the HBO show “Real Sex” and wanted to follow today with a segment on sex, with an expert. Her word- “expert”.

However as soon as I get on, Hannity starts right in by rambling about indoctrinating school children with sex saturated material and how people want to teach children any old thing they want these days and blah blah blah (I’m paraphrasing. For the exact words you’ll have to listen to the podcast if you can stomach it). This is all before I’m even introduced as a guest.

He goes on about how this type of indoctrination also happened at Yale and a “sexologist” (said with belittlement and sarcasm) came to teach about bestiality and incest. “Hey, what’s a “sexologist” anyway??”

So I explained. And I explained the Sex: Am I Normal” workshop he was referencing at Yale, even though it’s old news and I’ve already explained it a million times. I explained it’s about normal vs normative, and creating a safe space, and such but he kept interrupting me with “But what do YOU think about bestiality???” I again stated the program is not about my opinion, or a space for me to judge other people’s sexual behaviors, it’s about recognizing that sexual diversity exists for better or worse, but how  can you explain reason and logic to a person who has to bend the truth to get you to talk to them, and then when you talk to them belligerently repeats “Oh, c’mon, you’re a sexologist, you must have an opinion on bestiality so what is it!?” I took one last ditch effort to explain this is not what I came on to talk about and then thought, fuck it, and hung up.

hahahahahahahah

I hung up on Sean Hannity on live national radio. This is my life.

I am a busy person doing important work. I do not have time to be playing defense to someone who starts out a conversation saying that sex education is indoctrination. I do not have the energy to explain the importance of compassion to sexual diversity to a person who just last week told a rape survivor that her empirically backed claim that the best way to curb rape is to teach men not to be rapists is wrong. So I hung up on him. 

This entertains me. I think of the Seinfeld episode where Kramer runs into Jerry’s ex-girlfriend and proclaims “I snubbed her”. So I can only imagine the way he’s spun my snub, but either way, there it is.

PS: The woman, Zerlina Maxwell, that Hannity argued with later got public death and rape threats for daring to say men should be taught not to rape women. These are the type of listeners he has. How could I ever get a fair shot to explain what I stand for with a person like this? I don’t need this type of vitriol in my life. So I snubbed him. And I’m snubbing all requests from media for interviews about anything from now on unless the interviewer has a strong record of journalistic integrity, like Oprah. So if Oprah calls, I’ll talk to her. Everyone else, if you want to hear what I have to say, read my blog, buy my book, or purchase tickets to one of my workshops.