|
|
|
erotica  fictiongallerylifestyles fetishbdsmqueer/bi/transswingersfeatures news briefsarticlessexy spreadseros bits sound offtriviasexfessionsreviewsevents sf archiveslondon archiveslos angeles archivesnew york archiveslas vegas archivesinternational calendareros photo classified ads about eros ezine daily cartoon select different zine:
|
Papers miffed at cartoon's masturbation riff When editors at a small handful of newspapers around the country speak of the "M" word, they sure aren't talking about "mature." No, they're talking about masturbation, and it sure freaked a lot of them earlier this month when it was mentioned in Garry Trudeau's "Doonesbury" comic strip. When the Sept. 7 edition was advanced to editors, the news that some would skip the strip that day out of concern many readers would be offended made headlines.
The irony is that the strip never outright mentions the act of masturbation, only refers to it in broad terms, and that it's mostly about people's reactions to the subject. Trudeau made an attempt ahead of time to contextualize the Sept. 7 strip in order to take focus off of the so-called "M-word." "The strip isn't really about masturbation or the prostate cancer study as such, but about the shifting nature of taboos and the inability of two adults to have a certain kind of serious conversation." Well, while editors seemed to assume their readers had the same inability (or maybe they have it themselves), the truth of the matter is that they may have vastly underestimated the maturity of the masses. Media watchdog website Editor & Publisher reported last week that in papers that chose to run the strip, reader reaction was minimal, if any. For instance, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch received just more than 30 phone calls and e-mails criticizing the Sept. 7 comic. By way of comparison about 800 readers complained when the Post-Dispatch tried to drop the "Mark Trail" comic. Which brings up another point that's not been covered much in this controversy —wouldn't it have been safe for editors and publishers to assume that, given the demographic associated with "Doonesbury" (those who can appreciate its subtle political humor), any kind of severe reaction would be pretty unlikely? I mean, I could see if someone broached the subject of jerking off in, say, "Family Circus" or "Sally Forth," but "Doonesbury," where the running joke of the Duke character is that he's based on Hunter S. Thompson? Just another example of the media accommodating the lowest common cultural denominator, I guess… Scrotal shenanigans God knows there's a lot of stupid shit out there for people to buy, and a whole lot of stupid people love to buy it. But this story chronicles a kind of stupidity that could be its own Olympic event, kind of like a pole vault for imbeciles. An unnamed 37-year-old man was forced to seek treatment after complications stemming from the man's attempt to enlarge his ball sac resulted in an inflamed scrotum so acute that it engulfed his penis, causing, duh, a lot of discomfort.  According to a report from the Southern Medical Journal, the man had employed a technique known online as "scrotal inflation." At least one website offers a scrotal inflation kit, consisting of a 1000cc saline bag, an IV administration kit with drip chamber, and (gulp) a special catheter needle.Users of this amazingly idiotic kit are told to inject the entire 1000cc bag of saline directly into their scrotum. After a couple of days, the saline is allegedly "reabsorbed," leaving behind a bigger, more robust set of bullocks. Right. The Journal reported, "Unfortunately, the patient still had enlargement of the scrotum four days after the infusion, and it was quite painful. He stated that he had infused 900 ml fluid before the needle popped out of his scrotum. He was initially pleased with the results, but then he developed erythema and pain during the next two days." Physicians drained the fluid out of the stupid bastard's beleaguered balls, but not after this shining example of Darwinism spent almost two weeks with a painful case of temporary elephantitis. In his report, Dr. Jeffery Summers warned that ol' balloon balls may not be an isolated case. "This practice may be more widespread than expected," Summers wrote. "An Internet search revealed many references to this procedure, but a MEDLINE search showed virtually no information in the medical literature. Patients who are considering scrotal inflation, as it is called in the lay literature, should be warned of the potential complications of this procedure." Uh, yeah, that's putting it lightly. Let's review, people—if you've got a small scrotum, deal with it, 'cos no kit in the world is gonna help you, especially one you buy on a website with no medical literature on it. Look on the bright side; the small your sac, the bigger your schlong looks. Or something. Repressed Reagan I mentioned last week how much I hate Ronald Reagan. It happens to be a great time to hate "The Great Communicator," despite the overwhelming sentiment for him on behalf of the American public. First of all, the guy's not exactly at the top of the food chain at the moment. If you despise Reagan like I do, it should tickle you pink that the Gipper is spending his last days in a state of ignominy that makes Nixon's look like the swan song of an elder statesman, rather than the last gasp of a loathsome, unpunished snake.  Now, in a new book compiled of letters written by the former president, it's revealed that, like many of his generation, the old man had a few hang-ups about sex, an epiphany which would no doubt embarrass the hell out of him were he not completely oblivious to the world around him."Even in marriage I had a little guilty feeling about sex as though the whole thing was tinged with evil," Reagan wrote to a hometown friend recovering from her husband's death in 1951. (What the hell kinda way is that to comfort an old friend, anyway?) Reagan: A Life in Letters describes how, with the help of a "fine, old gentleman" (uh, am I just imagining some subtext of homoeroticism?) and research into a Polynesian tribe he regarded as "children of God" (man, this just gets weirder and weirder), the former actor-turned-politician refined his views on sex. "My personal belief is that God couldn't create evil, so the desires he planted in us are good and the physical relationship between a man and woman are the highest form of companionship," he wrote. Wow, sex isn't evil. What an incredible insight. I wonder which wife he was on when he learned this stunning fact of life.
|
|
|
 |
|