![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Catherine Townsend
A sex and dating columnist, Catherine Townsend published her first novel Sleeping Around: Secrets of a Sexual Adventuress in 2007, and followed up with Breaking The Rules: Confessions of a Bad Girl in 2008. She also appeared in How To Have Sex After Marriage on Five, and is now writing a third book. Born in Arkansas, Catherine was a gossip columnist for New York Magazine before moving to London in 2003, since when she has had a very interesting - and pretty public - private life...
So Cameron Diaz has spoken out in defence of women who don't want children by telling Cosmopolitan magazine that women are 'afraid to say that they don't want children because they're going to get shunned.'
She's right. There are now more single people than couples in the UK, so childless women are becoming the norm. Still, women who admit that they don't want kids (or that they aren't sure/ it's not their top priority) are still regarded as a bit weird (or selfish) by society, which is crazy considering that we live in a very overpopulated world. Surely it's more selfish to have a child for the wrong reasons??
( Read more... )
She's right. There are now more single people than couples in the UK, so childless women are becoming the norm. Still, women who admit that they don't want kids (or that they aren't sure/ it's not their top priority) are still regarded as a bit weird (or selfish) by society, which is crazy considering that we live in a very overpopulated world. Surely it's more selfish to have a child for the wrong reasons??
( Read more... )
So researchers have confirmed what Hugh Hefner figured out a long time ago: That men who marry younger women live longer. They say that men who hook up with women seven to nine years younger cut the risk of premature death by 11 percent ,while those with brides 15 to 17 years younger cut their chances of dying early by a fifth.
I assume, as the article concludes, that it may have something to do with natural selection: The most successful men with the most money (and presumably, access to the best health care) are able to attract younger women to keep them 'active' and later, act as nurses.
( Read more... )
I assume, as the article concludes, that it may have something to do with natural selection: The most successful men with the most money (and presumably, access to the best health care) are able to attract younger women to keep them 'active' and later, act as nurses.
( Read more... )
The New Scientist has a fascinating take on the always controversial topic of female ejaculation. The 'does it exist' debate has been going on for ages - re-ignited back in 2002 when material got cut from British Cum Queens (the censors argued that the actresses were urinating) and a feminist group argued that it should be put back in because some women could ejaculate (though most of what is happening in porn is staged!)
( Read more... )
( Read more... )
The evidence keeps mounting up that brainy women really do have better sex - but researchers aren't talking about IQ. Instead, they say that women with high 'emotional intelligence' can have up to twice as many orgasms as their 'less switched-on sisters.'
Emotional Intelligence is the ability to express our emotions and to read the emotions of others, so it makes sense that women who are good at making themselves heard in an argument and negotiating compromise will have the confidence to helpfully point out where her clitoris is if he gets it wrong.
This doesn't surprise me: Women who have confidence and and can communicate their desires to their partner probably do have a much greater chance of getting what they want in bed. And they are probably also less likely to fake it when things aren't going well.
So it's much less about waiting for the 'perfect man' to push our buttons, and much more about knowing where they are so that we can show them. We would get so much more out of relationships--and even one-night-stands--if everyone just learned to ask for what they want.
Emotional Intelligence is the ability to express our emotions and to read the emotions of others, so it makes sense that women who are good at making themselves heard in an argument and negotiating compromise will have the confidence to helpfully point out where her clitoris is if he gets it wrong.
This doesn't surprise me: Women who have confidence and and can communicate their desires to their partner probably do have a much greater chance of getting what they want in bed. And they are probably also less likely to fake it when things aren't going well.
So it's much less about waiting for the 'perfect man' to push our buttons, and much more about knowing where they are so that we can show them. We would get so much more out of relationships--and even one-night-stands--if everyone just learned to ask for what they want.
Amanda Platell writes in the Daily Mail that she'll NEVER trust a man who says he's had the new contraceptive jab, and neither should any woman. Because apparently, 'men are wonderful creatures, but they are not to be relied upon.' How sexist. How ridiculous.
My male friends are thrilled about the introduction of the male jab, which could hopefully someday be an alternative to the female Pill. It's fantastic news for both men and women: Women will have the option of not bearing sole responsibility for pumping tons of hormones into their bodies every day in a long-term relationship, and men will have much more control over their fertility.
Platell's argument about the 'question of proof' is also ridiculous: Basically, she says that men are more likely to lie and say they've had the jab when they haven't. Hello, is this any different to women who lie and say that they are on the Pill, and end up getting pregnant?
If two people don't know each other well enough to trust that they may be lying or trying to 'trap' each other, someone should insist on a condom. Period. But for her to say 'deep inside every man who still has his own hair and teeth...is a sexual predator' seems a bit extreme. Both men and women lie sometimes, but I would definitely trust a long-term boyfriend to have the jab. Not all men are evil, and not all women are angels.
My male friends are thrilled about the introduction of the male jab, which could hopefully someday be an alternative to the female Pill. It's fantastic news for both men and women: Women will have the option of not bearing sole responsibility for pumping tons of hormones into their bodies every day in a long-term relationship, and men will have much more control over their fertility.
Platell's argument about the 'question of proof' is also ridiculous: Basically, she says that men are more likely to lie and say they've had the jab when they haven't. Hello, is this any different to women who lie and say that they are on the Pill, and end up getting pregnant?
If two people don't know each other well enough to trust that they may be lying or trying to 'trap' each other, someone should insist on a condom. Period. But for her to say 'deep inside every man who still has his own hair and teeth...is a sexual predator' seems a bit extreme. Both men and women lie sometimes, but I would definitely trust a long-term boyfriend to have the jab. Not all men are evil, and not all women are angels.
Thanks to Scientific American, we know that the penis is, in an evolutionary sense, 'an impressive tool in every sense of the word'. But why is it shaped the way it is?
Basically, the design of the penis and large size (relative to other primates, anyway!) make it the perfect weapon for displacing sperm inside a woman's body.
As the writer says, 'at least some degree of fooling around has been our modus operandi for at least as long as we've been on two legs'. Since sperm cells can survive in a woman's body for up to several days, this means that if she has more than one partner over this period of time, then the sperm of these two men are doing battle inside her body.
This isn't just a theory: Gordon Gallup actually did tests with prosthetic genitals from erotic novelty stores, and boiled his own seminal fluid in an exhaustive battery of tests. This casts serious doubt over the theory that women are naturally monogamous, while men are destined to spread the seed.
I'll have to remember that at my next dinner party discussion.
Basically, the design of the penis and large size (relative to other primates, anyway!) make it the perfect weapon for displacing sperm inside a woman's body.
As the writer says, 'at least some degree of fooling around has been our modus operandi for at least as long as we've been on two legs'. Since sperm cells can survive in a woman's body for up to several days, this means that if she has more than one partner over this period of time, then the sperm of these two men are doing battle inside her body.
This isn't just a theory: Gordon Gallup actually did tests with prosthetic genitals from erotic novelty stores, and boiled his own seminal fluid in an exhaustive battery of tests. This casts serious doubt over the theory that women are naturally monogamous, while men are destined to spread the seed.
I'll have to remember that at my next dinner party discussion.
A 43-year-old American woman has set herself a 52-week deadline for finding The One, and set up a website to help her with her search. Experts are weighing in: Is she crazy for making her hunt for a husband a priority, or does her method make sense?
I agree that it makes sense to put yourself out there as much as possible, having adventures and make meeting new people a priority (this is why I love Internet dating!), but I think that setting an artificial deadline is taking things too far. I wouldn't marry someone who seemed desperate. I want to believe that the man I marry is walking down the aisle because he loves me, not because it's the eleventh hour and he's worried that he may not meet anyone else.
Her idea sounds more like a business plan than a love affair.
Anyway, don't women have enough pressure dealing with ticking biological clocks without adding yet another self-imposed deadline to the mix?
I agree that it makes sense to put yourself out there as much as possible, having adventures and make meeting new people a priority (this is why I love Internet dating!), but I think that setting an artificial deadline is taking things too far. I wouldn't marry someone who seemed desperate. I want to believe that the man I marry is walking down the aisle because he loves me, not because it's the eleventh hour and he's worried that he may not meet anyone else.
Her idea sounds more like a business plan than a love affair.
Anyway, don't women have enough pressure dealing with ticking biological clocks without adding yet another self-imposed deadline to the mix?
I've heard of filtering for height, location, and even income, but Seven or Better is a new online dating site for women who want to find out how many inches her man is packing in his trousers before the first date. Apparently, the site only takes men with penises that are 'confirmed to be seven inches or longer'.
'Hello ladies,” the site begins. “Wouldn’t it be nice to know upfront if a man has what it takes to satisfy you sexually?'
Right. Because just showing up with a huge erection and pounding away is a guarantee of sexual ecstasy--NOT!
The insanity continues:
'For men interested in women, it is quite easy to see if the woman’s breast size is to his liking or not, or even the shape and size of her derriere.'
I guess this site has never heard of padded bras!
I didn't really bother to read further, because frankly the whole thing could be a joke--and I guess it's no worse than some of the other sites that reject people who aren't considered hot enough or smart enough, but something about this site just leaves me cold.
And, on a practical note, since men to exaggerate vertical height on dating sites, how the hell are these guys going to verify length??
Her break-up with girlfriend Samantha Ronson may have been a train wreck, but I have to admit that I'm loving Lindsay Lohan's new singles ad on eHarmony. In the spoof video, which has become an Internet sensation, she jokes about her arrests for driving under the influence of alcohol, saying 'I would define my personality as creative, a bit of a night owl, a workaholic, a shopaholic and according to the State of California...an alcoholic, as well as a threat to all security guards if they work in hotels.'
She also promises her new significant other (male or female) that 'We'll crash a few parties, hit a car or two but at the end of the day I promise you I never lose my Google hits. Just my underwear.'
It may not help her land any more film roles, but laughing at herself is definitely one way to get over the 'absolute hell' of a breakup. And my guess is that she will get tons of responses: For some reason people seem to love crazy women, as long as they are 'hot crazy' and don't tip over into 'Fatal Attraction crazy'. Maybe it's because they imagine that women who are wild party animals will be wildcats in bed? Unfortunately, it will probably be from either a) people who want to 'rescue' her or b) people with just as many issues as she has, because drama tends to attract drama.
Here's hoping that she can keep smiling and avoid it for awhile.
She also promises her new significant other (male or female) that 'We'll crash a few parties, hit a car or two but at the end of the day I promise you I never lose my Google hits. Just my underwear.'
It may not help her land any more film roles, but laughing at herself is definitely one way to get over the 'absolute hell' of a breakup. And my guess is that she will get tons of responses: For some reason people seem to love crazy women, as long as they are 'hot crazy' and don't tip over into 'Fatal Attraction crazy'. Maybe it's because they imagine that women who are wild party animals will be wildcats in bed? Unfortunately, it will probably be from either a) people who want to 'rescue' her or b) people with just as many issues as she has, because drama tends to attract drama.
Here's hoping that she can keep smiling and avoid it for awhile.
Wow. I really, really thought I'd heard it all when it came to fetishes...but that was before I clicked on The Frisky this morning [via Asylum] and saw the men who claim to get off on wearing the 'skins' of latex sex dolls - complete with their blank-looking faces and dead, staring eyes.
It's called 'masking' or 'femskins', and apparently there are so many of these guys that they've planned a convention (though apparently, it was cancelled).
I'm not one to judge anyone else's sex life, but personally, this would scare the hell out of me. I'll have to add this to my (very short) list of sexual dealbreakers, right along with a) coprophilia and b) a guy jumping out of the closet wearing a clown outfit and carrying a knife. I think those are probably the only things that I could find more disturbing. Seriously, re-creating the Buffalo Bill scene from Silence of the Lambs is not my idea of seduction.
It's called 'masking' or 'femskins', and apparently there are so many of these guys that they've planned a convention (though apparently, it was cancelled).
I'm not one to judge anyone else's sex life, but personally, this would scare the hell out of me. I'll have to add this to my (very short) list of sexual dealbreakers, right along with a) coprophilia and b) a guy jumping out of the closet wearing a clown outfit and carrying a knife. I think those are probably the only things that I could find more disturbing. Seriously, re-creating the Buffalo Bill scene from Silence of the Lambs is not my idea of seduction.
Salon has posted the new UK ad for the Quattro for Women bikini razor, which shows lots of women wielding huge scissors and grinning madly push huge pink mowers while singing about how they "mow the lawn." Apparently, "some bushes are really big," although the Asian girl has a bonsai that's "really small." Wow. So my savings may be earning zero percent and my house has dropped in value, but the answer to stress relief during the recession is grabbing a razor and shaping my bush into a whimsical heart--who knew?
The message is lighthearted, but the ad will doubtless upset lots of women who believe that our culture's obsession with what Salon calls 'bush maintenance' has gone too far. Personally, I don't think it's that big a deal: I personally think that the trend toward better pubic hair grooming has been a good thing--for both men and women. The ad isn't advocating that women pursue a scorched earth policy and go completely bald: They are merely calling for a bit of basic maintenance. I expect the men in my life to make sure that they don't have visible nose hair, and while they are at it, to trim the hedges downstairs. And a random straw poll of my male friends shows that they are more likely to go down on a girl with good grooming.
It's simple. Less pubic hair = more oral sex. That's why these girls are smiling!
The Guardian has a hilarious take on casting directors' ageism, pointing out that the idea that 'one dog year is equal to seven human years could just as easily be applied to female actors as Alsatian'. The examples are endless: Angelina Jolie cast as Colin Farrell's mum in 'Alexander' (she was 28, he was 27), Glenn Close playing Mel Gibson's mum in 'Hamlet' (meaning that she would have given birth at age nine) and most recently, Hope Davis admitting that she was 'peeved' at being offered the role of Johnny Depp's mum. The reason? He's a year older than her!
But is it really just Hollywood? I'm dating a man who is seven years older than me, and we have literally never had one person make a comment about it. My last boyfriend was ten years older, and it was the same story. But one of my best friends is dating a guy four years younger than her (she's 33, he's about to turn 29) and it's a constant topic of conversation.
Personally, I think that people should be able to do whatever they want. But I do find it strange when men who are, like, 18-months younger get called 'toyboys' while the difference is totally irrelevant if the man is older. Just like in Hollywood, we pretend that the age gaps don't exist.
But is it really just Hollywood? I'm dating a man who is seven years older than me, and we have literally never had one person make a comment about it. My last boyfriend was ten years older, and it was the same story. But one of my best friends is dating a guy four years younger than her (she's 33, he's about to turn 29) and it's a constant topic of conversation.
Personally, I think that people should be able to do whatever they want. But I do find it strange when men who are, like, 18-months younger get called 'toyboys' while the difference is totally irrelevant if the man is older. Just like in Hollywood, we pretend that the age gaps don't exist.
Headlands School in Bridlington, Yorkshire has the dubious distinction of having the highest rate of teacher-student sexual encounters in the first world, according to Nerve's best guess. Police have just charged another staff member with having sex with a teenage girl, bringing the grand total of arrests to FIVE. That's right, five teachers or staff members at the school have been charged in the past three years.
First, there was the art instructor who forced himself on a teenage girl and got four years in prison (she claimed that she was traumatised from the encounter and left with bulimia and other medical problems). In 2007, another science teacher was convicted of having sex with three students and got five years. Two more teachers were arrested last year, and they received much lighter sentences.
Parents are outraged, especially since a report by the East Riding Safeguarding Children Board a year ago disclosed that up to 14 members of staff had inappropriate relationships with pupils aged 11 to 18--and seven are still teaching!! The scary thing is, teacher/student sex is probably underreported, so there's no telling how many more indecent relationships are going on in schools.
Why can't the management control the staff? Why aren't teachers given a battery of personality tests before being trusted with a room full of impressionable young minds? They use "personality profiling" to weed out candidates in office jobs - why not teaching?? Seriously, it's enough to make a person consider homeschooling.
First, there was the art instructor who forced himself on a teenage girl and got four years in prison (she claimed that she was traumatised from the encounter and left with bulimia and other medical problems). In 2007, another science teacher was convicted of having sex with three students and got five years. Two more teachers were arrested last year, and they received much lighter sentences.
Parents are outraged, especially since a report by the East Riding Safeguarding Children Board a year ago disclosed that up to 14 members of staff had inappropriate relationships with pupils aged 11 to 18--and seven are still teaching!! The scary thing is, teacher/student sex is probably underreported, so there's no telling how many more indecent relationships are going on in schools.
Why can't the management control the staff? Why aren't teachers given a battery of personality tests before being trusted with a room full of impressionable young minds? They use "personality profiling" to weed out candidates in office jobs - why not teaching?? Seriously, it's enough to make a person consider homeschooling.
Gmail has unveiled a killer new feature: The site now has an 'Undo Send' button that puts a five to 10-second hold on outgoing messages. It's perfect for those moments when you hit 'Reply All' when you really shouldn't...but I'm thinking that ten seconds isn't really long enough. Sure, it covers those brief brain freezes when you send catty messages about your boss TO your boss, but what about the long, margarita-fuelled emails to ex-boyfriends and shag buddies that you don't remember sending until the next day? I'm thinking that a 10-hour delay would be better for certain addresses - Come to think of it, as Jezebel points out, it would be really great if life had an 'undo' button for those awkward conversations/outfits/relationships that you REALLY wish you could go back and do over. Those that come to mind for me would be (in no particular order) the permed mullet haircut I had in the mid-80s, going to Las Vegas with my ex, doing body shots off a guy with too much body hair and travelling to Caracas, Venezuela alone on a bus full of strangers. But at least I learned from my mistakes!
I feel for Susanne Klatten, the BMW heiress who got taken for a ride by the so-called 'Swiss gigolo' Helg Sgarbi after meeting him at a health spa. But come on, couldn't she have seen this coming?
Scary to say, but I find myself agreeing with Jan Moir for once...though it's ridiculous for her to imply that falling for a con artist a totally female phenomenon. I have several male friends who have been taken for a ride by predatory women, and believe me, suckers come in all shapes and sizes.
Still, in this case the amount of red flags were ridiculous. First of all, she was reading a self help book, and he said that it was his favourite. Hello, red flag! Men who make a point of reading self-help books in public want you to know how sensitive and wonderful they are--until they hit you up for a loan. As for the 'spy' line, do people seriously still believe that one? He can't have been a very effective undercover operative if he plopped down next to a stranger in a health club and announced it.
Still, none of this would matter if everyone followed the most important rule: DON'T LOAN MONEY TO A NEW PARTNER. If the bank won't give them cash, there's probably a reason why.
Other warning sighs: If they claim to be 'on holiday in Paris' and you don't get a foreign ringtone (they are probably calling from their mum's basement and Photoshopping the Eiffel Tower in later!), they use the line 'I could tell you, but I'd have to kill you,' or claim to be living with a 'sister' or female roommate who you are never allowed to meet.
I feel for the victims, I really do. But we all have to have some basic common sense. A new relationship is like a job interview - don't be afraid to ask questions!
Scary to say, but I find myself agreeing with Jan Moir for once...though it's ridiculous for her to imply that falling for a con artist a totally female phenomenon. I have several male friends who have been taken for a ride by predatory women, and believe me, suckers come in all shapes and sizes.
Still, in this case the amount of red flags were ridiculous. First of all, she was reading a self help book, and he said that it was his favourite. Hello, red flag! Men who make a point of reading self-help books in public want you to know how sensitive and wonderful they are--until they hit you up for a loan. As for the 'spy' line, do people seriously still believe that one? He can't have been a very effective undercover operative if he plopped down next to a stranger in a health club and announced it.
Still, none of this would matter if everyone followed the most important rule: DON'T LOAN MONEY TO A NEW PARTNER. If the bank won't give them cash, there's probably a reason why.
Other warning sighs: If they claim to be 'on holiday in Paris' and you don't get a foreign ringtone (they are probably calling from their mum's basement and Photoshopping the Eiffel Tower in later!), they use the line 'I could tell you, but I'd have to kill you,' or claim to be living with a 'sister' or female roommate who you are never allowed to meet.
I feel for the victims, I really do. But we all have to have some basic common sense. A new relationship is like a job interview - don't be afraid to ask questions!
PETA has released a new addition to its 'I'd rather go naked than wear fur' ad campaign: This time, with strippers saying that they would 'rather go topless' than wear fur. The only problem is that, as pointed out by AdFreak and Jezebel, this renders the whole concept totally nonsensical. The original idea was to use women who wouldn't normally be totally naked. Having a stripper say that she'd rather strip down than wear fur is kind of missing the point - she can't be that outraged, can she? It's her day job! Personally, I would be a lot more convinced by a group of naked nuns.
Another day, another debate in The Times about whether, in the wake of so many young teenage pregnancies, it's okay for parents to allow mixed-sex sleepovers.
My parents aer divided on this one. My dad says HELL no, then again he STILL doesn't allow me to sleep with boyfriends in the same room when I visit him, (as he says, 'not until I have a ring on my finger', cheers dad!) Mum says no in principle, but she allowed a lot of my male same-sex friends to stay over when I was younger. She trusted me completely, because we had such an open, honest relationship.
This was probably where she went wrong - You can't trust 15-year-olds!
( Read more... )
A judge has ruled against Richard Batista, the guy who sued his wife for $1.5 million, the value of his donated kidney, according to the New York Post (Which had one of the best ever opening sentences with 'It was kidney failure'). After his wife broke his heart and left him for another man, Batista wanted his organ back. He sought to classify the kidney as a marital asset in his divorce proceeding, which could have set a very dangerous precedent.
But the judge saw sense, ruled that the kidney was a gift and even suggested that the doctor could have committed a crime by trying to get money for a bodily organ.
Hopefully this will be the final nail in the coffin of the sorry saga - though somehow, I doubt it. This guy is really pissed off, and I can smell an appeal coming.
I'm a bit sceptical of the new study published in the American Journal of Preventative Medicine, that links high exposure between lyrics that describe degrading sex and early sexual activity in teens. The study, which reportedly found that those who frequently listened to music by artists like 50 Cent were more than twice as likely to have had sex than those who had the least exposure, only involved one group of teenagers in a low-income inner city school...surely these kids could have been high risk before they started listening to the music, rather than the other way around?
( Read more... )
( Read more... )
From the woman who swallowed the diamond ring her boyfriend dropped in a glass of champagne to the lady who jumped out of a cake wearing lingerie screaming 'Will you marry me?' in a crowded restaurant (only to have her boyfriend walk out), The Guardian helpfully provides cautionary tales of public proposals gone wrong...proving once again that if you are planning to pop the question in front of an audience, perhaps it's best to be 100% sure that the answer is going to be yes!! Happy Valentine's Day everybody!
