Episode 2.3

25Jan12

Beth, Lynnea, Jen and Tracie discuss purity bear, Santorum's opposition to abortions in the case of rape victims, a matriarchal society in India and the men who are pushing back, sinking ships and their captains...and the apartment next door catches fire!

Also: Results from the previous contest and a new contest for "I Melt With You" gift bags!

  • AussieGal

    “Normal woman” …. “typical male behaviour”…. re:sex. Im thinking if we just say its all about compatibility, we can leave the whole gender issue out. Im “like a man” if I go by what was mentioned at “normal”…and I know men, who have felt bad and used and neglected by me, by no intent of mine….but they needed more time and intimacy. So really…..its just, if you are one way…you should steer clear of people incompatible?

    Jan 26, 2012 at 2:56 am
  • Lars (typical male)

    I don’t like lubes. If you need to use a lube then she’s not ready. To bake a cake you gotta preheat the oven.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 5:16 am
  • microbiologychick

    Lars,

    You’re just wrong. Some women just don’t get wet. The pill and sinus medicines also block lubrication.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 7:00 am
  • tracieh

    Aussie:

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/study_are_more_likely_say_orgasm_RnJhqIISgkOsqaJF9BPtdI

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/02/09/the-orgasm-gap.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgasm >Masters and Johnson found that men took about 4 minutes to reach orgasm with their partners. Women took about 10-20 minutes to reach orgasm with their partners, but 4 minutes to reach orgasm when they masturbated.

    I don’t see why people should be called on to ignore general realities. The idea that there is no such thing as “normal” in the sense of a more common physical experience, is simply incorrect. All of medicine is based on acknowledging normal physical states and abnormal ones. And sociology is the social science of understanding this about people in all regards. It’s not a crime or a problem to simply admit “most people X” or “most men X” or “most women X”–and use the differences to *gain understanding and respect for the differences*. There are diseases, for example, that impact more men than women or more women than men. Is it sexist to say so? To express that is not problematic nor sexist. It hardly matters if you, or I, or anyone likes it or not, it’s a fact that *in general* the sexual experience is a different experience between men and women. And it’s *not* more unhelpful to deny that, and expect women to be, physically, more like men (than they demonstrably are), rather than to accept women as *generally* not men. And respect them for what they *most often* are.

    This does not mean that deviation from a norm can’t also be understood and respected, by the way. It only means that ignoring real differences is about as helpful and useful as ignoring any reality in general–which is, not at all.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 7:28 am
  • tracieh

    To employ my analogy here, it’s like saying “why do we have to pigeon-hole gay people as people only attracted to same sex? Why can’t we ignore that and just realize they sometimes sleep with opposite sex partners as well? And some straight identified people have same-sex attractions, as well.”

    As true as that is–it’s not helpful if the goal is to have gay people respected by the straight community. Making them acceptable based on a marginal claim that they’re *more like us straight people than we understand* is just code for “I don’t respect you for your differences, if you’re not somehow *like me*, I don’t understand or accept that.” The concept of “How can I make you more like me and deny the stark contrast that is the elephant in the room,” just seems to deny reality and ignore the problem.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 7:35 am
  • J. Smith

    Somebody has their laptop on the desk with their microphone stand, and I can hear her typing constantly throughout the episode. There must be some sort of technical solution to this… For me, the mental picture it creates is of all of you sitting in a room, and one of you completely ignoring the others, which is weird.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 8:01 am
  • Lars (typical male)

    “Some women just don’t get wet.”

    I stand corrected. I was not aware of this. I have to say it sounds painful though, lube or no lube.

    I’ll shut up now.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 8:19 am
  • tracieh

    Lars: You raise a great point and example, though. The fact that some women don’t get wet should not be taken as confirmation that men should just ignore stimulating women in order to try and get them wet since “I just can’t assume it’s universal for all women.” The idea that women normally do get wet—and that this is the common experience due to evolutionary reality—is generally correct and results in useful acts by men during sex, such as stimulation early in the sex act to help make penetrative sex easier and more enjoyable for everyone.

    You have a few options: Proceed based on an acknowledged and well understood norm. Proceed based on a minority possibility; don’t have sex in a spontaneous/intuitive mode—and instead keep talking and asking if the person can confirm for you their preferences are or are not in line with generally demonstrated common experiences.

    To me, I see life as slowing down considerably if I can’t make a move toward another human being without adopting some basic assumptions. If a person is in a group that deviates from a standard common experience, I expect them to let me know if I overstep a boundary. Just as I am aware that some people are insulted by having another person hold a door for them (interpreting this as a statement of their perceived weakness), I don’t ask people before I hold a door for them, if this is acceptable to them. I hold the door because *most people* appreciate the polite gesture. If someone doesn’t they are welcome to express that, and I won’t hold doors for them anymore. It’s not a problem. But I have to, in that moment, hold the door or not. And I go with the more common action of holding the door, because that’s what I understand *most people* appreciate. And I don’t see this as rude of me or presumptuous or even problematic. I’m not judging people who don’t want me to hold doors, I’m simply trying to negotiate life in a society where people are diverse, but where we have to come to some agreement on the best/better ways to treat one another; and understanding more/less common attitudes is quite useful shorthand in determining these negotiations.

    If I said “breast cancer is more of a concern generally for women than for men,” why would anyone cite the statistics of some men getting breast cancer as an example for why they think it’s wrong to say that women generally are more concerned about breast cancer? Finding exceptions within the margins does nothing to invalidate general norms that are demonstrated in real data provided by good research. I can’t disregard reality just because some people don’t like particular realities. If research showed men and women were identical in their sexual experiences overall, I’d happily admit and promote that–but it doesn’t.

    Another prime example of a sexual experience difference that would be common is that women are, as you are pointing out, often stimulated by partners early in the sex act, as a means to stimulate lubrication. This often means a woman is brought to orgasm initially in the act, and then penetrative sex happens, and the man finishes with an orgasm. This is *quite common.* In this model, the women has orgasm then, as an act that initiates “sex”—and the male has orgasm as the marker for the act that results in the end of sex. When my gay friend said that “orgasm is the goal,” it reflected this model—from a male standpoint only. From the woman’s perspective in this same scenario, sex did not *finish* with her orgasm—it actually simply began with her orgasm. So to her “sex” is not an act culminating in an orgasm in this common model. But from a male perspective, that is exactly what is describe d here. And my gay, male friend was expressing that. However, his description was quite foreign to me, as a woman, based on a very common female sexual experience. I don’t see why it should be problematic for anyone for me to simply describe this reality and say that people should respect the differences in experience and perspective without asserting that there is something “wrong” with the man or women for just describing how sex is to them.

    This is well off your topic, but provided what I thought was a good opening to talk about how understanding general realities is useful, and there is no reason to denigrate using them or avoid admitting they exist.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 10:42 am
  • ThatAwesomeGirl

    LOVED THE PODCAST!!

    By the way, I am staying away from sex for as long as possible because 1.) I contracted HPV ( non cancerous) like two months after loosing my virginity. 2.) I have a history of getting emotionally attached to my sexual partners. 3.) I feel like sex is one of the most valuable things you can give to someone a partner…. 4.) I don’t find sex very pleasurable so why risk the first 3.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 6:35 pm
  • Randomizer

    Great podcast as always, ladies. On the purity bear video, I kept thinking ‘it’s a pedobear commercial!’

    Jan 27, 2012 at 4:19 am
  • ArtCrow

    Great show as always.

    Lynnea, I got your MST3K reference (big MST3K freak). Sadly, you made me think about Final Justice, and the odious Joe Don Baker… Not cool.

    Jan 27, 2012 at 8:06 am
  • Rilian

    Where did the disgusting idea of ship captains committing suicide come from, and why are you supporting it.?

    Jan 27, 2012 at 11:41 am
  • David

    Huh. The mp3 server, media29.podbean.com, isn’t responding to http or ping.

    I’ll try again later.

    Jan 28, 2012 at 2:14 am
  • Randomizer

    Rilian, you misunderstand the custom of ‘going down with the ship.’ The idea was that if everyone COULD get off, everyone would. If, however, due to circumstance there was not an ability for every person to get off the ship the captain would stay behind making sure that everyone who could be saved, was saved. It’s part of their job to make sure that everyone who can be saved, is saved, if that means giving up their life that is the price they pay. Why is this acceptable behavior for firefighters, police, military personnel, but somehow a ‘disgusting idea of suicide’ for ship captains? It’s the same job, they are responsible for every single person on the ship.

    Jan 28, 2012 at 5:44 am
  • mond

    @Rilian, Let me change the senario slightly. Imagine that an aircraft got into difficulty. The pilot realises that the plane was going to crash. What is his duty to himself and the passengers? He should make the best attempt possible to make the crash survivable.

    If he put on a parachute and left everyone else to their fate then he may have avoided possible ’suicide’ but he may have prevented many people from surviving by leaving his post.

    Jan 28, 2012 at 7:31 pm
  • Innerspecrum

    I think that in most cases we should avoid using phrases like “most men X” or “most women X”. And heres why: Suppose 72% of men fit description X, it would therefore be factually correct to say “most men x”. However, most people would take it to mean more like 95% or 98% or something like that. Thus a large portion of the population is being misrepresented. Because of that, “most x” type statements should be reserved for those cases where it actually is the vast majority. It’s important that we avoid stereotyping.

    Jan 30, 2012 at 1:29 am
  • DavidH

    With regards to your discussion about abandoning ships and women and children first.

    Modern ships have (are required to have) more lifeboat places than people, the most important thing is getting people off the ship as fast as possible.

    Sorting people out into women and children first slows everything down.

    The basic principle is that you pile people into the boats as fast as its possible to safely do so.

    Lifeboat stations and muster points are assigned by cabins so that people are automatically spread out amongst the lifeboats.

    The idea is that the “you go, no you go” arguments don’t ever have to happen. Particularly as they also have multiple inflatable emergency rafts as backup [some of which you could see stuck on the side of the capsized ship].

    Your general discussion about feminism and the ridiculous article as well as the rest of the show were all excellent. However I was wondering if you could do something like the “Show Notes” that they have on the SGU podcasts with links to all the stories and such. The BBC article you talked about for example I can’t find anywhere.

    Jan 30, 2012 at 4:21 pm
  • Bridget

    I really like the response to that guy’s complaints and Tracie’s rant in is great.

    Maybe ya’ll could talk about sexist language. I hear women talk about being hit on at atheist gatherings but I haven’t heard anybody talk about the sexist language that is common in male-dominated groups. This might only be an issue for me but it is really hard for me to stick around a group where derogatory language about women is accepted. There is an attitude that a woman should speak up if she feels uncomfortable but I think that is an unfair expectation to have, especially when she’s in the minority, especially when she’s a stranger. I think that the expectation should be that people don’t use cruel language. It’s a patriarchal and entitled attitude to claim that men have the right to use any language they want in the company of any group of people up until the point that somebody tells them to stop. I hope that nobody holds that opinion. There are many analogies to be drawn from that type of situation.

    Jan 31, 2012 at 3:23 pm
  • Dez

    Bitches killed it this time. Awesome show. GB gives an unapologetic voice to atheist feminists. ROAR!!!!!!

    Jan 31, 2012 at 5:53 pm
  • GodlessDick

    All of you women are simply great. But I do think the ACA should sponser another podcast that is just Tracie ranting about whatever she feels like for the week. Sure this week’s rant was epic, but does she ever have a rant that isn’t?

    Feb 1, 2012 at 12:20 am
  • Crommunist

    Y’all talked about the legitimate reasons to wait for sex, and whatnot. You also say the guy in the video seems like he’s ready. I disagree, and here’s why: he’s taking dating advice from an imaginary stuffed animal. This isn’t Donnie Darko - anyone who’s hallucinating a nagging teddy bear is probably not ready.

    Seriously though, I don’t see how “you’re worth the wait” is the same as saying “you’re a slut if we have sex”. Even the bear says “this could define YOU for the rest of YOUR life”. It doesn’t seem to me, at first glance anyway, that this is about the woman in the relationship - it’s about the guy deciding to safeguard “purity” instead of leaping into temptation. It still fetishizes virginity, which is an anti-feminist position, but I don’t see the slut shaming.

    Another great podcast!

    Feb 3, 2012 at 2:11 pm
  • Durakken

    I want to be clear and concise without sounding like a jerk… I don’t mean to be… and I don’t care so much about the label, but I think it should be brought up when Tracie made this huge rant and didn’t follow through on where it would go if we’re talking about labels…

    The reason I will not call myself feminist and why I think it is an asinine label is simply for the same reason I would find the following label asinine…

    Blackist

    That would be what someone for “racial” equality would be called if they followed the feminist labeling format and I’d also find that in itself racist.

    also… as a sidenote. There is no misunderstanding of what you mean by feminism or what it may have originally meant and putting forth such a claim is pretty dismissive which is quite insulting.

    Feb 5, 2012 at 10:23 am
  • Cat

    Hi,

    A few thoughts about the Cosmo discussion, did you notice that the sex advice in Cosmo was mostly directed to females as to how to increase sexual satisfaction for the male. Where is the sex advice for males in the mens mags about how to increase sexual satisfaction for females? Most of the “articles” seem to be for direct satisfaction of the male, though stories or photos? Treating females as an object to gain sexual satisfaction from without consideration for her sexual independence or requirements. My perception (non scientific observation only) is that females seem to be frequently (in mass/popularist media) told they need to have better skills to keep their man satisfied, while most men are allowed to believe they are “Gods gift to women” without any additional guidance or education.

    Thanks for the great podcast, please keep up the good work.

    Feb 5, 2012 at 7:46 pm
  • MH

    One thing I never hear come up in these conversations - and hence I am beginning to wonder if it is even true - is that men NEED orgasms and women don’t. If a man doesn’t have an orgasm occasionally - I assume the number of days varies by age and individual - he starts to get distracted, horny, etc. and eventually it is even painful. If he doesn’t have a wet dream, he must masturbate or have sex. MUST. The fluids are being produced and must leave. The discomfort increases dramatically if you ALMOST have sex, but then don’t. It can be physically painful to spend the night next to a woman and not have sex. It isn’t about emotion, desire, love, etc. It is physical pain. As far as I know, women don’t have this problem. They might want sex, like sex, enjoy sex, but they don’t biologically “need” it in this way and don’t experience physical discomfort if denied orgasm. Correct me if I’m wrong.

    I think that has to be a part of all these discussions, but I’m afraid bringing it up will lead to problems, like people assuming it is being forwarded as an excuse for date rape or rape in general, for example. But I am certain that this physical, biological circumstance plays a large role in how the two sexes see and experience sex.

    Feb 7, 2012 at 9:37 am
  • Rilian

    Hey, all of spanish also has this word “nosotros” that means we, first person plural. And it also has a masculine and feminine form, the same way that vosotros does. Personally, I’ve never heard anyone use the word “nosotras” except for people in their first semester of a spanish class who are all gung-ho about the gender distinctions for some reason. But then again, the subject pronouns are often omitted, so there wouldn’t much opportunity to hear it anyway. Regardless, I say fuck the stupid-ass gender segregation of spanish. I change all the -o and -a endings to -e when I speak spanish. Or sometimes just leave them off.

    Feb 10, 2012 at 12:30 am
  • Leet

    I’m also not a fan of the term “feminism” or any other such similar terms. Although I understand your point on specific relevance if you’re in a minority group, I still dislike terms such as “negroism” instead of “racial equality”. Quite simply, the nature of such terms is that they _imply_ favoring that class/subculture/whatever. I’d rather not fight for equality with non-egalitarian terms because I don’t want that after the fight is won instead of using masculine nomenclature, we’re using feminine instead (even if the “understanding” is there that these terms are egalitarian).

    Mar 9, 2012 at 8:44 am
  • High PR backlinks

    I agree with Lars, he is absolutely right. He make me laugh with comparison “To bake a cake you gotta preheat the oven. “

    Mar 25, 2012 at 9:37 am
  • Ibofanga

    I absolutely loved this episode; one of the most insightful entertaining videos I have heard in a very long time. I can’t wait to watch more, and to show my two daughters, who being of the enlighten sort, will love this.

    Apr 18, 2012 at 5:43 pm
  • Rilian

    You imply that incest involves an unwilling woman but you also list it as separate from rape. But if one person is unwilling then it IS rape. You could say “incestuous rape” but if you just say “incest” I’m going to assume you mean pure incest, which would be relatives choosing to have sex with each other. Then if someone gets pregnant, why is it assumed that they would want to or should get an abortion? A person is not necessarily deformed just because their parents are close relatives. You could at least do DNA testing before making a decision. It’s up to the mother and people shouldn’t be pressuring her.

    Jul 21, 2012 at 11:11 pm

Loading Plays
47Episodes
January 2012
S M T W T F S
« Dec   Feb »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031