When it came time for her 10-year high school reunion she was not feeling the urge to revisit the past. So instead of RSVPing for herself, comedy writer Andrea Wachner hired a stripper to attend the reunion in her name, reports Bob Tourtellotte for Reuters.
If there's one thing I've learned writing these columns, it's that you ladies have penis on the brain. Which is why I'm going to admit that my penis is so huge, so gargantuan, that when I get excited, I barely have enough skin with which to whistle. Seriously. It's like three grapefruits in a gym sock. Trash bags are my preferred prophylactic. I ain't bragging or nothin'. Does size really matter? How do you know your vagina isn't all floppy? I knew a dude once who described sleeping with a woman as "driving a hatchback through the Lincoln Tunnel." I am convinced y'all make so much of a fuss about size as a passive-aggressive way to get back at dudes who you perceive as judging you solely by your boobs, waist, and butt. But when it comes to sex, good sex, bite-mark-on-the-shoulder sex, we are the sum of our physical, and emotional, parts. Otherwise, you're not having sex. You're just slapping bits.
Just when we thought it was fine for a woman to marry at any age she damn-well pleased, some guy in Texas has come along to correct us. And sadly, the guy is not just any guy, but a sociologist who teaches at a legitimate university (University of Texas-Austin) and publishes books that are considered academic (the latest is titled Forbidden Fruit: Sex and Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers). His name is Mark Regnerus. And in a new piece for the Washington Post, he says that — while he sees no issue with the fact that men are marrying later these days (28 years old for the first marriage now, as opposed to 23 years old in 1970) — he is disheartened to learn that women are now also choosing to marry later as well — around the spinsterly age 26.
Rowan Pelling, former editor of The Erotic Review, answered this question in her latest sex advice column for the Daily Mail. A happily married woman with two small children wrote to Pelling complaining she only wants sex once or twice a month. Meanwhile, her husband wishes she’d be “normal” and put out a few times a week. She goes on to lament those “normal” bedroom marathon folks, and how she secretly thinks them all liars or exaggerators. Including a tarty French chick she worked with who ran into the office late out of breath, with sex hair blabbing about her animalistic boyfriend all the time. “Libido is a capricious thing,” she sighs.
Love Bytes: three must-click sex, dating, and relationship links. Do separate beds improve or hurt a relationship? [The Frisky] Would you ever have a themed wedding? [Shine] What not to say to very skinny man. [Lemondrop] So if you're dying to know more about that rail-thin Romeo, steering clear of these lightweight lines will ensure your chances of catching his attention are anything but slim.
Historically when a woman found out a man she wanted to date was unemployed, she would go running for the hills. But these days, with the recession affecting people in all professions, many recently laid-off men actually make very promising boyfriends. Chances are high that these men worked in law, banking, or another field that requires a decent amount of education, intelligence, and motivation. So while these men may fall into the dreaded unemployed category, they are still desirable, and maybe even more desirable than men who still have jobs. Here are four reasons why starting to date someone who's been laid off can actually be better than someone who has to go to work every day.
We've all heard the oft-cited gender stereotypes. Men are promiscuous. Women are choosy. Biology programs men to want to widely spread their seed and women to want to guard their eggs.
Just last week we were extolling the virtues of being a late arrival to the pretty game. "Being a late bloomer," our clever blogger Jed wrote, "usually means you're either super smart, really good at something, or used to be, well, less attractive. In any of these cases, it's a positive." Indeed, wouldn't most of us — if forced to choose between the two — rather grow into our looks, rather than grow out of them? We think so. But that got us to thinking about something else: What happens if you start off not so pretty and never grow out of it?
When I was younger, I was always willing to pick up the slack for M.I.A. moms. But what if you never get to have children? It seems like you get screwed. Where do you stand on this issue?