Cognitive Dissonance

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that I reach for my feather boa!" - Allen Ginsberg

Posts tagged sex

38 notes

Dr. Phil Clarifies: He Was Just ASKING If You'd Bang a Drunk Girl

And then his apology the show’s apology, is delivered in a stilted, third-person fashion. Of course. 

Because it’s totally not offensive if you use the JEEZ, I WAS JUST ASKING defense. Not at all. </sarcasm>

Filed under Dr. Phil fuckery sex gender twitter

52 notes

amedio3k:

This just came up on my FB feed because an acquaintance “liked” it. My head just about exploded.I suppose I’m not terribly surprised, since the image was posted by an account called “Catholic Church” (their info states: ‘This is not an official page approved by the Catholic Church. It is a lay initiative and has no approval from any Ecclesiastical Authority.”), and links to uCatholic (motto: “Catholic Traditions in the Modern World”.I’m not even surprised that the acquaintance “liked” the image, since she’s a devout LDS, married with three kids. I really don’t care about someone else’s religious belief, or sense of morality.What has me raging, however, is the blatant misinformation…the generalization…and the projection of one group’s sense of morality onto others.Not only is this a slap in the face to those who don’t want to get married or can’t get married , but it’s an incredibly dangerous assertion when you consider the truth about HIV and other STIs. I’m sorry (not really), but a ring on your finger and a signed marriage license aren’t going to protect your health.Fidelity won’t necessarily protect your health.Sex is not the only way that HIV is transmitted…and the idea that marriage and/or fidelity equates “safe” sex is just one of many myths that has allowed for the rapid spread of HIV infection, particularly among couples in sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, about one out of every ten couples living in Kenya has at least one partner who is HIV+. Among married people who are living with HIV, 45% have a partner who is uninfected.According to Population Action International: 
“In a study of five African countries, two thirds of HIV-infected couples are serodiscordant (one partner is HIV-negative, while the other is HIV-positive). 
In Rwanda and Zambia, it is estimated that over half of new infections occur within marriage or in cohabitating relationships, and just under half in Uganda.
 While risk of transmission in discordant couples can be drastically reduced, this can only happen when partners are tested, disclose their results, and use condoms. “There’s really nothing righteous about lying and promoting ignorance. This sort of bullshit “wishful thinking” is killing people. It’s beyond infuriating. It’s despicable. 

amedio3k:

This just came up on my FB feed because an acquaintance “liked” it. My head just about exploded.

I suppose I’m not terribly surprised, since the image was posted by an account called “Catholic Church” (their info states: ‘This is not an official page approved by the Catholic Church. It is a lay initiative and has no approval from any Ecclesiastical Authority.”), and links to uCatholic (motto: “Catholic Traditions in the Modern World”.
I’m not even surprised that the acquaintance “liked” the image, since she’s a devout LDS, married with three kids.

I really don’t care about someone else’s religious belief, or sense of morality.

What has me raging, however, is the blatant misinformation…the generalization…and the projection of one group’s sense of morality onto others.

Not only is this a slap in the face to those who don’t want to get married or can’t get married , but it’s an incredibly dangerous assertion when you consider the truth about HIV and other STIs. 

I’m sorry (not really), but a ring on your finger and a signed marriage license aren’t going to protect your health.
Fidelity won’t necessarily protect your health.

Sex is not the only way that HIV is transmitted…and the idea that marriage and/or fidelity equates “safe” sex is just one of many myths that has allowed for the rapid spread of HIV infection, particularly among couples in sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, about one out of every ten couples living in Kenya has at least one partner who is HIV+. Among married people who are living with HIV, 45% have a partner who is uninfected.

According to Population Action International

“In a study of five African countries, two thirds of HIV-infected couples are serodiscordant (one partner is HIV-negative, while the other is HIV-positive). 

In Rwanda and Zambia, it is estimated that over half of new infections occur within marriage or in cohabitating relationships, and just under half in Uganda.

 While risk of transmission in discordant couples can be drastically reduced, this can only happen when partners are tested, disclose their results, and use condoms. “

There’s really nothing righteous about lying and promoting ignorance. This sort of bullshit “wishful thinking” is killing people. It’s beyond infuriating. It’s despicable. 

Filed under HIV AIDS Catholic Catholicism Religion Faith Safe Sex Sex STIs Health Truth Marriage Fidelity

96 notes

On Contraception, Republicans, and Federal Funding

Rebloggable by request:

I’m visiting my dad and he’s insisting Obama starting the federal funding of Planned Parenthood. Help!

 Anonymous

Meg at Cognitive Dissonance:

Nope. Thank this guy:

That would be Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th President of the United States. Planned Parenthood’s federal funding was started by Nixon under Title X. Here’s his statement on it:

"I called for a national commitment to provide adequate family planning services within the next 5 years to all those who want them but cannot afford them. It was clear that the domestic family planning services supported by the Federal Government were not adequate to provide information and services to all who want them on a voluntary basis.

To implement this national commitment, I asked for expanded research in contraceptive development and the behavioral sciences, reorganization of family planning service activities within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and legislation which would help the Department to implement this important program by providing broader and more precise legislative authority and a clearer source of financial support. The National Center for Family Planning Services was established in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare shortly after my message.

The bill before me today, the “Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970,” completes the legislation I requested in my message on population. This measure provides for expanded research, training of manpower, and increased family planning services. In addition, it provides for the development of family planning and population growth information and education.

It is noteworthy that this landmark legislation on family planning and population has had strong bipartisan support.”

See, back in the day, the Republican Party was much less against contraception and family planning than they are now. Let me repeat that: Republicans in 1970 were more supportive of welfare, contraception, and access to both than they are now. Tell your dad “citation needed, bro.”

Bonus points! Here’s why public funding of contraception is important from the nonpartisan Guttmacher Institute:

• Publicly funded family planning services help women to avoid pregnancies they do not want and to plan pregnancies they do. In 2006, these services helped women avoid 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, which would likely have resulted in about 860,000 unintended births and 810,000 abortions.

• Contraceptive services provided at publicly funded clinics helped prevent 1.48 million of these unintended pregnancies; the remaining 450,000 unintended pregnancies were prevented among Medicaid enrollees who received publicly funded contraceptive services from private physicians.

• Without publicly funded family planning services, the number of unintended pregnancies and abortions occurring in the United States would be nearly two-thirds higher among women overall and among teens; the number of unintended pregnancies among poor women would nearly double.

• Contraceptive services provided at Title X-supported centers helped prevent 973,000 unintended pregnancies in 2008, which would likely have resulted in 432,600 unintended births and 406,200 abortions.

• The services provided at publicly funded clinics saved the federal and state governments an estimated $5.1 billion in 2008; services provided at Title X–supported clinics accounted for $3.4 billion of that total.

• In other words, nationally, every $1.00 invested in helping women avoid pregnancies they did not want to have saved $3.74 in Medicaid expenditures that otherwise would have been needed.

Success!

Tell your dad to email me. He sounds interesting.

Cheers,

Meg

Filed under Family Planning Contraception birth control gender politics Richard Nixon Anonymous ask box Obama Barack Obama Republicans GOP Title X sex reproductive health reproductive rights Planned Parenthood

594 notes

One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea… It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, for purposes that are, yes, conjugal… but also procreative.

That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act… And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special. Again, I know most presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are… I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues.

Rick Santorum, giving an odd interview back in October to CaffeinatedThoughts.com

Ahem. An open letter to Rick Santorum:

Dear Rick,

I can call you Rick, right? You seem to want to get to know me on an awfully personal level. Well, I have something to say about that: Please get the hell out of my vagina. I did not invite you up in there. Nor did I invite you to poke around my uterus and ovaries, or anywhere else in my bathing suit area. 

I think it’s important that people “are who they are” too, which is why I don’t care what two (or more) consenting adults want to do to get freaky. I don’t care if you and Karen do it twice a year with the lights out, socks on, and magic sweater vest flung on the floor. I don’t care if you have a secret furry fetish involving My Little Pony and jars of marshmallow fluff.

I. DON’T. CARE. ABOUT. YOUR. SEX. LIFE. Is that clear?

In exchange, it would be super cool if you stopped giving a fuck about mine. It’s getting creepy. You look out from the TV screen like we’re just pals, chatting about “intimacy” and making sure I’m barefoot, pregnant, and making men sandwiches because Jesus said reasons.

Let’s get one thing straight, mmmkay?

Go have some sex for pleasure, Rick. I bet you’ll have fun, Karen will be shocked, and your litter o’ kidlets will wonder if daddy and mommy are demonically possessed because they’ve NEVER heard those kinds of noises. 

Cheers,

Meg

(Source: cognitivedissonance)

Filed under Rick Santorum Contraception politics an open letter GOP Conservative conservatives Republicans Election Election 2012 social issues reproductive rights NO sexism sex Really?

248 notes

First, masturbation can be a form of homosexuality because it is a sexual act that does not involve a woman. If a man were to masturbate while engaged in other forms of sexual intimacy with his wife then he would not be doing so in a homosexual way. However, any man who does so without his wife in the room is bordering on homosexual activity, particularly if he’s watching himself in a mirror and being turned on by his own male body.

Mark Driscoll, “Pastor” of the Mars Hill Church in Seattle, claiming men need to stop masturbating because it’s a kind of homosexuality. Driscoll also authored a booklet entitled Porn-Again Christian: A Frank Discussion on Pornography & Masturbation for God’s Men.

This is what immediately came to mind:

Yes, that’s James Franco making out with himself. Oh, and this:

In order to clear up any confusion for Driscoll, here’s the Merriam-Webster definition of homosexual:

ho·mo·sex·u·al adj
\ˌhō-mə-ˈsek-sh(ə-)wəl, -ˈsek-shəl\
Definition of HOMOSEXUAL
1: of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex

2: of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

Nothing in there regarding sex with yourself, I promise. Oddly enough, he says nothing about women, lesbianism, female masturbation, etc. I just don’t know what to say about this - it’s so ridiculous. 

DON’T TOUCH YERSELF, BOYS! IT’S GONNA MAKE YOU A HOMOSEXUAL!

Yeah, okay. Oh, and “Pastor” is in quotations marks because reason, dude. You’ve got none.

(Source: addictinginfo.org)

Filed under homosexual homosexuality Mark Driscoll gay GLBTQ bigotry really? hypochristianity Christian christians? Mars Hill Church Wait what? sex masturbation

54 notes

BREAKING: Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces birth control must be covered by insurance with no copays

And now for some marvelous news!

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, commended Health and Human Services Secretary (HHS) Kathleen Sebelius for accepting an expert panel’s recommendation that family planning be considered preventive health care. Now, newly issued insurance plans must cover the full range of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved contraception at no cost.

The federal health-care law requires newly issued health plans to cover - at no cost - certain preventive-health services that are specific to women. HHS appointed an Institute of Medicine (IOM) panel to recommend which services should be included. The panel of leading women’s health experts recommended fully covering family-planning care. Secretary Sebelius’ decision to adopt this recommendation will make no-cost contraception a benefit required by law.

This is a major victory for those of us who struggle with paying for birth control and will help organizations who had been providing it to people who could not pay because their insurance did not cover it.

Thank you, Kathleen Sebelius.

Filed under reproductive rights politics Kathleen Sebelius Squee! birth control women women's rights gender sex equality insurance health care

36 notes

In 2009, the pop star Rihanna told ABC anchor Diane Sawyer she finally broke it off with her violent pop-star boyfriend Chris Brown. For the children, of course. “When I realized that my selfish decision for love could result into some young girl getting killed, I could not be easy with that part. I couldn’t be responsible.” … There simply aren’t enough people questioning why Rihanna has repeatedly put out a string of please-hurt-me songs over the last two years, two years since she left the violent embrace of Chris Brown and she still so clearly expresses a desire to be beaten.

Last year, Rihanna also sang in “Rude Boy” that she likes the way “you pull my hair.” Big deal, you say? Then try last summer’s duet with the rapper Eminem called “Love The Way You Lie.” … These songs are not a pose – or it’s all part of a long-running publicity stunt to spur bad-girl “buzz.” In March, she told Rolling Stone magazine “I like to be spanked. Being tied up is fun. I like to keep it spontaneous. Sometimes whips and chains can be overly planned – you gotta stop, get the whip from the drawer downstairs. I’d rather have him use his hands.” …

Whether her affinity for violence is reality or fakery is irrelevant to me. Either way it’s a grotesque violation of her womanhood. And for that, she is given star treatment. For that, she is surrounded by all the trappings of fame and fortune.

What was that about her selfish decision possibly resulting in some young girl getting killed, again?

L. Brent Bozell III, "Exploiting Domestic Violence?"

Really? If Mr. Bozell here thinks songs reflect reality, perhaps Johnny Cash should not have been lauded by then-President George W. Bush. Instead, Cash should have been investigated for shooting a man in Reno just to watch him die and busting a chair right across his dad’s teeth, then drawing a gun on his own father for naming him Sue. Right?

Also, Bozell is confusing consensual BDSM between consenting adults with domestic violence. Spankings are not equal to a beating that leaves lumps on an individual’s forehead, and splits open the person’s lip. And how is understanding her own sexual likes and dislikes “an affinity for violence” and “a grotesque violation of her womanhood”?

Fine, okay - for all we know, it’s just something she says to sell her music. But does this mean women who engage in BDSM desire to be beaten viciously in a parked car? No. Partners who practice BDSM typically discuss limits and have safe words. This is part of mutual consent. Domestic violence is completely different. Desiring to be spanked is not desiring to be beaten. End of story.

Filed under BDSM L. Brent Bozell Rihanna conservative conservative weirdness domestic violence misogyny sex slut shaming violence womanhood? WTF?! srsly?

5 notes

Eight Strange Sex Fetishes

Porn star Aurora Snow has seen it all, and done most of it. Here, she lists eight fetishes—from plushophilia to tickling—that she still finds stunning.

As a veteran adult actress, I have done my fair share of foot-fetish films, but as the Internet has made itself the primary source for most of our media needs, I cannot help noticing how many other fetishes have sprung up. The Web allows everyone’s whim to be satisfied—and if you’re into it, whatever it is, chances are you can find someone doing it online.

Here are some that have made me giggle, or that I find a little stunning, along with some others that are outright puzzling.

Rule 34, folks

Filed under Rule 34 Fetish sex porn Aurora Snow

387 notes

I’ve never understood the concept of “saving yourself for marriage”. What exactly is one “saving” by waiting until the blessed wedding night to have sexual intercourse? An unbroken hymen? And what does one expect to accomplish by doing so? Moral fortitude? The rhetoric itself implies that proprietorship thing that bothers me so much about many relationships, and this phrase in particular tends to be fairly gender focused – a girl is told that if she saves herself until the right man comes along, then she can give herself (as if a prize) to him once he has demonstrated his love for her enough that he might marry her. Really? Is this a message girls should receive? That they are part of a purchase contract, the bargaining chip in an antiquated marriage negotiation? I just can’t get on board with that. I don’t think I could have been on board with that in 1910. I sure can’t understand how that scenario regularly plays itself out 100 years later, and during a time (and in a place) where gender equality is at it’s most immutable.

Sexie Sadie’s Stories of Seduction » Blog Archive » Save. Scarleteen Blog Carnival. (via greaterthanlapsed)

I have never understood this either. Sex is filthy until you get married then it’s got a magical A-ok stamp from above?

(via lipstick-feminists)

Filed under gender saving yourself marriage sex love inequality we don't have dowries anymore