Well, then maybe he should have married a chick who was into Scat play

March 14, 2008

I love Dan Savage, but I don’t always agree with him. That’s the case in his take on the Spitzer situation (or more exactly- his take on Dr. Laura’s take on the Spitzer situation) in a post titled “But What if Elliot Spitzer Wanted to Shit in his Wife’s Mouth”

Dan’s point is that some sexual needs are so kinky that it could be considered more loving to have them met by a hooker than to burden the wife with them.

And while I see his point, I don’t really agree. Because, in the real world, guys don’t suddenly wake up with a fetish. He wasn’t into vanilla sex when he got married and then, 20 years later, decides he needs to be dressed up like a little girl and pegged by a lady with a strap-on. No, he had that fantasy all along, but kept on trying to ignore it in an attempt to fit into the ideal of what people are supposed to find sexy.

If you want to shit in your wife’s mouth, then marry a chick who is into scat play. If there are no women who are into scat play then at least marry one who understands your needs and doesn’t mind if you get them met somewhere else.

Yes, these women do exist. We’re the ones who are told “you’re not the type of girl you marry.”


This Virgin/Whore thing… it’s complex

March 11, 2008

Did you hear that NY Gov. Spitzer hired a hooker?

Of course you have. Everyone has. It’s the top story in every paper (my fave headline: “Ho No!”).

The main question I keep hearing people ask is “why?”. I mean, on one hand we all know why, the question behind the question is why a guy like this would need to pay for sex?

He’s married, to a really cute wife. Seriously, don’t judge her by the way she looked at that non-resignation resignation press conference. She’s actually quite cute, and has a great shape.

And even if he was tired of his wife there is no end to the number of aides, interns, and co-workers he could have used for a booty call. As sad as it sounds, an affair with a co-worker probably would have been better for his career than one with a hooker. We can forgive cheating (exhibit A: Bill Clinton) but we can’t get over the hypocrisy of a guy who used to punish hookers now frequenting them.

But he didn’t go that route. He paid an estimated $3,000 for sex, with another $1,500 going towards future visits. And that is what most people don’t understand.

The phrase “you get what you pay for” might be true for shoes, but not for nookie.

So, if there are a number of women he could have sex with, why did he need to pay for it?

I think it all goes back to our old friend the virgin/whore complex.

Read the rest of this entry »