Where to start? Well, I guess it’s official, I’m unlikely to ever, ever be interested in the Museum of Sex if it’s going to be this misogynistic before I even put foot in the door. I mean, if there was a woman anywhere on this creative team, I’ll eat my bra. And it has an underwire!
But let’s go to the big issues first, shall we?
Bad sex is better than good sex with yourself? Is it, really?
Last bad sex I had, in August, outraged me, because it was casual, something I don’t typically do, and over in an instant. My thinking was, “If I’m going to risk STDs and whatever else you’re risking by sleeping with a casual partner, then a) it better be GOOD fucking, and b) it better last a long time. I mean, I better be SPENT after taking that chance.”
It’s the old adage, anything worth doing is worth doing well. I think that adage needs an asterisk from here on out, and a perma-footnote that reads especially sex.
Because, let’s face it, life’s too short to risk health and welfare for some fuckhead sex partner who’d rather be elsewhere or just plain doesn’t deserve to be in your sack. If you’re in it for a quickie orgasm, then you should’ve stayed home and wanked, because I’ve got better things to shave my legs for, all right?
And let’s tackle the notion that somehow bad sex is better than masturbation from another viewpoint: Self-esteem. If you’re some needy fuck who has no self-esteem, no self-respect, and needs to validate themselves through the eyes of someone else, then I guess a lousy lay works for you.
But who’s writing this ad? Men? Because that becomes pretty important (and dare I say obvious) when you’re tackling the merits of masturbation versus bad sex. Men start wanking in their preteen days. Women,often not until their 20s. Women get good at sex when? In their 20s. Wow! What a coincidence! Wanking = mastery! WHO KNEW?
So, ironically, boys, if you don’t encourage your women to stay home and masturbate now and then, bad sex-vs-masturbation is the only choice you’ll get, since she’s unlikely to know HOW you need to operate in order to have her screaming your name.
Masturbating makes women better lovers. There’s way too much evidence, anecdotal and otherwise, out there to support this truism for PR copyboys like this to miss.
But I hazard a guess that it’s misogynistic fuckwits like the fellas who wrote these ads who are the boys losing out by women becoming empowered through masturbation. Hmm, should I stay home with the Rabbit or go out for drinks with another asshat fumbling trying to get my bra off within four minutes of hitting a sofa, because he thinks the “fore” in foreplay refers to time? And the Rabbit doesn’t need me to even wear a bra or put on waterproof mascara? Do the math, Einstein.
Speaking as a single intelligent woman who’s tired of bullshit, I’m telling you, dating is hard enough without asshats like this who run a public institution (sort of), muddying up the mix with antiquated slogans that speak to misogyny and sexism of days gone by.
Bad sex is bad. Always. I mean, fuck, I have semantics on my side. Bad = the opposite of good. Did anyone at the museum crack a dictionary open to check that out? Bad means bad. Not “consolation prize” or “good enough”. It’s BAD.
Bad sex is bad because somebody’s feelings inevitably get hurt. When you’re left unfulfilled and bitter? That’s bad. And then you have laundry to do? Even badder!
How can bad sex with someone else — in which you have to start dealing with the messy business of human emotions — be any better than good masturbation — in which no communication, financial transactions, or call-backs are required?
There are a million ways in which this series of ads are offensive. So, then, moving on:
One of the other ads says, “Sex needs only a few inches. Love is deep.” Where do I begin with THIS one? Well, first off, sex is apparently all about the penis again. Lesbians, you’re out of luck. Sex needs a fuck of a lot more than a few inches, pal. It needs kisses and strokes and moans and pushing and prodding and pulling. Know what sex needs? Sex needs VERBS, not inches. Leave the measuring tape at home, bring the “doing” words, thanks.
And another ad says, “To laugh in bed is sexy. To laugh and point in bed is cruel.” Again, so many ways to slam this one, but let’s go with the obvious: Once again, it’s all about the penis. As if women can only feel better about themselves in bed by deriding penises, as opposed to shagging a lover into submission. Because women, of course, only fuck penises. Again, lesbians, no sex for you! Not until you learn to love cocks, you silly little gay girls.
What do all these ads have in common? They’re making a mockery of sex. They’re saying sex is always, always shallow. They contribute nothing new to the argument for sex. Now, I realize a museum is about history, but there’s no reason that should mean these PR fuckwits are bound only to expressing themselves in dated, prehistoric ways.
They’re reinforcing straight-sex-is-the-only-sex mentality of the ’70s. They’re insulting women. They’re making men seem like laughable stereotypes, too, like penises for hire.
Sex is a magical blend of the physical, the psychological, the emotional, the aural, the olfactoral — it’s not just tits, cock, and twats. It’s everything from the smell of someone’s skin to the gaspy-fluttery-shudders that follow an orgasm. It’s everything blended together that industry will never, ever be able to bottle and sell, that the soul will never get enough of, and that culture will never see die — it’s matters of the heart and biochemistry.
And you would think that people who purport to be curators of all things sexual from over the years would at least understand that the whole appeal about sex is that it just can’t be easily categorized… not least by ridiculously cliché and unimaginative ads like these.