vibrators

 

There’s a feeling of portentous solemnity that hangs over this Yahoo Life piece like a shroud.  “Antiquated gender-specific and belittling,”  referring to vibrators as “toys.”  Really?

Of course, the Facebook posture is even worse.  They won’t promote “sexual pleasure,” as though that were comparable to ageism or sizeism.

C’mon, people.  Sex is about fun.  Why otherwise do it?  Promoting “sexual wellness” sounds like work.  Sexual wellness, fine and good.  But how about “religious wellness” and “road-traffic wellness?”

“Sexual wellness” we need, right?  But I may have to take the kids to Little League.  Do we have to do this today?

And to blast “toy” language in vibrators: unbelievably earnest.  Toys are ludic instruments.  They steer us toward sensuality — not “wellness.”  There is nothing trivial about this.

Anyone in favour of more sensuality, raise your hands.  I thought so.

 

Leave a Comment