Cock-Headed Columnist Obsesses About Vaginas
Michael Smerconish really takes his role as “The Shame of Philadelphia” seriously
Funny how we’ve never had similar trouble with our own plumbing: pecker, johnson, shaft and rod always seem to do the trick just fine. But things have always been more complicated when it comes to women.
And not just for what we guys call it, but women’s usage, too.
Vagina has always been out there, but it’s never been quite right. It’s uninviting, and seems to have an edge to it. There are plenty of other choices, including the dreaded c-word, which is nasty.
First of all, I don’t understand why a discussion of Smerconish’s preferred informal terms for genitals belongs on the OpEd page of a big city newspaper, not even when it veers into an ignorant pseudo-discussion of feminism. Second of all, anyone who thinks that the vagina has “a hard edge to it” hasn’t been around very many vaginas. Third, for a guy who claims to espouse “conservative values” and has complained that discussing homosexuality is “is the stuff of parenting, not teaching”, it’s a little disconcerting to see a full-blown, George Carlin-esque list of words for penis on the editorial page of a family newspaper.
The feminists, it seems, have a proprietary interest in female genitalia.
No matter what you call it, many feminists don’t want guys attracted to it. If it were up to them, there’d be an image at www.dictionary.com with a sign next to “vagina” reading “No men allowed.”
Speak for yourself, moron. Every single woman I’ve ever dated has been a strong feminist, and none of them have had issues regarding sex. Maybe women have historically closed their legs to you because you’re a right-wing, pro-life, anti-female, torture-loving blowhard with a head that looks like a cock.
I’d like to see some supporting evidence for these claims, because what I’m reading is a bunch of unsupported statements that drip with misogyny– oh wait. Pardon me: Smerconish HAS done his research. He had deep “consultation” with his “man friends”, none of who have a vagina of their own, and whose qualifications aren’t identified. Who are these “man friends”, Mr. Smerconish? Are they OB/GYNs? Sociologists? Or are they just your idiot friends down at PooPoo’s Tavern?
It’s shameful that the Daily News gives some of their prime real estate to an adult member of the Little Rascals “he-Man Woman Haters Club”. That’s exactly what this column is: it puts down women and girls, makes false and outrageous claims about feminism, and has the explicit goal of making women feel ashamed of their genitals and by extension their sexuality.
Interestingly enough, Smerconish’s discomfort with the fine vagina reveals that he is not only an ignorant cock-head, but a gibbering twat as well. With so many other things going on in the world, from cop-killings in Philadelphia to an ongoing war in Iraq to the destruction of our Constitutional rights to global warming to the droughts that are destroying the Southeast to the imploding economy to the freefall of the dollar, this is all this man can talk about?
No wonder Philadelphia has a national reputation for rampant stupidity: it’s media personalities like Michael Smerconish who make the rest of us look bad.
Please go back to Doylestown and stay there.
UPDATE: From Lutton in comments:
Hey Mike, why don’t you try to come up with some column ideas of your own, instead of going over what the NYT wrote about three days ago?
All your double entendres (put my finger on it, beat around the bush, warm and fuzzy) are immature and the premise of your whole article is misogynistic.
If you really had the balls you’re pretending to have by writing such a dickish column, you’d talk about “the nerve-rich locus of a woman’s sexual pleasure” the way the times does.
I’m surprised Smerconish has kids at all, Lutton, considering that the very thought of a vagina sends him into a panic. He can’t even bring himself to use an ordinary word and has to resort to ridiculous squeamish euphemisms.
Vagina. Vagina. Vagina. Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.Vagina.
It’s a perfectly nice word for a perfectly nice part of the human body.
6 Responses to “Cock-Headed Columnist Obsesses About Vaginas”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 1st, 2007 at 10:17 am
did you Pandagon just had a similar discussion of the ‘vajayjay?’
great minds think…about vaginas!
November 1st, 2007 at 10:20 am
Moist, damp, gooey and banned on television
http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/30/moist-damp-gooey-and-banned-on-television/
November 1st, 2007 at 10:36 am
and lastly (maybe): Hey Mike, why don’t you try to come up with some column ideas of your own, instead of going over what the NYT wrote about three days ago?
All your double entendres (put my finger on it, beat around the bush, warm and fuzzy) are immature and the premise of your whole article is misogynistic.
If you really had the balls you’re pretending to have by writing such a dickish column, you’d talk about “the nerve-rich locus of a woman’s sexual pleasure” the way the times does.
As for the NYT’s article, ‘oh, come on!’
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/fashion/28vajayjay.html
look at these names and profiles:
“John H. McWhorter, a linguist and a senior fellow” is he a cunning linguist? mc - WHORE -ter?
” Steven Pinker, ” pink, PINKER, pinkest? Isn’t all pink in the middle?
November 1st, 2007 at 11:32 am
I think it’s time for national vagina day…Let’s get Atrios on board!
November 1st, 2007 at 11:45 am
every day is vagina day so far as I’m concerned.
I love the vagina.
If I ever have a daughter I’m going to name her Vagina, just so I can annoy people like Michael Smerconish (and the equally ridiculous and vagina-phobic Christine Flowers: note she uses the same “no trespassing” motif. Is this some meme of rightwingistan?)
November 1st, 2007 at 12:03 pm
[...] Michael Smerconish on the vagina, 11/1/07: “The feminists, it seems, have a proprietary interest in female genitalia. [...]