Figleaf's Real Adult Sex

Summary: There are already lots of animal names for women. The “cheetah” one may be foot in mouth tongue in cheek but the new carnivorous-animal euphemisms suggest men lie to themselves about their eagerness for sex.

So some bright young doodle, clearly auditioning for a job at Details in his post for The New York Observer, tried to introduce yet another new kind of desperate woman into the pantheon of cat names. This time the “Cougar’s Young Niece, the Cheetah.” By which, I think, he means single women who are interested in men so close to their own age no one would even blink if the man was the same number of years older.

The plucky, lucky young doodle (who, come to think of it might just be auditioning early for next year’s Bad Sex in Fiction, pseudo-journalism division) thinks this cheetah phenomenon, which he meticulously distinguishes from pumas, cougars, and (seriously!) saber-tooth tigers, is an unseemly catastrophe having to do with women who, in clear violation of Rule #1 actually want to have sex and want to have it with.

Anyway it’s all bullshit, and (as Echidne suggests, probably just a publicity draw since outrage tends to draw more links than not being stupid) not ordinarily worth linking to.

Except that in comments someone named Jinxedluck said

Sex should be fun. Stop making it icky.
Submitted by jinxedluck on Thu, 12/03/2009 – 16:17.

When will men realize that if they stopped making women feel like shit for having sex, they’d get laid more? Shouldn’t this be a good thing for everyone?

Why do you feel the need to degrade women amongst your male friends? How about not making women regret ever having slept with you? You might even get a chance to sleep with her again if you actually respected her.

Perhaps you’re of the species (look, I can make animal references too) that is nice to women in person, then makes a mockery of her to your male friends? Icky. Really icky feeling.

She said it here.

More proof, if proof were needed, that the dominant, women as the “no-sex” class paradigm is primarily a phenomenon of men, not women.

—-

And can I just say here that the fact that these little pencilscribes are using large, carnivorous animal euphemisms because contrary stereotypes they’re not ravenous for sex with women they’re fucking terrified of it.

Men say they resent sexual scarcity but sweet mother of pearl some of us go out of our way to create it!

Update: Via Twitter Heather Corinna, who’s tired of the whole business of giving classes of women animal names anyway, what’s up with the general phenomenon. After a certain point you gotta confront that calling women chicks, bunnies, bevers, cows, bitches, sows denies or discards the possibility of peer relationships. You know that bit about radical propositions that women are people? The persistence of animal euphemisms suggests…?