Comments
Please wait...
and remember to be decent to everyone
all of the time.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Dan... you rooock
As much fun as they may be, they aren't going to comfort you when you have a shitty day at work, they aren't going to surprise you with a trip to your favorite restaurant, they aren't going to tell that you are sexy when you wake up in flannel pajamas with a bird's nest in your hair.
Beyond that, the sexual experience itself isn't the same. You can't scratch a vibrator's back or bite its neck or grab on to its hair. If you call it a dirty slut in the heat of passion, it won't respond. A vibrator can't give you a good open-hand slap on the ass.
I've never had the desire to cuddle with my vibrator after sex. Conversely, I've never had the desire to shove my partner in a drawer after sex. There really is no comparison.
We love you!
My first girlfriend was a Southern Baptist who wouldn't have vaginal sex but gave great blow jobs and liked to saddleback.
While she eventually lost religion and gave up her objection to traditional penis-vaginal sex. But for a year I had a helluva fun time saddlebacking!
The PHENOMENON of Christian teens having anal sex to preserve their virginity is a noun.
The ACT of having anal sex to preserve one's virginity, presumably out of adherence to Christian morals or pledges, is the verb.
The definition you have up on saddleback.com needs to be expanded. (I also love that you have a website with just the definition... it's a thing of beauty that I've already linked on my facebook.)
I sent this letter to Betty Bouwer back on 15 June 2004. It relates to saddlebacking.
Piet de Best, from Amsterdam, The Netherlands writes:
I know that anal sex can be a way for good Christian girls to have their fun and still retain their virginity (at least technically). But what advice do you have for a young gay boy who wants to keep his virginity but still doesn't want to lose his boyfriend because he won't "go all the way"?
Thank-you in advance for a Christian answer!
Betty's Reply:
Anyone who engages in anal sex is going all the way. All the way to Hell.
It was a wise-ass question, and I got a wise-ass answer.
Piet
When we see saddleback porn. That's when it will stick in the public subconscious.
By the way, LOVE the definition of saddlebacking--perfect!
Yes a vibrator is a great comfort but Mizz Blau is right, fucking a human is so much better than fucking a piece of vibrating plastic, and even better than that is to have the human and the vibrating plastic. If you want to stuff your partner in a drawer when you're done, you're fucking the wrong kinds of people.
That, or he's the guy from a few weeks ago who intends to wear it on his nose....
Just one suggestion: could you fix the spacing between the last and next-to-last lines? Needs to be shrunk a bit...
Your eternal fan and layout fascist here in Nara...
Vote up the new definition and vote down the one that is simply wrong.
just checking. i mean, fair's fair!
That crazy-think infects boys too, y'know.
I do have have an opportunity to mention the santorum on occasion.
I agree with the above comment that saddlebacking.com could benefit from elaboration. Specifically the part about being "saddled ... with religious hang-ups and serious misconceptions about sex". To me, this is what makes a simply funny definition profound.
Seeing a pair of socks on a guy while he screws some willing body really does it for me. It's that little bit of something hidden... especially ankle socks.
Maybe it's not intentionally done as a foot fetish thing, but it does it for this rather mild foot fetishist.
"The experiments also revealed a rather surprising effect: both men and women found it easier to have an orgasm when they kept their socks on. Draughts in the scanning room left couples complaining of "literally cold feet", and providing a pair of socks allowed 80 per cent rather than 50 per cent to reach a climax while their brains were scanned."
I think about this now whenever I see some guy in a porno wearing socks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddleback
"I had a thought about the guy with the strap-on. I haven't attempted this, but it occurs to me he might be intending to double-penetrate a female partner. I don't know if, physically, that would actually work."
It works.
As Matt saddlebacked her, Kelsey admired her purity ring and thanked God that she had an understanding boyfriend who was willing to wait for their wedding day.
I do feel a little sorry for Saddleback College and Saddleback Maine (and really anyone in the Saddleback Mountain range).
Regarding men watching porn during sex, I personally wouldn't have a problem with it occasionally, but it's a different thing. Asking your partner to use a sex toy ON YOU to get you off is quite a bit different than telling your sex partner you want to use them as a sperm toilet while you focus on and pay attention to someone else(s) entirely.
A more appropriate analogy would be a guy who asks his partner to use a masturbatory aid on him, or dildo for the prostate stimulation, because that's how HE gets off.
The reason that people wear socks on their feet in porn is that the soundstage that porn is filmed on is made of black stuff that rubs off on feet easily. My friends who have been in the biz always roll their eyes at seeing "porn star feet" - a girl is on her back, she's perfectly made up, but the soles of her feet are black. This means that she was walking around on set, outside the dressing room, in bare feet (instead of in the flip-flops the girls are supposed to use). It's a mark of an amateurish production or performer. Guys wear socks for the same reason, and occasionally they forget to take them off, that's all.
Also, personal aside... my husband has had the same qualms about vibrators. He's over it now. Apparently, when I orgasm with my vibrator, I clench his cock hella harder than when I orgasm without. Handy, that.
"But in this case, it's not the bare-naked cock-in-ass that's the most important feature of the ride, but the fact that the person being ridden has been saddled—thanks to the efforts of the Rick Warrens of this world—with religious hang-ups and serious misconceptions about sex."
In fact, the best definition I have ever heard for religious indoctrination that says it all is "mind fuck."
I would be overjoyed if saddlebacking was expanded, not just with the context for the original definition, but with a secondary definition that describes the intellectual raping, "the mind fuck," that religious indoctrination represents.
It would expand the use of the word, and produce a definition for the indoctrination that made possible such perversity in the first place, as well as continue with the sexual nature of the original definition.
I must say, the grammar police have gone and dumped me by the roadside, in that I had to examine the definition on saddlebacking.com to figure out the noun/gerund issue, and then when "conjunction citation" was brought up later in jest, not knowing what a conjunction is almost led me to weep on the spot...
I can't handle this!!!
In any case, saddlebacking.com wasn't on the top 5 pages of either search. Thought plenty of other Dan references on the "saddlebacking" search.
I know you are going after Saddleback church and all which is why you chose "Christian" but women do this all over the world. This definition needs expanding!
Otherwise GREAT WORD! I'm going to go saddleback a chick right now.
@mw: sorry, but there's a major difference. A woman who can't get off without a vibrator pressed against her clitoris has a physical problem (easily solved with the application of the proper tools). A man who can't get off without porn has a psychological problem.
Please note: I'm not saying that watching porn is inherently a problem, just that not being able to get off without it is.
And, just as couples should try to find toys that they're both comfortable with, I think that couples should also try to find porn that they're both comfortable with.
It is probably the most influential news magazine published in the English language. NOT the most widely read, but the most influential among people who actually make decisions. Political decisions. Economic decisions. Business decisions. It liberal in the old meaning of that word. It has supported legalization of drugs and gay rights for decades, while at the same time being fiscally conservative. Its average reader earns well over 6 figures a year and is rumored to have been required reading in the State Department for the past four decades -- no matter what party was in the White House. It puts rags like Newsweek and Time to shame.
The Economist is a trend setter. Not in fashion and art, in politics and business. By the time you read it in USA Today it is yesterdays news. The fact that you are reading it in the Economist means that it is about to be news everywhere else.
The folks that write the Economist think themselves too clever by half. The backhanded way the mention Dan and his campaign to name "Saddlebacking" is in fact their highest compliment. They KNOW that their readers are now going to go search the internet and try and find what those "unprintable" definition are, and in fact will be more curious not less by the description they give them. The Economist was very amused or they would not have mentioned it. Kudos to Dan.
The gesture is very educational too; the awareness just might save a few lives in the bargain...(inferior religious freak lives, sure, but lives, all the same...)
But, Dan, please amend the term's classification: (as others have pointed out) "saddlebacking" is a noun (a verbal noun or gerund), not a verb. "[To] saddleback" is the verb form.
I agree that "saddleback" should be added to the web page in order that web searches for the church make their way to www.saddlebacking.com instead (or in addition to).
Way to go!
P.S. Perhaps the man on the plane wasn't even referring to a strap-on dildo? I mean, how does the writer know he was referring to a sex toy (and in public, no less)? I recently purchased a strap-on heating pad for my back, and I'm pretty sure I said aloud more than once, "I can't wait until the strap-on arrives [in the mail]." Just a thought.