I’m going to Barack Obama’s inauguration in Washington, D.C., on January 20. I’ve spent eight
years, one month, one week, and one day waiting for this. (But who’s
counting?) However, I am looking for suggestions for a respectful way
to protest the participation of Rick Warren. As a lifelong
Episcopalian, I really don’t want to engage in an antireligious
protest. (FWIW: I was annoyed with some of the antireligious people at
the anti-8 rallies. We need all our allies for this fight, so don’t
trash the engaged, progressive religious folk!)

While my friends want me to throw shoes,
that ain’t gonna happen. Ideally, I’d like a peaceful, gracious way to
protest Warren’s participation that won’t undercut this great day, a
way that can be picked up (and publicized) by folks on the Mall. Any
suggestions?

Faithful Obama Girl

Whatever you do, FOG, don’t do those things
you, um, already said you don’t want to do. No one should boo or throw
shoes or do anything disruptive. The American Taliban love to pretend
that they’re the persecuted ones around here, and booing or
throwing shoes or even just turning your back on Warren—the
gay-hatin’, right-wing Christian bigot Barack Obama invited to give the
invocation at his inauguration—will invariably be spun as an
attack on people of faith, as a vicious assault on prayer itself, as
the moral equivalent of a syphilitic rent boy pissing directly into the
open mouth of a crying baby Jesus.

Instead, borrow a page from those
long-suffering gay Catholics. To register their displeasure with the
pope’s revealing obsession with gay sex, gay marriage, and gay shoes
(the douchebag wears Prada), some gay Catholics wear rainbow sashes to
mass. Perhaps folks disappointed by Warren’s participation could
coordinate a similar sartorial protest? Everyone wear a button with
that rainbow-striped version of the Obama logo? Wave little rainbow
flags during Warren’s remarks? Head to the Mall in nothing but rubber
chaps?

And speaking of Rick Warren, pastor of
Saddleback Church and author of The Purpose Driven Life…

My life’s purpose over the last week was
reading thousands of proposed new definitions for “saddlebacking” sent
in by my readers. As with the new definition of santorum crafted by
Savage Love readers (“the frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is
sometimes a byproduct of anal sex”), the new definition of
“saddlebacking” has to be some act that (1) needs a name but doesn’t
already have one (we can’t just rename “reverse cowgirl,” people) and
(2) is naughty enough to discomfort, say, a Reverend Warren, but
something that actual people might actually do because that’s the only
way the actual word will actually get used.

So I’ve disqualified proposed definitions
that were too literal (“putting an actual saddle on someone’s
actual back and actually riding them”), too gross (“to
crap on someone’s back and then sit on it, moving forward and back
while making horse-riding-related noises like ‘giddyap!’ and ‘whoa!'”),
too complicated (“one person on all fours with a strap-on strapped to
their midsection, a second person riding said strap-on, and a third
person hitting the first person from behind while holding on for dear
life/giving a handjob to the second person”), or too bitter (“when you
give someone some kind of basic human right, like marriage, and then
take it away again after a few months”). Here are the proposed
definitions that made the cut:

(1) “Logically, if ‘barebacking’ means
having butt sex with no condom, then ‘saddlebacking’ should mean having
butt sex with a condom.”

(2) “Saddleback (verb): to submit someone to
any kind of humiliating, unreciprocal sex act, either literally or
metaphorically, consented to by passive partner due to
submissive/masochistic tendencies, desire for approval, or other darker
motive. E.g., ‘I don’t know why Obama is letting Rick Warren
saddleback him into presiding over his inauguration.'”

(3) “The saddleback position involves
placing your lubed dick between the butt cheeks of your partner. This
position can be performed on your sides or on top of a facedown partner
(maybe with a pillow under his or her hips). My favorite way of
finishing up the saddlebacking is to lift up and come on my wife’s
sweaty back. The saddleback is a nice compromise position when your
partner won’t allow anal entry.”

(4) “To saddleback is to rail against gay
sex in public while secretly indulging in the same in private. Ted
Haggard? Total saddlebacker. Larry Craig? Saddlebacker. Rick Warren?
Probably a saddlebacker.”

(5) “‘Saddlebacking’ should be the term for
the phenomenon of Christian teens engaging in unprotected anal sex in
order to preserve their virginities. ‘After attending the Purity Ball,
Heather and Bill saddlebacked all night because she’s saving herself
for marriage.’ Please, please adopt this definition!”

(6) “Saddleback (verb): to ejaculate on the
back of a partner at the culmination of doggy-style anal sex.”

(7) “Before being invited to give the
invocation, Mr. Warren was most noted for his book The Purpose
Driven Life. Therefore, ‘to saddleback’ is to fuck with a purpose,
i.e., to procreate. A heterosexual couple asked if they’re trying to
have children could reply, ‘No, we’re not ready for kids yet, but we’ll
probably start saddlebacking next year.'”

Those are the nominees, ladies and
gentlemen. But before we open the polls for a vote—you’re going
to pick the winning definition!—let me quickly handicap the
candidates:

(1) I like the idea that “sex” is understood
to include condoms and that sex without condoms—bareback
sex—needs a special term. But tons of people suggested that
“saddlebacking” should be the opposite of “barebacking,” so here it is.

(2) Seems a bit tortured and unlikely to come into common usage,
but I like the point the reader is making with this definition, so I
included it.
(3) Technically this kind of
assfuckery—butt-cheek fucking à la titty fucking, with no
actual penetration—is a form of frottage, but like a woman doing
a man in the butt with a strap-on dildo (dubbed “pegging” by Savage
Love readers), this particular brand of rubbing off could use a name of
its own. (4) One of my favorites—but does a Haggard or Craig
tumble out of the closet often enough for the term to come into use?
(5) Hilarious—and an entirely appropriate way to honor Reverend
Warren, who is a proponent of abstinence education, the “sex ed” that
has convinced so many Christian girls and boys that buttfucking isn’t
actually sex. (6) A common move—and not just in porn—that
could use a name. (7) Makes sense, so here it is. But I imagine Warren
would approve of this definition—except when lesbians used it
(even you, Melissa E.!).

Okay, Savage Love readers, “saddlebacking”
is in your hands now. Vote for your favorite definition from the list
of nominees by sending an e-mail to saddleback@savagelove.net. You
must include “saddleback” and the number of your preferred definition
in the subject line to have your vote count (“saddleback: 1,”
“saddleback: 2,” etc.). Vote now!

mail@savagelove.net

455 replies on “Savage Love”

  1. #5 is a winner! I wish someone had told me about Saddlebacking while I was at Catholic School. All we ever did was dry hump until we shot in our pants – try explaining that stain to Sister Felicitas.

  7. i love this post!

    i vote #3. i really like #5 aswell, as a definition and poking fun at the dimwitted christian youths that don’t consider anal as sex. however i like it when words are suggestive of their meaning – i think ass-fuckery frottage makes sense in this way, because it’s like you’re saddling up a cock/dildo with an ass.

  8. I’m going for 5. It’s a problem that needs an embarrassing fucking name. Idiot kids not being educated by their idiot parents and thus get STDs.

  10. If only because I want the term to get a lot of use (and I like the idea of a the word being used to refer to safe and healthy sex that abstinence only morons discourage) I like #1.

  13. 4 and 5 are both genius.

    1. While it IS the most logical one, it doesn’t have enough ‘punch’ to it, the way ‘santorum’ does.

    2. This inauguration issue will soon fade from the public mind, while stupid teens and hypocritical politicians are here to stay.

    3. I wouldn’t want to ‘saddleback’ anyone I loved.

    6. See #3

    7. Too contrived, and possibly attractive to the people in question.

  17. VOTE 7. As a breeder, I would love a different word to suggest that my wife and I are fucking to reproduce. “Trying” is too wimpy a word and suggests flaccidness which would be contraindicated. VOTE 7.

  19. It’s gotta be #4!
    “The frothy mix of self-loathing and shit-talking that is often the byproduct of being a religious closet case”.
    Er.
    Seriously, though, this is the root of the most destructive homophobia that exists in this country. Whether it is a respected religious leader working to take away rights, or an insecure asshole that beats up a gay person, it warrants more attention.
    If Warren is actually gay, maybe he’s been maturely delaying gratification of these urges his whole life. I don’t think that would make him any less of a hypocrite. He’s already shown himself to be a bigot, and a destructive one at that. He should be linked to public hypocrites because he behaves like one, and his anti-gay religious message is helping to create more of them.
    The miserable saddlebacker.

  33. #5, definitely.

    But I must also object to your comment on #3 – I’m a woman, and when I fuck men with my strap-on, it’s *sex*, not just rubbing off.

  34. No. 5. Absolutely. Clear, to the point, and *appropriate*. And just to add to the gall, I can utterly imagine the teens in question adopting the term, if it’s carefully seeded.

  39. saddleback: 5

    christian teens!

    the other contender is good, but not enough of an anomaly to come up in conversation very often – why would you mention the guy who wanted the opposite of barebacking? The douchebag who wants to bareback is much more of a conversation-causer.

  43. I’d like to add another definition for “saddlebacking”. Using DP or double penetration is too unwieldy or puzzling to some, so why not “saddlebacking” to describe this practice?

  44. I got bounced by your email address.

    #1. I’ll go with this as the most logical… but I believe you CAN rename a sex act as you see fit. After
    all, look at the name churn in America’s sports stadiums. Nothing is sacred.

    Come to think of it, Monster.com should have spent its money on having a sex act renamed for the company. It
    would have sounded less silly than a ball park.

  48. O crap, I forgot to case my ballot. Gotta go with #5. That is classic and I could totally see those Christian gals using their ars to save their vag.

  49. As for the attempted rebranding of the name “Saddleback” and “Santorum”, evangelical Christians would be wise to ignore it (with the possible notable exception of Rick Santorum). If gay groups have the audacity to co-opt even a symbol of God’s promise to humanity (in the view of Christians), a rainbow, certainly trying to abuse a church’s or person’s name is par for the course. Though it is mildly surprising that the community would attempt to generate more fuel to feed stereotypes and derogatory comments. Perhaps it should even be viewed as an honour. You know, “Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.” (Matt. 5:10-11), kind of thing.

Comments are closed.