Podcasts Sep 18, 2012 at 1:00 am


Dan, you have to stop being so defensive about this guest. She was terrible. She lied or exaggerated constantly and pushed her crappy website more often and more obnoxiously than that coked up guy used to push Oxy Clean. Her ideas were neither original or particularly insightful. I work in law enforcement and her speech patterns and style reminded me of a con-artist trying to hard to convince a mark (you were her mark) and you got conned.
And like a lot of people who got conned, you are in denial about your victimization.

I made it through about 45 minutes but I was literally yelling at my car radio.

She sucked, you got conned and your audience suffered.

I have loved all of your shows but this one. The overwhelmingly negative response you see is not "hate" it is accurate criticism of an awful, terrible, rude, immature guest.

I'm not a hater, but saying "yep" in the middle of Dan's sentences was incredibly annoying. She really needs to work on that.

On top of that, she should actually pay careful attention to the questions and answer them. To the girl whose boyfriend was sneaking off to wank while she was in the house with him, Ms. Gallop just brushed her problem off as "not a problem." But the girl clearly had a problem with it, which may have been one of many things. While Dan suggested that maybe she wasn't having enough sex with him, I think it has something to do with the fact that he's abandoning the horny girlfriend in bed to go off and wank to porn. The message he's sending is "I would rather watch porn and wank when I'm horny than have sex with you." I think if Ms. Gallop had spent some time actually thinking about and conversing with Dan about the problem at hand instead of going back to porn, they might have sussed this out and talked about the exact kind of conversation she should have with her boyfriend.

I guess my conclusion on this podcast was that while Ms. Gallop's message is very important, she's not very good at delivering it via audio and should probably stick to print.
10+ years reader, podcast listener since day 1, Dan Savage's #1 fan (along with 25,000 others). First time commenter by virtue of the fact that this podcast was truly egregious.

I am a Brit and have a rapid, fluid style of speech, but goodness only knows where Ms Gallop developed that dreadful affectation of hers. Her accent is a parody of something upper class, while her diction is so clipped that she frequently drops at least a syllable per word - probably so she can shoehorn 20 more words in per sentence. I checked my iPhone several times to make sure I didn't have the podcast playing back at 1.5x speed - I am not exaggerating for comic effect, sadly.

Her lack of self-awareness is quite breathtaking. Her delivery meant I had to listen to this podcast in chunks, because it was simply too emotionally draining, tense and infuriating to listen to - the aural equivalent to being assailed in the face by thousands of nails from an automatic nailgun.

The poor woman comes across as desperately insecure and quite delusional about her own prowess, both professionally and sexually. I've looked at the website and it resembles a school project thrown together by a slightly immature 14 year old. Her refusal to answer the question that was asked on every occasion positions her as a) somebody who flunked all their exams or b) an unelectable political candidate.

I completely agree that porn sex is not real sex. Soap operas are not real life, either, but we don't want to watch real life - not even in documentaries, hence the rise of the fly-on-the-wall and the docusoap. And I agree that parents should be engaging in more open and frank discussion rather than expecting discernment to naturally prevail. But this yipping harridan does nothing to further her cause - she has had a (not particularly original) idea and then completely failed to execute it. No wonder the banks won't touch her. She is not investible.

Her battery of young lovers must insist on the gag-inducing, face-fucking style of oral sex typified in misogynistic resentment porn, just to suppress the constant yipping.

PLEASE! Indulge this woman if you must in the column but NEVER AGAIN as audible content.

PS - maaarrrrrsturbating? Even in southern England (where people are supposed to be posh), it's pronounced with a short 'a' as in MASS. It's clear this woman has no emotional intelligence but she also undermines her intellect with this posturing and pretension.
That website was a sickening pink.

I'd love for Dan to bring someone else and give porn a do-over.
Cannot listen to that woman, very annoying voice, and constantly interrupting. Cannot. listen.
love her site, love her mission, but damn she needs to learn how to do an interview. ugh.
It's all been said before, but since I came here especially to add my two cents I'll say it again. Dan, we are not haters, but that woman is frigging INSUFFERABLE. Please never ever again. OMG. Sooo paaainful.
First time commenter here. OK Dan, after you implored us to give it a chance I tried four more times to get through this podcast. I couldn't. I even tried listening at half speed on my iPhone, but her constant interruptions and never going one sentence without mentioning her web sites got to me.

I know you're sick of our comments, but your defense of this unlistenable podcast seems that you're trying to save face that you actually put this crap out. I did go check out her website and it is one of the most horribly designed sites I've seen in years.
Holy cow. She's a self-obsessed banshee. Yep!
I didn't even make it 10 minutes into the podcast. She drove me crazy and was really just on there to sell her own stuff rather than have a decent dialogue.
Agree with all those who found Cindy insufferable, and if you had not been clearly worn out / overwhelmed by her, you might have given a decent response to the clearly distressed young woman trying to reconcile her extreme discomfort with pornography with her knowledge that it would be unreasonable to ask her boyfriend not to look at it. If you were not going to address her problem properly, you really should have just edited it out, rather than add insult to her injury by calling her a crazy bitch and let Cindy talk over you and pimp her website some more. I was horrified on that poor girl's behalf.

And as for Cindy's website, not only is it an assault on the eyes, no amount of digging around in it yielded any sort of content, other than a bunch crazy meanderings, preachiness and well, not much else. The reason she can't get any investors is because there is no "there", there.
Found this one to be very interesting. Loved that there was finally someone to challenge Dan's role as the more aggressive talker, very nice change of pace (not that I don't love Dan's normal way of talking, but the difference was great to see).

Just a minor suggestion though: In future I'd rather if guests like the various doctors or Lucy (Please have her back! Also Mistress Matisse!) answer questions, since they tend just focus on answering question. The promotional ones are good too, just for shorter periods of time and only at the beginning. Especially if they don't really answer questions.
Well. Looks like I'm saying the exact same thing that everyone else has already said. I listened to ten minutes before I had to give up. Her repeated spluttering and cutting you off stressed me out!

I really like what she's trying to do, I even went to look at her website, but the site is ugly and has only a few milquetoast points. "Myth: Everyone likes this thing" "Truth: some people like it, but some people don't" Thank you Captain Obvious. Any advice or actionable points? No.

I understood that she was looking for money but I didn't understand why she needed it...other than perhaps to take some courses on how to speak and listen.

Not trying to pan the lady, I like what she's trying to do. But Jesus. I couldn't listen to her and I couldn't look at her website. It's the only podcast I've ever had to delete. I laughed while listening to it, thinking, "The people who were bothered by Lucy are going to HATE Cindy" FWIW, I thought Lucy was AWESOME!
Dan, I am a BIG fan. I've been reading your column for many years and have been listening to your podcast for about 2 years. I am HUGELY disappointed in this episode. I get what Cindy's point of view is, and agree for the most part, but she was using your show entirely for shameless self-promotion! How many times did she plug her website? Or ask for help from banks, businesses, etc? Not only that, but I just went to makelovenotporn.tv and you need to 'rent' the videos on her site for $5 each (funny she didn't mention that on the podcast).

Please don't invite her back.
Also, to the commenters who are suggesting that she's getting all this negative feedback for being a woman, you're crazy. Dan has had many female guests who don't say "yep" multiple times in each of his sentences. I like the lady from Planned Parenthood, because she listens carefully to the questions and answers them. Same thing with Mistress Matisse. I wasn't a huge fan of the Lucy podcasts, but it had very little to do with her speaking style- she was problematic to me because she couldn't credibly be claimed as an expert on anything, and unfortunately had some pretty ignorant opinions that she voiced as if they were facts. Expertise-wise, I wouldn't say there was anything wrong with Cindy, but her speaking style and failure to listen to the questions were extremely annoying.

On top of that, I have to echo what other people are saying about her site: it has very little in the way of content. And I can sum up her message a lot faster than she can:

The society we currently live in is as dysfunctional about sex as we would be about relationships if all we knew about relationships were what we saw in romantic comedies. Just as everyone realizes that romantic comedies are meant to entertain and so are mostly not like real life, porn is meant to entertain and is not like real life.
Interview aside, her website is so terrible. I wonder if Dan has seen it or if he just likes the idea of it. It's appallingly bad.
I enjoyed this episode, beginning to end, and agree with Dan that Cindy should ignore the haters.

Signed up for the beta of her .tv website... looking forward to seeing real sex. The rare kind of porn that I love, and that is difficult to find, is video of a couple who obviously love each other and are making love with each other.

Even if actors would fake care and tenderness for each other, in regular porn, I think it would be really hot.
I was listening to this podcast, and what Cindy Gallup said about "the good old days" when men felt like failures if they couldn't get their female partners to orgasm made me think about where my pre-conceived notions come from. I had no experience with visual porn growing up, but I was surrounded by trashy historical romances, and in all those books the men were more virile if they could make their women orgasm and they were less than a man if they came first. This set me up for success, because it taught me that's a legitimate expectation. Thanks for the great show!
Wow, this is fucking intolerable. How did you (Dan) keep a straight face as this woman whimpered and yipped over your every interjection. I feel bad you had to be in a room with this woman. She may be a lovely person, but what the FUCK? I had to turn it off when my ears started to bleed. And GOD, 5 minutes in and I GET IT, GALLOP. YOU DATE YOUNGER MAN. LOTS OF THEM. LOTS OF YOUNGER MEN.
To the girl who wants her boyfriend to "ask for his space" so he can masturbate: You are being unreasonable. What you are basically doing is making him ask your permission to masturbate. If he has to kick you out of the house in order to rub one out, that means he doesn't get to do what he wants unless he wants it badly enough to get rid of you first. You are making it into a bigger deal than it needs to be, and making it into an either/or choice: you or Rosy Palm, but not both. It's only five or ten minutes out of the whole evening. Do you really want to sacrifice the rest of the evening over 10 minutes? Do you want to make him sacrifice the rest of the evening? What are you trying to prove here?

Making him ask for his own space implies that YOU OWN HIS SPACE. Are you sure you want to be that girl? God, I hope not.

Also, it's kind of like demanding that he let you know that he is about to go pick his nose. It can be kind of sticky and messy, he may carry some baggage about it from his childhood, it may be in various ways embarrassing to him. Do you want him to tell you every time he discovers he has to go pee? That's a bodily need too. What you need to come to terms with is that masturbation is not about you. Yes, sometimes he has some bodily needs that don't revolve around you. Get over it.

Unless he is masturbating so often that he is not available to meet your needs, what needs to happen is that you need to just give him his space -- and not make him ask you for it. And by giving him his space, that doesn't mean slipping quietly out the door when you realize what he's doing in the next room. That totally comes across as stalking out in a huff. Give him five minutes to himself, for god's sake. Or go jump his bones and show him how much better those five minutes would be with you involved. But what you are doing now is some not-so-subtle shaming. Knock it off.
Be nice, people. It was a radio interview. Chances are reasonably good that she was nervous being on microphone. People are often scared to death of dead air, and will fill it with non-stop chatter to compensate. Cut her a little slack.
She was a machine gun of self promotion. All those words and nothing said. It was torturous waiting for content.
I do agree with her that I find gay porn a lot less mean spirited than straight porn tends to be. There's more tenderness in it than in straight porn. I hadn't really thought of it being from anger towards women, but you know what? I think it kind of is. Or at least a lack of respect/delight in.
Well, what I have to say is obviously going to be drowned out by all these people who didn't like Cindy's speaking style, but I guess I will try anyway: To the caller who was obviously upset about her negative reaction to porn, you are not alone! The key was when you mentioned a CHRISTIAN background. I grew up in a Christian community as well, and the way sex is demonized and women are made to submit can really mess with you. Dan, she may be insane, but she was driven mad and brainwashed by the culture she was raised in. It's not your fault, caller. I, too, have really struggled with this. Do find a counselor and talk about this with your partner as openly and honestly as you can. I am making steady strides in deprogramming myself and you can, too! Brainwashed Christians, it can get better if you let yourself open up! Counseling is really helpful-but not a Christian counselor. :)
I just listened to the podcast and while I was very interested in the content and think this woman is doing good work, I too was very bothered by Gallop's pushiness and constant talking. It was very irritating to listen to and a huge turn-off. She needs some elocution lessons, stat. I'll pass on her future talks/interviews.
@ 217 - Yes!

I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one who actually took a peek at makelovenotporn.tv because no one commented on the glaring contradiction between her content and her promotion.

It is a PAY PORN SITE. She gives specific directions as to what sort of content is acceptable. You pay to submit a video. Other people pay to watch it.

    Please wait...

    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.

    Add a comment

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.