Cunnilingus at Dartmouth: Not as Good as at Brown
Perhaps The Dartmouth's editors should have thought twice before putting the following headlines in the same issue:
The former is a sophomore Aurora Wells' how-to on cunnilingus. The latter is worst coincidence possible given its proximity to Ms. Wells' guide to going down on the occasionally cheesy region of a woman that I shall henceforth refer to only as "sugarbush."
Aurora begins her column with a wave of the Dartmouth banner:
Listen up, freshmen: the rumors are true. You may, in fact, actually get laid in college. And if casual, inebriated encounters are what you're after, thank your lucky stars you were rejected from your first choice school.
Clearly she's has never been to Brown, skankiest Ivy of them all, where the Daily Herald's weekly Post obliterates the sugarbush-munching competition in quality and quantity. Unlike the Post's myriad guides, Wells' is relatively straightforward and not nearly as titillating as we'd hoped. Except right here:
One female explains that she "likes the dry feeling of latex against her clit, like a tease." If it's a one-night deal, then it's just plain smart. And if not, well then it's only until you and your partner drag your asses to Dick's House and get tested anyway, right?
I doubt the existence of said "female" because I'm pretty sure nobody in the entire history of college has ever used a dental dam. But I digress from the real gem of this paragraph, which begs the question: Do people actually call Dartmouth's sexual health center "Dick's House"? Somebody needs to cover that Run-DMC song, stat.
Ms. Wells ends her column "May you be safe, get off, and maybe even find love along the way. Welcome to my column, and welcome to Dartmouth." Look out, Lena Chen: There's a new Carrie Bradshaw-wannabe in town.
Aurora's Guide to Eating Out
Listen up, freshmen: the rumors are true. You may, in fact, actually get laid in college. And if casual, inebriated encounters are what you're after, thank your lucky stars you were rejected from your first choice school. I'm kidding, of course. But don't cream your pants just yet, and I say this with tender empathy: you're still a total novice and awkward as f*ck.
And thus I asked my female friends who sleep with women what advice they had to share with the new Dartmouth freshmen, and I proudly offer you a crash course from true cuntoisseurs. I warmly invite you, the Class of 2011, to dig in…
Locale? It's all good in the hood.
Although this anecdote may break your heart, I feel it necessary to divulge that last year, a hook-up of mine actually inquired as to the whereabouts of the clitoris. F*ck, I thought while attempting to mask my horror. Which should I show him? The clit or the door? To spare the women of subsequent classes this weighty decision, I've drawn a treasure map to pinpoint the exact location of this apparently enigmatic organ, and de-mystify the vulva at large. Ready? X marks the spot!
•The clitoris is that little pearl of tissue that forms the clitoral head and is covered by the protective clitoral hood. With twice the number of nerve endings as the penis and no anatomical purpose other than making women come, this is where the money's at. So put your mouth where the money is.
• The labia minora (referred to as simply the labia, or 'inner lips') are full of personality. Here they are depicted trimly for the sake of clarity, but don't be thrown by the various shapes and sizes you may encounter.
•The G-spot, not pictured, is a small, rough patch behind the pubic bone in the vaginal wall. It is best reached through the "come hither" motion of a finger. When stimulated, it often causes an urgent sensation of having to pee. This sensation will most likely lead to a powerful orgasm, occasionally female ejaculate, and probably not pee.
•The female Spotted Hyena urinates, mates and gives birth via an enlarged, erectile clitoris known as a pseudo-penis. No, really. Just Wiki "clitoris" sometime. My head exploded when I read that. But anyway, I digress.
Put your mutherf*ckin napkin on your lap already.
Although the risk is much lower than that of intercourse, sexually transmitted infections can be spread through oral sex. Herpes, gonorrhea, HIV, (and less commonly) HPV, hepatitis B, syphilis, and chlamydia can be contracted from head.
However, I feel it necessary to concede that dental dams are not without their pitfalls. They are cumbersome, they dull sensation, and they're somewhat ridiculous, if not somewhat insulting. It's like, You want it, baby? Yeah? Right there? HOLD ON - LET ME JUST PULL OUT THIS GIANT, BANANA-FLAVORED SHEET OF LATEX TO PROTECT ME FROM YOUR [FESTERING] VAGINA.
One female explains that she "likes the dry feeling of latex against her clit, like a tease." If it's a one-night deal, then it's just plain smart. And if not, well then it's only until you and your partner drag your asses to Dick's House and get tested anyway, right?
Dental dams and condoms are available at Dick's House or in The Gay Room (Robinson Hall room 107/9), and in a pinch you can have some DIY fun with cellophane or a condom, cut length-wise.
Wet your appetite.
Vajayjay is a delicacy, so don't ambush the damned bush. The clitoris is usually too sensitive to be stimulated directly right away, so get those juices flowing first. One pal claimed that when it comes to muff-diving, "anticipation is everything." Another chimed in, "kiss her everywhere but there - and when you do, start by licking around and inside the vagina before moving northward."
One female casually confided, "I think it's extremely important to try different things with your partner to see what they like. My girlfriend likes the tongue slow and delicate, but I like it fast and hard."
Try eating with your hands
As one friend stressed with an urgency that made me cringe (and cease further inquiry), "CUT YOUR DAMNED NAILS."
Alright, this is where the G-spot comes in. Most women can't have an orgasm without clitoral stimulation, but the G-spot generally intensifies the sensation in the clitoris, and vice-versa.
One female explained that her partner inserts two fingers into her vagina, then rubs her G-spot while sucking the clitoris - sort of like that thing you were always trying to do in third grade, where you pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time. Only now your reputation is on the line and your neck hurts like Jesus.
I'm kidding, of course.
Still hungry?
Some women simply can't climax from lip service. Some can't without. Others have trouble reaching orgasm period. But the single best piece of advice I collected for this article is: Don't. Give. Up.
That's not to say miss your 10A; but it might not happen in five or 15 or even 45 minutes, either. Just be patient and stay focused. You could be there a while. As long as she's enjoying it, it isn't futile.
And remember that unlike a man, a woman's orgasm doesn't necessarily mean game over. Especially if it's a quick one, it may be just the warm-up round. Seconds, anyone?
If you are instead shoulder-tapped off the field, don't get emo on your lover. Coming is not always the end-all-be-all of cunnilingus. Besides, there's always next time. Chin up! It could be just a pong game away.
So I raise my glass - er, paddle - to the Class of 2011. May you be safe, get off, and maybe even find love along the way. Welcome to my column, and welcome to Dartmouth.
Questions, stories, tips or tricks? Blitz TheGuide.
89 Comments | 
| 
Print This Post
Read more: Dartmouth, Sex, the dartmouth
Email – 
Search
About
Report a bug
Archives
RSS Feed
October 9th, 2007 at 10:22 am
This girl’s a lesbian, which removes all hotness potential from her article. What WASN’T on the web version, was the drawing accompanying the article….wow…not to be read while eating.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:26 am
I fail to understand how this girl is an overnight authority on giving advice to freshman, even though she just finished her first year. You need to be at least a junior to begin a sentence with, “listen up, freshman.” Oh lesbians.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Dick’s House is the name for the infirmary / health center in general– short for Dick Hall’s House, after a ‘27 who died of polio when he was a sophomore.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Also, this girl isn’t really a lesbian; she’s a college lesbian.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:57 am
is the actual name of the all-purpose infirmary/student health center - you go when you break a toe playing mud soccer and get dragged there when you get nabbed for underage drinking. Not sure who it’s named after; I’m assuming someone named Richard.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
hey keggy- how could the column be hotter if she wasn’t a lesbian? so you can get off on thinking about a girl who talks openly about sex and have any shot with her?
October 9th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
um, first of all, yes the girl who likes dental dams exists, BECAUSE IT IS ME. Second of all, everyone at Dartmouth calls it dick’s house. Third of all, it is unacceptable that everyone is using “lesbian” as an insult. And lastly, you all need to stop being offended by the blatant display of female sexuality. Why are you so fucking scared of oral sex? of the vagina? You all obviously need to overcome your immature sexual lives.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
um, first of all, yes the girl who likes dental dams exists, BECAUSE IT IS ME. Second of all, everyone at Dartmouth calls it dick’s house. Third of all, it is unacceptable that everyone is using “lesbian” as an insult. And lastly, you all need to stop being offended by the blatant display of female sexuality. Why are you so fucking scared of oral sex? of the vagina? You all obviously need to overcome your immature sexual lives.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
um, first of all, yes the girl who likes dental dams exists, BECAUSE IT IS ME. Second of all, everyone at Dartmouth calls it dick’s house. Third of all, it is unacceptable that everyone is using “lesbian” as an insult. And lastly, you all need to stop being offended by the blatant display of female sexuality. Why are you so fucking scared of oral sex? of the vagina? You all obviously need to overcome your immature sexual opinions.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
um, you’re all a bunch of assholes. aurora’s article was one of the best articles that the Dartmouth has ever published. It was witty, funny and very educative. stop being scared of women’s sexuality and get a fucking life, literally.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
kudos to the Dartmouth for publishing such an amazing article!!!
and yes, we do all call it dicks house and use dental dams.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
whatever, brown’s columns are all anonymous and much safer for people who write them. daddy and mommy can’t google them and find out that their little girl/boy is indeed a “cuntoisseur,” which would deter most students from saying anything that could remotely be construed as sexual and is in a public forum.
aurora has guts. it’s hard to deal with people that attack the author and not the article, especially at a school with a large conservative population and an ongoing legacy of sexual assault and maltreatment of women. students here reacted with shock that their grandpa, who went to dartmouth long before it was coed, might read about the clitoris, not with disappointment in her lack of juicy details. an opinion article ran suggesting that she should join a sorority to talk about female sexuality instead of bringing it into a public space, because that’s more fair to frat boys that evidently can’t talk about penises in public without being sexist.
aurora is writing dartmouth’s first sex-positive, queer column and that’s awesome. she is witty, knowledgable, and sincere. give her the credit she deserves.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
d-alum, no, she’s not a “college lesbian”, she’s a lesbian, lesbian.
And Aurora, nobody’s saying it was a bad article, but you shouldn’t make 2 consecutive posts under the same pseudonym, expecting it to look like someone else’s support. ….especially not a few minutes apart. Still though, good article. It was kind of mean of you to send a blitz to the Dartmouth Review your freshman fall reading “Dont’ ever fucking blitz me again”.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
It is amazing how women’s sexuality is so threatening. Pigheaded men attacked Aurora’s writing for being too sexual in The Dartmouth this morning, and now all of you are attacking it for not being sexy enough. The response to the article has shown how deeply sexism is still imbedded into Dartmouth and Ivy league tradition. We need more women like Aurora to start the discussions that bring out the true nature of Ivy league men.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Finally, Ivygate! I’ve been waiting for you to scoop this for the past four days, and been enduring the blog-reader’s equivalent of blue balls in the process. At last, welcome release. If only you could’ve included the lovely anatomical sketch that accompanied the article, my pleasure would’ve been complete. For the benefit of those not blessed enough to have seen it, I’m nick-naming it the Bandersnatch and leaving the rest to your imagination.
Seriously, though. @lesbian:
-It’s pretty funny that our medical facility is called Dick’s House. Just have a nice laugh about it along with everyone else.
-Female sexuality is all very well. I’m a fan. But the issue in the mind of many men of Dartmouth, one that was raised by two separate columnists in today’s D, is that a similar article instructing women in the proper techniques of orally stimulating the male member would have been construed as sexist. You know it’s true, and I dare you to tell me otherwise.
Oh, and @D-student: speak for yourself.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Finally, Ivygate! I’ve been waiting for you to scoop this for the past four days, and been enduring the blog-reader’s equivalent of blue balls in the process. At last, welcome release. If only you could’ve included the lovely anatomical sketch that accompanied the article, my pleasure would’ve been complete. For the benefit of those not blessed enough to have seen it, I’m nick-naming it the Bandersnatch and leaving the rest to your imagination.
Seriously, though. @lesbian:
-It’s pretty funny that our medical facility is called Dick’s House. Just have a nice laugh about it along with everyone else.
-Female sexuality is all very well. I’m a fan. But the issue in the mind of many men of Dartmouth, one that was raised by two separate columnists in today’s D, is that a similar article instructing women in the proper techniques of orally stimulating the male member would have been construed as sexist. You know it’s true, and I dare you to tell me otherwise.
Oh, and @D-student: speak for yourself.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
reading “what the hells” comment just reminds me why we need more articles that not only address female sexuality, but undercut heteronormative ideals and bring queerness forward. “oh lesbians,” however witty or benign it’s intent, clearly indicates the intrinsic sexism that permeates into even high level institutions. what i love is that not everyone loves the article. it opens up a dialogue. for those who didn’t get a hard copy of the D, the aquinas house ad is on the same page as her vivid-vaj…much funnier than the juvenile remark about cheese. oh straight people
October 9th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Go Becca!
October 9th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Go Becca!
October 9th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
i thought the article was hilarious, but i’m not surprised the vagina hating frat boys didn’t respond well to it. Dartmouth is a very very conservative place and Aurora really has guts to write a sexually empowered article from a woman’s point of view.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
guys can talk about girls giving them a blowjob without being douchebags about it. if you leave out the “bitches and hoes” and make it constructive, why the hell not. it’s not like sex is sexist.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Roooooooaaaaaaaarrrrrr!
October 9th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
I’m a lesbian and I heard people in an anonymous IGB forum are making fun of a lesbian. WAAAAH!
Grow up. You and your friends posting multiple times doesn’t create a groundswell of support for a mis-perceived injury. Your roaring only serves to highlight your lack of true power — whether societal or logical. Get a real issue and a better argument and your roars will be for real.
Or maybe I’m wrong and Aurora just needs her guts stirred with “the talking stick”.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
The reason Brown students are skankier is because they aren’t as worried about their partners’ criticism: all sexual encounters are graded pass/fail.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
is the conservative machine that is the dartmouth review still trying to convince people that aurora is a lesbian?
I know you hate lesbians and all, but it isn’t actually going to discredit her.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
http://thedartmouth.com/2007/10/09/opinion/gottlieb/
gottlieb just wipes with ass w/ aurora’s article
October 9th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
1) @dartmouth10: nice.
2) @pa: pretty sure frat boys don’t hate vaginas, maybe just the histrionic ones
3) @aurora: I like your name; it is nice. And I have no problem with your article; free speech - if you’re willing to write it and the D’s willing to print it then have at it. But because you put it out there for commentary, people are allowed to have and voice their opinions. I found it gross and distasteful and poor accompaniment to my Collis teabread. Again, also fine, no one forced me to read it. Just because people disliked it doesn’t make them sexist (would be difficult, since I am a woman), homophobic (some of my dearest friends, teammates, sorority sisters and real life family are lesbian), or illiberal (liberalism should allow for comfortable freedom to express opinions - whether those ideas themselves be liberal or conservative or just plain old moderate). Just don’t fool yourself into thinking you represent “women’s sexuality” (@ angry, above). Most of us were pretty grossed out. And it’s not political, it’s just not our thing.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
wow. must suck to be a woman and be grossed out by your own vagina.
I’ll take your word for it that women cant be sexist. (even sorority girls who have a lesbian friend. wtf? inane comment.)
@ 2) i guess you can only expect frat boys to love and respect your vagina as much as you yourself do. (if the poor girl’s still alive down there, tell her to keep toughing it out)
October 9th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Since when is graphic description and relatively obvious (and unsolicited) advice an act of empowerment? For that matter, when did all things sex become political? College kids care about politics. College kids are horny. Don’t conflate the two. Probably the most obnoxious thing about all of this was the GSA branding it a “queer column,” when the first installment was a guide for men to eat women out.
The only way this article could be considered making any kind of stand is if it was broaching some horrible taboo - its not, kids talk about this shit all the time.
Sex columns are advice from people with little standing to give it, printed for an audience with little interest in hearing it (from that source, at least). The only decent thing sex-related from an Ivy has been GoAskAlice, which is the furthest thing from this column.
October 9th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
GoAskAlice is the best thing ever. Also, I liked this column better when it was written six months ago, on the Columbia Bwog, called Belle Jar, and was funnier.
Seriously, a sex column on oral sex? It’s kind of BEEN DONE! Even Datskovsky tackled this one, granted she managed to make it much worse. I understand that it’s tough to come up with column ideas, but at least try to be original.
October 9th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
I felt Ms. Wells’ column was refreshing, witty, and, dare I say it, helpful. Whether the author herself is sapphic or straight is hardly relevant, and judging from the op-ed page of the Dartmouth, I’d say that these insinuations (or, perhaps more accurate to their tone, attacks) stem from a fear of a shift in the patriarchal status quo. Sure, the article was somewhat subversive, but for that the author deserves our respect rather than malignant and petty jabs from those who only wish they got so much attention. She has obviously broached a subject which is contentious here at Dartmouth and for that reason necessitates reasoned debate. Explain the lack of outcry to the numerous articles addressing similar subjects at the Post. Ms. Wells has chosen to speak as a member of our generation rather than as a Dartmouth student, unbridling herself of all the stodgy hubris that the latter title entails. Brava.
October 9th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
I’ve recieved oral sex at both Brown and Dartmouth. Brown, hands down.
October 9th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
That’s dead on.
@camsta, how was the article subversive again? I have a friend who puts on the Vagina Monologues at an incredibly conservative Catholic university. That’s subversive. Talking about a commonly-practiced, frequently (in private) discussed sex act at a northeastern liberal arts college? Not quite.
The only contentious thing she’s broached is the sort of sexuality-based, unreasoned, pseudo-feminism that irritates/antagonizes the rest of campus (especially the hostile faction most needing to broaden its perspectives a bit), and undermines the legitimate, productive work being done on these issues.
Please don’t lump this (and the entire indignation-over-politics scene in which its encouraged) in with the actual activists and feminists at Dartmouth. Thank The D for running the DFP’s refuse.
October 9th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
“Dartmouth is a very conservative place”
Another shithead talking about stuff they know nothing about. Dartmouth is as liberal as Brown, you idiot. Stop showing the world how ignorant you freshman are.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
@couplathings: if you would read the fucking opinion essays in the Dartmouth today, you would understand why the article is subversive.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
as a senior, i can tell you that Dartmouth is extremely conservative. Dartmouth is no where as liberal as other ivies like brown. PLEASE.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
you are my hero. if the rumors are true, and you do happen to be a lesbian, please dont hesitate to blitz me. i’ll facebook you.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
um, it would not have been sexist if the article were instruct women AND men on how to perform oral sex. duh.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
As a human being, I can tell you that the only way Dartmouth could be construed as “extremely conservative” is by someone who grew up in a commune, or possibly by a tenured professor. Sure, Dartmouth is more “conservative” than many other universities (insofar as the word “conservative” has any meaning any more), but that still places it comfortably “left” of “center.”
More importantly, how exactly does political stance have anything to do with what somebody thinks of Aurora’s article? I know conservatives who are more frank about sexuality than anyone I’ve ever met. I know liberals who are prudes. Stop conflating personal with political and accept the fact that some people DON’T LIKE THE ARTICLE, regardless of who they vote for.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
First of all Dartmouth has a pretty long his/her-story of subversive sex columns which Ms. Wells has read and learned from (as seen in other Alternative Dartmouth pubs like the Dartmouth Free Press and Untamed Publications, which don’t have the same kind of censorship problems that The Dartmouth has (for example see Ms. Arvidson’s sex column here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~thepress/bio.php?id=19 or Mr. Wong’s sex column here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~thepress/bio.php?id=269 ) ).. She is taking it to a different level/different audience. And most importantly she is talking about sex in a healthy way, encouraging young people to explore and *be safe*. By choosing to publish in the D, she is reaching a wider audience, and taking a risk by possibly scaring some people who don’t know what a clitoris is (Dartmouth, though mother of Animal House, still has a large conservative or at least reserved population of young people. And also even if you think our campus is very liberal, “Liberal” doesn’t necessarily mean sexually experienced)….. Any sex guide that fails to address health issues is failing to be a good guide. And telling young men/ reminding young women where and what the clitoris is IS ALWAYS relevant. Women CAN and should have good orgasms too.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
just to make this clear:
THE PERSONAL IS POLITICAL.
that is the whole point of the feminist and other movements.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
the sex columnists for columbia’s new blog are actually really funny. http://columbiaspectator.com/blog/opinion and actually maddie wrote about fingering today… i love her description of stomach-masturbating
October 9th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
I thought there was also something about giving women rights…not sure though. Maybe you know better than I. In any event, I think saying “the personal is political” is stupid. Not because I hate women or feminists or GLBTQ or whatever. Just because it’s stupid: there’s a reason we have two different words for “personal” and “political,” and it’s because they’re different.
Oh, and by the way, you know what I hate? I hate when somebody thinks he/she can judge me just because I think AURORA WELLS’S ARTICLE IS DUMB. I think I should be able to think whatever I want without being judged for it. So fuck off, duh.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:39 am
I heard the Free Press wouldn’t publish this so she quit. Is she now a regular columnist for The D, anyone?
Also, Maureen, you incorrectly used “begging the question.” You meant “raises the question.” For further explanation, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
October 10th, 2007 at 12:41 am
I heard the Free Press wouldn’t publish this so she quit. Is she now a regular columnist for The D, anyone?
Also, Maureen, you incorrectly used “begging the question.” You meant “raises the question.” For further explanation, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
October 10th, 2007 at 1:19 am
“THE PERSONAL IS POLITICAL.”
THAT might be the dumbest thing I’ve read here so far. Excellent rebuttal by the poster three posts above this one.
October 10th, 2007 at 1:53 am
some people don’t know what a clitoris is?
October 10th, 2007 at 2:08 am
I don’t deny it, the school sucks. If only we were Yale. That said, subversion is undermining or overthrow of what is established, not the eliciting of incredulity.
Buy a dictionary, you twat.
October 10th, 2007 at 8:13 am
The only real grounds for judging the merits or otherwise of Aurora’s article is whether, in fact, Dartmouth women start getting better sex as a result.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:15 am
i dont know if dartmouth women are getting better oral sex, but i can assure you from personal experience that they are certainly *demanding* better oral sex.
:( so much work
October 10th, 2007 at 11:29 am
worthwhile letter to the editor in today’s d, from a female dartmouth med student:
To the Editor:
I have to confess, I don’t open The Dartmouth very much, but I’m glad to have missed “Aurora’s Guide to Eating Out” in its first rendition (Oct. 5). When I read it online, even without the picture, it made me wince. It wasn’t so much the content as the attitude; I could have done a search on Google and come up with more detailed and exact information than that on the female anatomy, all while remaining focused only on Homo sapiens.
Unfortunately, while the “Guide to Eating Out” made me shudder, so did “Zach’s Guide to Fellating Upperclassmen” (Oct. 8) and “Eating In,” (Oct. 8), the two opinion responses. “Eating In” was polite and “Fellating Upperclassmen” was sarcastic and equally as gross as Aurora Wells ‘10’s article: two male opinions screaming bloody horror with undercurrents of misogyny. Great. Let’s not run along gender lines here. The original article was directed at straight young men. But weren’t there any women who were upset at the representation of their sex? Because I was.
Wells’s story about the poor man who asked was cruel (and I hope that he did agree to be alluded to in that manner). It was nearly as cruel as the entire article’s dearth of information and wealth of condescension, claims of empathy aside. I’m ashamed to think that anyone might have considered throwing him out; at least he didn’t pretend he knew when he didn’t. Besides which, the very sexually experienced among us recognize that if you want to know how to please your partner, you’re going to have to talk to them. And there’s nothing wrong with just asking them. Privately. Or publicly — and an article with an end in a list of books and honest resources would suffice as an answer if you didn’t find someone inclined to answer your questions with a demonstration. Now everyone’s afraid to ask.
In Wells’s hook-ups example, perhaps, the man should have better phrased the question, “Where is your clitoris?” Or better yet, “How may I service you?” since that seemed to be all she required. However, the kindest response she could have given would be simply to show him, since he felt safe enough to ask and, well, he’s not a vibrator. He’s a real, living, breathing human being, and there is no need to humiliate him.
It’s as if the sexual revolution is giving way to sexual tyranny, proving that both sexes are the same in some ways after all. How unsurprising.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:32 am
worthwhile letter to the editor in today’s d, from a female dartmouth med student:
To the Editor:
I have to confess, I don’t open The Dartmouth very much, but I’m glad to have missed “Aurora’s Guide to Eating Out” in its first rendition (Oct. 5). When I read it online, even without the picture, it made me wince. It wasn’t so much the content as the attitude; I could have done a search on Google and come up with more detailed and exact information than that on the female anatomy, all while remaining focused only on Homo sapiens.
Unfortunately, while the “Guide to Eating Out” made me shudder, so did “Zach’s Guide to Fellating Upperclassmen” (Oct. 8) and “Eating In,” (Oct. 8), the two opinion responses. “Eating In” was polite and “Fellating Upperclassmen” was sarcastic and equally as gross as Aurora Wells ‘10’s article: two male opinions screaming bloody horror with undercurrents of misogyny. Great. Let’s not run along gender lines here. The original article was directed at straight young men. But weren’t there any women who were upset at the representation of their sex? Because I was.
Wells’s story about the poor man who asked was cruel (and I hope that he did agree to be alluded to in that manner). It was nearly as cruel as the entire article’s dearth of information and wealth of condescension, claims of empathy aside. I’m ashamed to think that anyone might have considered throwing him out; at least he didn’t pretend he knew when he didn’t. Besides which, the very sexually experienced among us recognize that if you want to know how to please your partner, you’re going to have to talk to them. And there’s nothing wrong with just asking them. Privately. Or publicly — and an article with an end in a list of books and honest resources would suffice as an answer if you didn’t find someone inclined to answer your questions with a demonstration. Now everyone’s afraid to ask.
In Wells’s hook-ups example, perhaps, the man should have better phrased the question, “Where is your clitoris?” Or better yet, “How may I service you?” since that seemed to be all she required. However, the kindest response she could have given would be simply to show him, since he felt safe enough to ask and, well, he’s not a vibrator. He’s a real, living, breathing human being, and there is no need to humiliate him.
It’s as if the sexual revolution is giving way to sexual tyranny, proving that both sexes are the same in some ways after all. How unsurprising.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:48 am
There is a stark difference between the points being argued here: 1) women’s sexuality being a topic in a public forum and 2) the content of this article. Women’s sexuality IS important to talk about– but not in such a crass, juvenile, and degrading manner. I was frankly disgusted at the way the article handed the topic. On a campus where sexism is very much alive (possibly more so than at any other Ivy), using crass potty humor will NOT reach the audience that the article was intended to– the ignorant, impressionable ’11s (or, presumably, the rest of campus). The reality is Aurora just preached the the choir (I love how on Monday, a friend of hers sent a letter to the editor whose content amounted to “YEAH YOU GO GURL”); the rest of us–who certainly admire and appreciate the vagina–were simply turned off by her base treatment of the topic.
Just because you are a feminist doesn’t mean you have a license to be stupid and vulgar.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:58 am
laura little, i presume you’d rather talk about your pussy with purely medical terms? It’s a shame that the only acceptable words for female genitalia in our language are cold, distant, medical descriptions. Thats no way to have a good relationship with any body, especially your own.
October 10th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
It’s a shame you have to call me out by name– how childish. It’s also reductionist to assume that somehow not using grade-school slang means one wants to have a medical discussion about the mechanics of sex. And shame on you for assuming that just because one doesn’t want to talk about one’s own vagina in a widely-read campus publication, one doesn’t have a health relationship with the body.
October 10th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
It’s not that “we all call it” Dick’s House. It is “Dick’s House.” The name’s right on the building.
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~health/
October 10th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Why do I suddenly wish Natalie Krinsy were still around, writing of carrots and cucumbers when telling college girls whether to spit or to swallow?
October 10th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Seriously? I mean, seriously? Laura posted one of the most cogent, reasonable comments on this board, and all you can think of is how she doesn’t respect her body because she refers to the womanly parts as a “vagina” rather than a pussy?” Well, if slang terminology is akin to respect for female sexuality, then by all means let’s crack open Roget’s and go wild! Cunt, snatch, pussy, twat, quim, pooter…
If this, to you, indicates respect for female sexuality, you’re out of your mind.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
cuuuuuuuuuuunt.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
cuuuuuuuuuuunt.
October 10th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Harvard boys give good head from my experience as a girl here. Is Dartmouth really this conservative? I’d assume since you’re in the middle of the fucking (ha) woods you’d have nothing better to do than to explore your sexuality.
October 10th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Harvard boys give good head from my experience as a girl here. Is Dartmouth really this conservative? I’d assume since you’re in the middle of the fucking (ha) woods you’d have nothing better to do than to explore your sexuality.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
http://thedartmouth.com/2007/10/11/opinion/garber/
October 11th, 2007 at 7:41 am
No, Dartmouth isn’t conservative in the slightest.
October 11th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
dartmouth is the most conservative place in new england. No other place has as great a concentration of wealth, privilege, and disdain for others as dartmouth college. Dartmouth is called “The most conservative ivy” for a reason.
October 11th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
If “wealth, privilege, and disdain for others” were the markers of conservatism, the Kennedys would be Republican.
October 11th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Dartmouth is not any more conservative than any other Ivy League school.
After graduating and coming to Yale, I can tell you that people here have their heads much father up their pampered asses than anybody at Dartmouth ever did. A think that a pathetic 40% of the undergrads receive financial aid, here–compare that to Dartmouth’s nearly 60%.
October 11th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Dartmouth is not any more conservative than any other Ivy League school.
After graduating and coming to Yale, I can tell you that people here have their heads much father up their pampered asses than anybody at Dartmouth ever did. I think that a pathetic 40% of the undergrads receive financial aid, here–compare that to Dartmouth’s nearly 60%.
October 12th, 2007 at 5:16 am
Oh, Schlosser, you’re so insightful.
October 12th, 2007 at 7:48 am
I think so.
October 12th, 2007 at 8:38 am
An average of 15% of undergrads at D are the first in their families to go to college. And as for being the most conservative place in new england, Kerry carried Grafton county by a WIDE margin while several other n.e. counties went to Bush in 2004. And if there were any truth to us being the most conservative, as someone mentioned before, that would still put us to the left of center. But heaven forbid there be diversity of political opinion on a college campus.
October 12th, 2007 at 8:41 am
re the kennedys: hear, hear.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
just another example of dartmouth trying, and ultimately failing, to remove themselves from the brown’s shadow. To hash out the merits of this article is futile; their daily newspaper is dedicated year-round to boasting their students’ ability to “blackout,” and someone who is blacked out isn’t going to have the time, interest nor coordination to “eat vayjayjay” for 45 minutes. The time Aurora spent writing this article would have been much better spent explaining the rules of pong for the Dartmouth, again, or writing about frat culture/the rush process, or listing the students that got arrested for drinking.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
just another example of dartmouth trying, and ultimately failing, to remove themselves from the brown’s shadow. To hash out the merits of this article is futile; their daily newspaper is dedicated year-round to boasting their students’ ability to “blackout,” and someone who is blacked out isn’t going to have the time, interest nor coordination to “eat vayjayjay” for 45 minutes. The time Aurora spent writing this article would have been much better spent explaining the rules of pong for the Dartmouth, again, or writing about frat culture/the rush process, or listing the students that got arrested for drinking.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
just another example of dartmouth trying, and ultimately failing, to remove themselves from the brown’s shadow. To hash out the merits of this article is futile; their daily newspaper is dedicated year-round to boasting their students’ ability to “blackout,” and someone who is blacked out isn’t going to have the time, interest nor coordination to “eat vayjayjay” for 45 minutes. The time Aurora spent writing this article would have been much better spent explaining the rules of pong for the Dartmouth, again, or writing about frat culture/the rush process, or listing the students that got arrested for drinking.
October 13th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Brown has a shadow?
October 13th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Hi Schlosser
October 13th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
‘wasted time’ is not me. Not that it matters. I think that people would be using their real names if they wanted to.
October 13th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Tom McDermott.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:01 am
Dartmouth is in Brown’s shadow? Pshaw, I say.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I thought Aurora’s article was very good. It was responsible of her to add the bit about safe sex/STD’s and the entire article was very well written…not as a scientific analysis, but as a fun, witty column about a beloved American pastime. Cheers to the vajayjay–in all its magic and glory.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
I thought Aurora’s article was very good. It was responsible of her to add the bit about safe sex/STD’s and the entire article was very well written…not as a scientific analysis, but as a fun, witty column about a beloved American pastime. Cheers to the vajayjay–in all its magic and glory.
October 14th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I think Aurora did a commendable job with this piece. She was responsible in addressing safe sex and the entire article was very well-written. It seems clear that her intention was not to present a scientific analysis, but rather to write a fun, witty column and to give useful advice on what many consider to be a beloved American pastime. As far as I can tell, she succeeded in both respects. I think many would agree with me that it was a very fun read. Cheers, Aurora. And Cheers to the vajayjay–in all its magic and glory.
October 14th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
I think Aurora did a commendable job with this piece. She was responsible in addressing safe sex and the entire article was very well-written. It seems clear that her intention was not to present a scientific analysis, but rather to write a fun, witty column and to give useful advice on what many consider to be a beloved American pastime. As far as I can tell, she succeeded in both respects. I think many would agree with me that it was a very fun read. Cheers, Aurora. And Cheers to the vajayjay–in all its magic and glory.
October 14th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Four posts in a row, yalemale10? That’s got to a record for ignorance about how to use comment boards.
October 14th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
come on, (s)he has to be. he’s posted the same thing all over. hilarious.
October 24th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Greetings
I shall do posts and to read this forum
October 31st, 2007 at 9:52 pm
becca,
brown’s columns are not anonymous. the writers’ last names aren’t put online, but they run in the print version, and pretty much everyone at brown knows who the writers are anyway.
and aurora’s article is fine…kind of ridiculous that it created such an uproar.
December 16th, 2007 at 9:35 am
Hi everyone. Great site. Hold on.
try to check