By Dan Kennedy • The press, politics, technology, culture and other passions

The joys of user content

Media Nation reader M.G. sends along word that the entertainment message board is promoting a “Blow Job Workshop for Women in Oct.” I hightailed over to see for myself, and was pleasantly surprised to see that it hadn’t been taken down yet. Click here and scroll down (it’s under “New Message Boards”), although it will probably be gone by the time you get there. At least at this moment, as the screen capture shows, it’s also getting prominent billing on the main Arts & Entertainment page.

This is neither the result of a massive brain cramp nor a prank. Drill down and you’ll see a detailed description of a “Fellatio Workshop,” along with this helpful syllabus: “This is NOT simply a ‘blow job’ workshop. Anyone can learn tips and skills to use when performing oral sex. What makes you GREAT at it is having the desire and the confidence to do it.” You can also sign up for a striptease class, or for “Sexology 101: Ladies, Get More Pleasure in Bed.”

Now, I have no problem with such content, and except for the “Blow Job” come-on, it’s not actually on As far as I can tell, these are legitimate offerings, and how else are people supposed to find out about them? Somehow, though, I don’t think the folks at would agree.

Update: It’s 2:52 p.m., and the notice is still up on both pages. So I guess a new era has dawned at

Update II: It’s 10:01 p.m. now, and it’s gone.

Discover more from Media Nation

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.


Learning and listening


Not the Craw, the Craw!


  1. Rick in Duxbury

    Clinton did some good things in office. Lowering our national consciousness to that of a 1960 Hot Springs whorehouse was NOT one of them. Sad for kids who might actually have liked romance. At this rate, Phoenix will have to start covering obscure Harvard faculty politics to retaliate against the Globe.

  2. Anonymous

    This belongs with the hooker and phone sex ads in the back of the Phoenix.

  3. Steve

    Rick, I’m not sure what you mean here. You think before Monica the kids didn’t know about blowjobs?

  4. Rick in Duxbury

    Nice try. I meant that the President’s actions have an exaggerated effect on those who support or oppose him. Those who are inclined to look for an excuse for behavior use him as a totem, an ideal (or as the personification of sleaze, depending on one’s political persuasion). I’m just old fashioned enough to appreciate a President who kept his suit jacket on in the Oval Office, for example. If I get caught with a professional colleague over whom I wield power, I’m subject to harassment rules but the most likely penalty is the loss of what little workplace prestige I may enjoy. If there is a more prestigious job in America than POTUS, I’m unaware of it. You and I both knew about oral sex in high school. I’ll wager we both remember influential people trying to slow the coarsening of our culture even in those days. I just find it sad that Clinton’s charisma and power to influence were frittered away to some extent. It’s the “opportunity cost” that’s galling.

  5. Anonymous

    Rick, oh please. I’m of similar age to Monica Lewinsky and was in college during the whole Clinton embroglio. You are sadly mistaken if you think that the morals and romantic yearnings of “kids” were downgraded by that particular era. Most of us in our late teens/early 20s merely shrugged at the supposed “crime” and were rather more peeved at the Republican response. And, just to set your mind at ease, most of us have gone on to form fine, healthy romantic relationships with partners. But thank you for your concern.

  6. Rick in Duxbury

    You’re welcome, 6:42. Your implication is that people aren’t allowed to be kids anymore, (use of quotes) or that no crime was committed, (wasn’t a law license taken away?) You were indeed fortunate to burst forth as a fully-formed, mature adult. (Bet Monica’s dad wishes that had happened to HER). Hope you have a great career while you (unlike me) still know everything.

  7. Steve

    “Nice try”? A little childish, don’t you think?I share your frustration with Clinton’s foibles, but I sure wouldn’t blame the coarsening of the culture on him. Certainly the people who stalked him and his wife for the past 15 years deserve a share equal to his.But I’ll take a president who popularizes blowjobs but gives us prosperity and (relative) peace over a president who trashes our national prestige, makes us less secure by reckless adventurism, and bankrupts our federal budget to favor a wealthy few any day.

  8. Rick in Duxbury

    Well, if 1.the coarsening of the culture is not partially Clinton’s fault and2. those who “stalked” him and his wife deserve an “equal share” of blame to his (i.e., zero),I guess everything is OK then. Nothing to see here, move along! (Guess we can email this link to our 10-year-old daughters.) Over and out.

  9. Anonymous

    rick … did you miss the last paragraph of Steve’s last post?

  10. Anonymous

    Rick,Is there any problem you don’t blame on Bill Clinton or liberals? It must be convenient, but last I checked it was Ken Starr who published a novella length report of the sordid details.Would you rank the Monica scandal coarser of finer than Newt dumping his wife in the hospital? Or the Republican attacks on John Kerry and Max Clellan’s patriotism?What about Fanny Foxe?

  11. Anonymous

    Talk about convenient. You remember back over thirty years to Fanny Foxe but skip over Studds and Frank.(Big price paid by them, eh?)

  12. Aaron Read

    I’ve known a few women that had radical misconceptions about what giving oral sex meant. One hilariously memorable one was a friend of a friend who thought “blow job” literally meant you blew on a man’s penis. Like blowing out candles on a birthday cake.I’m not going to say all women should be required to know how to go down on a guy…but I sure as hell don’t think there’s anything wrong with people trying to provide information and training in a field where there’s a dearth of information a lot of inexperience.Hell, if I were gay I’d probably sign up for a course like that. If you’re gonna do something, might as well learn to do it well, eh?

  13. Anonymous

    Did anybody notice that Dan’s blog entry made page 3 of the Sunday Herald? Does anyone read the Sunday Herald?

  14. neil

    Sexual folly has no party affiliation, though each time it happens the usual sides blame the other. My guy only acted this way, because your guy paved the way. You started it. No you started it! Tiresome, predictable. When it happens to your team, as it inevitably will, remember it will happen to a member of the other team soon enough, and then you simply reverse the arguments.I’ve never seen harm in most sexual mischief. Particularly of say, Presidential comfort. If the most powerful man in the world can’t get a blowjob on the side after all, then what is the point of having the job. When did we become such prigs? There should be a button on the Presidential desk that calls for such a service. Leave the moralizing to the wife. That is punishment enough for any man. Oh but he lied about it, to the nation! I would lie too without hesitation, when I thought it was none of your goddam business. You don’t need to know, dear nation, who has been attending to my pecker.Make love not war. A few blowjobs might have calmed the bellicose tendencies that got us into this stupid war.What gets me is the indignant moralizing. Oh such saints are we, what righteous upstanding family men, that never ever tried to get some action, or more likely were lucky enough not to get caught, that we can rail sanctimonious about the moral failings of those with whom we disagree. This deviance reflects the rotten core of the very principles my opponent holds dear! They are the party of wanton lust, of pederasty, of child molestation, of, of blowjobs!No. Get off the high horse. Foley got caught doing something embarrassing. He stepped down, apologies all around, that’s enough. Don’t blame Clinton, or lower standards caused by hippies, or the atmosphere of moral relativism created by secular humanists. It’s just a guy with a jones for the lads. No actual harm done to our nation’s precious youth.Of course any party that claims guardianship of “values” (protecting our poor missing and exploited children–from secular humanists!) exposes itself to the charge of hypocrisy. Because it could happen to any of us, if not exactly in that form, then in another.Hypocrisy is the greater sin. Take care, before you decide to lecture others on morality. Somebody might find out about your little secret!

  15. Anonymous

    Anon1:32The point is neither party has the right to throw stones, but only one party has set itself up as the arbiter of morality. From Rick to Scott Allen Miller to DR Tucker to Rush, the Republican party has become home of the sanctimonious.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén