Cosmopolitan - sex toys for penis havers and clitoris havers

[WhereAreWeNow]

I've just seen this on a GC FB group. www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/love-sex/sex/g12813404/best-lovehoney-sex-toys/
A whole article about sex toys for men and women that doesn't mention men or women once. Cock rings for the penis haver in your life?

Not sure the link worked
www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/love-sex/sex/g12813404/best-lovehoney-sex-toys/

" ..perfect for partnered penetrative sex with someone with a penis." Oh God couldn't they make it any clumsier? Nice bit of alliteration though.

It's the poor grammar that annoys me most.

Havering, in Scottish, is talking shite. Seems appropriate in this context.

Ew. Don't fancy having to scrub some of those to get the bodily fluids out of all the cracks.

Also funny how it was the very last one for the prostate haver that mentioned consent.

They are evidently trying so hard to avoid the use of man or woman in relation to sexual body parts. Is this the new normal I wonder?

Is this the new normal I wonder?

It’s the new bollocks.

At least they’re being equal opportunities wankers by including men as “penis havers” in their made up bollox rather than “men and clitoris havers”.

I thought TRAs disliked the “reduction” of men and women to their biological sex? But reducing them in the most crude way to biological sex organs is okay?

At least they’re being equal opportunities wankers by including men as “penis havers” in their made up bollox rather than “men and clitoris havers”.

Do you know what Cosmopolitan is? It's a magazine for women. They're hardly going to discriminate against women, are they?

The point of the language is that a "penis haver" could be a man, or a transgender woman, whereas a "clitoris haver" could be a woman, or a transgender man. If they're trying to be politically correct and respectful, they're hardly going to write "men and clitoris havers," because that would upset some transgender people.

The person with a penis is the one who's a man. The person who has a clitoral is a woman. No need to reduce people to their genitals and use four words where one is sufficient.

Do you know what Cosmopolitan is? It's a magazine for women. They're hardly going to discriminate against women, are they?

Yes, of course I know what Cosmo is! And moreover, I would argue that they are already discriminating against women by using terminology like “clitoris havers” in the first place. I struggle to imagine the equivalent men’s magazine using such terminology.

Whoosh!

That's the sound of several decades of radical feminist and gender critical feminism sailing over a new poster's head.

I am a woman, not a "clitoris haver" or a "menstruator" or any other of the woke shit designed to dehumanise me and reduce me to my body parts.

I also made a conscious decision back in my twenties to stop reading Cosmo when I realised it could more accurately be titled "Internalised Mysoginy Monthly". It really is a vile rag designed to make women (the old fashioned cunty kind) feel bad about themselves.

GAH I seem to have forgotten how to spell. New phone not yet sufficiently trained!

Revolting.

Wow, way to scare off a new poster, @FermatsTheoren . You’re trying to be just as “woke” as many TRAs, just in the opposite position. That kind of thing is why people think of this board as an echo chamber full of nasty attitudes. No need to be mean.

That’s pricelessly funny. They are so woke that in fact it’s actually hugely transphobic. It’s reducing people to their biological essentials and the shape of their genitals. It’s dividing people into two based on their biology. Exactly the opposite of the obfuscation being done by trans ideology and its newspeak language. I rather like it!

We could develop a short from nickname for their penis havers and clitoris havers couldn’t we?

The "new poster" I was referring to was a specific one who has popped up over the weekend systematically derailing threads, deliberately misrepresenting people's views and generally shit stirring. I make no apology for drawing attention to their behaviour.

If you come on a site in good faith that's fine; if you come on a site with the express intention of shitting all over it and disrupting conversation, that's not fine. (NB generic "you", not PP) .

Clitoris owners should never be “nasty” - it’s unseemly.

Internalised Mysoginy Monthly

Much more accurate title than Cosmopolitan! I can't imagine that any sensible adult female would buy into any of the crap it peddles. In fairness I haven't looked past the cover of one in more than 25yrs (because even as an insecure teen it was easy to surmise that it was a joke).

Most women's magazines are a joke though so it isn't like Cosmo is alone in peddling shit.

I'm totally with you Fermats #proud2beawoman

Call me pedantic, but is not the recipient the penis-haver, and the donor the penis-giver?

Whoosh!

That's the sound of several decades of radical feminist and gender critical feminism sailing over a new poster's head.

I am a woman, not a "clitoris haver" or a "menstruator" or any other of the woke shit designed to dehumanise me and reduce me to my body parts.

Woosh!

That's the sound of my point sailing over your head because you misread my post.

I was not defending the use of terms like "clitoris haver," but merely pointing out to someone that it was very obvious there was no intention to discriminate or dehumanize women. You may feel they did, but there was no intention, which was self-evident in the fact that they also used "penis haver."

Never mind Cosmo, do you like the Guardian, @dwatsuts?

Yes I do, but some twat copied my username on there.