Slate’s Prudence, a/k/a Emily Yoffe, is one of the worst of the advice columnists. The smug-looking cunt’s advice tends to be both insipid and patently misandrist. Just as I occasionally give bad advice or say something incorrect, “Prudie” occasionally stumbles into saying something intelligent and fair. Otherwise, she’s Frau Farbissina
brought to life.
In one column last year which brought her round and near-universal condemnation from both sexes, Prudie, perhaps revealing her own hygiene habits (or lack thereof), gave a guy shit for questioning whether it was hygienic for his girlfriend to rarely clean or change her bra. Prudie claimed she “actually polled some of the cleanest women I know on their bra-washing schedules. The answers ranged from ‘weekly’ to ‘when my white bras look black and can walk themselves to the washing machine.’”
I’d hate to know what the bras of some of the dirtiest women she knows look like.
Prudie closed by snapping, “.. if you want your girlfriend of six months to be your girlfriend six months from now, you will drop the judgmental tone and think of yourself as a lucky explorer of a fascinating, strange land.
“ Apparently, in 2010, Prudie considers any guy who gets to second base with his girlfriend of six months to be lucky. So what if he feel a pair of clean, hot-chick tits in just about any full-contact lap-dance club in the United States for less than $50! So what if I used to feel hot-chick tits at windowless peeps for a grand total of a buck-and-a-half
Prudie’s bra post was actually an item of discussion on local radio as well among the women in my office. From the 20-year-old heavily-tattooed mixed-race intern to the 55 year-old white lawyer recently-transplanted from West Virginia, the consensus was unanimous – a bra is worn once and then washed.
Earlier this year, Prudie, 55 (85 in girl years), gave perhaps the most senseless advice I’ve ever seen in an advice column – making, as he would be the first to proclaim, Dan Savage look like a good dispenser of wisdom to guys. A lonely widower wrote,
“I am a 38-year-old widower. Three years ago, my wife passed away after a long illness. Our son was not quite 4. Since her death, my focus has been exclusively on him and my work. I have had no social life. My mother-in-law helps out, but she is quite old. I recently hired a woman to take care of my son until I get home from work. The woman is 24 years old, and my son adores her. She has a boyfriend of several years who seems like a good guy. Here’s the “problem.” She just told me she has a serious crush on me and is restless in her relationship. She has also made feints into discussions about sex with me, which I’ve brushed away. She is very attractive, and I have been completely alone since my wife passed, so this is pretty awesome on about 100 levels. But, of course, there are also a number of complications. I will not do anything if she is still seeing her boyfriend. If she does break up with him, what are my options?”
Prudie, obviously enraged by an age disparity that DirkJohanson would characterize as a bit on the narrow side, a rage echoed in the title of the ever-misandrist Tampa Bay Times’ reprint of the column entitled, “Widower, 38, Should Not Bed His Son’s Nanny, 24,” snapped:
“If your name is Von Trapp and hers is Maria, that would color my answer. But before you two burst into a chorus of ‘My Favorite Things,’ I’m afraid pursuing this young woman, awesome though it may sound, is a bad idea on about 100 levels.“
Prudie then went on to falsely characterize his post, “Since you’re already wondering whether you can hire her back when things don’t work out (answer: no), you clearly aren’t interested in her as more than a jump start to your too-long-dormant sexuality.“ In fact, the sincere, well-intentioned widower had posited the qu estion “If we eventually break up, can I (gulp!) hire her back?” “If,” not “when.“
Prudie, continued, …”use the motivation she’s provided you to start looking for someone more suitable to date. This young woman has a pre-existing condition: She’s your son’s babysitter. …But he’s now made an emotional connection to this young woman, and it would be unnecessarily confusing for him to lose her as a baby sitter because you started an affair with her. I applaud that your response to her feints has been to brush them off and not to ravish her. Since nothing’s happened yet, keep it that way. You need to tell her that you appreciate the wonderful job she’s doing with your boy, and you want her to continue, but you two must leave your relationship strictly as employer and employee. If she can’t accept that, then you have to let her go.”
Lets analyze the levels of idiocy in Prudie’s post:
1. inability to read.
2. distinguishing the situation from the Von Trapp family, WHICH WAS A TRUE STORY WITH A HAPPY AND HAPPILY-EVER-AFTER ENDING, revealing evidence of the ever-repeating pattern that, for all their good talk about marriage, many American women have little tolerance for a guy actually happily ending up with a woman he wants. In this regard, Prudie falls squarely in that camp of women that proclaim that marriage is great, but actually only like marriage when it involves a woman 35 and over landing a rich guy.
3. assumption that the going-on-25 babysitter has no other aspiration in life than to remain a babysitter forever.
4. concluding that if the babysitter refuses to accept the rejection, that he is has to fire the babysitter, anyway, leaving the boy without a babysitter in the end – which, according to Prudie, was the very reason for her advice in the first place.
In a column out just within the past couple of weeks, Prudie again brought her poison to bear in an advice column about a girl who was having trouble having sex. Describing a largely-psychological condition known as vaginismus, the girl wrote,
“every doctor has recommended that I get a boyfriend and come back after I try sex with him.”
This column presented the elderly Prudie, 55, who not surprisingly is on record criticizing hook ups, with the opportunity to advise something to the effect of, “Good idea. instead of sharing the same handful of oversexed studs with all your girlfriends, give one of the other guys a chance – you know, one of the vast majority of guys that usually goes home from the club looking like they want to cry since all the girls have sex with the same few guys every night. I’ll bet one of those guys would relish the opportunity to help you.” At least that’s what DirkJohanson would say.
Instead, Prudie, who is not a doctor,
blasted, contrary to successful advice I am personally familiar with, “forget the notion that there’s some Prince Charming with a magic wand who’s going to solve your problem.
“ From apparently a single conversation with a non-physician hot chick
from the Kinsey Institute (which in an earlier Monologue brought you Heather Rupp and her ludicrous
assumption that women prefer having one-night stands with guys who have little sexual experience, Prudie speculated that the girl might have two vaginas, a quality no shortage of guys – from Prince Charming to Attila the Hun – would appreciate for many obvious reasons
In other words, Prudie sided with the advice from her own conversation with a non-physician – possibly over cocktails – over the advice of not just one gynecologist who personally examined the girl, but also the gynecologist who personally examined the girl in order to provide a second opinion and the gynecologist who personally examined the girl to provide a third opinion.
The prospect of dating a girl with two vaginas does raise an interesting question, though: what would the her ass be used for?
Never mind. I answered my own question in this post. The ass could write an advice column for Slate.
And now, I’ll leave you with the song that, thanks to cuntie Prudie, the lonely widower and babysitter will NOT be playing at their respective weddings, if any:
Click on pen to