Written by


  1. aaargh  


    A vaginia is INSIDE a woman. It can't be hairy. If it is, something is terribly terribly wrong. Please use proper terminology-- girls should shave their SNATCH. BEAVER. CROTCH. I'll even go with PUSSY.

    Jesus, girl.

  2. and also....  

    that column is the absolute worst piece of bullshit trash i have read since her last damn column. no wonder barnard girls get a bad rap.

  3. p.s.  

    someone should let her know that every single column she writes is a "straight guy" column: this isn't some kind of CRAZY and DARING exception!!

  4. ...  

    oh man "shaved vagina" -that's so revolutionary! Thanks Miriam!

  5. bystander  

    "Serious Goals, Great Solutions"?

    "New GS Order"?

    Damn, why can't CCSC parties have kickass, semi-fascist names like that?

    "Pants" party? Come on!

    P.S. Because SOMEONE always get offended. I don't think GSSC is fascist at all. That's ESC's job.

  6. miriam  

    Just so you know, your description of a "straight guy" has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not he is straight.

    • moreover  

      I'm a straight male and I find pubic hair (as long as it's kept neat) pretty damn sexy; a completely shaven pussy makes a girl look like a pre-pubescent. And while I love a good deep-throated blowjob, having the girl gag isn't especially attractive. I don't get off on power trips from abusing women, and I too initiate long conversations with my sex partners because I want to communicate with them intellectually as well as physically, even if only for the night. Being an insensitive asshole is not a hallmark of straightness, nor should it be considered even remotely desirable in a man or a woman.

      So thanks Miriam for pigheadedly reinforcing and mindlessly glorifying every gender stereotype you could fit into your 4 inches of drivel.

  7. ttan

    I hate you all. I wish I still wrote for Spec.

  8. miriam is an asshole  

    that was the dumbest piece of shit i have ever read in my entire life


    "there is no men's studies section in barnes and noble"


  10. gssc elections  

    that was the most confusing article i've ever read in my life. i still have no idea what the hell happened in that election.

  11. big kiss  

    the big kiss article was cute, but it didn't offer much reporting. it would have been nice to have interviewed some onlookers and get their reactions, for example.

  12. wow

    my favorite part of miriam d.'s insanely retarded column is the part about blow jobs where she suggests choking and then says "and always return the favor." so the guy is doing the GIRL a favor by ALLOWING her to blow him? or is miriam just a completely incompetent writer? well, the latter is true no matter the answer. the only thing worse than candice bushnell is a pathetic imitation of candice bushnell.

  13. kisser  

    "Some of the 15 or so pairs who ended up kissing wore plaid flannel, or dreadlocks, or three days’ worth of facial hair."

    Why is this important??

    Bwog's coverage was way better.

    • sarcasm  

      oh wow, bwog is so great at covering the important events. give em a pulitzer.

    • come now  

      Don't play naive. The connection comes through a series of associations related to American cultural history. Activities involving sexuality that resemble in spirit those of hippies calling for free love and openness in the 1960s will, of course, call to mind other characteristics of that group, of which dreadlocks and facial hair, for example, are obvious ones.

      So, they were notable features to briefly cite in the article if they were also present. Nothing more to it.

  14. polar bear

    Once, just once, I would like to read a blog comment that doesn't call something "best. ___. ever." or "the dumbest piece of shit i have ever read in my entire life." get a sense of proportion, get a life.

  15. hey  

    The big opinion piece by a professor slamming the Writing Program seems pretty notable -- more so than the GS article.

  16. quiqui  

    I don't understand why everyone equates how one likes to have sex with the content of one's soul... you can like making a girl gag and still be a perfectly nice fellow . . . sex is its own sphere, and it shouldn't be used to make cute generalizations about what one segment of the population likes and what the other doesn't etc. Miriam Datskovsky's column is worthless because ALL sex columns are worthless. They presuppose that humans are prewired to like certain sexual things while others dislike these same things and thus we have to be mutually educated in order to compromise.

  17. honestly  

    What is Miriam ever writing about?

    Even when she ostensibly has a topic, her articles invariably devolve into a muddled combination of every shallow cosmo sex article ever written.

    So Miriam prefers "straight guys." So she asks them to fill her in "on the ultimate, mostly female-related, apprehensions and offenses." What does that mean? She then goes on to list a series of unrelated and mostly cliched complaints that guys have against girls. The article concludes on a completely trite note about "embracing whatever you like best, without hesitation."

    Not sure why I'm going on because my sentiments are entirely summed up by whoever said, "that column is the absolute worst piece of bullshit trash i have read since her last damn column."

    Miriam, stop writing. Please.

  18. straight-guy?  

    jeez, i thought i was straight, but i've never slapped a girls ass in public. I realized that I must be "flamboyantly gay." today i slapped a guy's ass. it was awesome. thank you miriam, for helping me realize i was gay!

  19. quiqui  

    Has anyone ever encountered a guy who was too scared to ask a girl for a blow job? Do we really need Miriam Datskovsky as our sexual intermediary? All this sex advice is just a huge industry, tricking people into thinking they have neuroses and hang-ups about sex, and that sex is so freaking complicated and that communication between partners is so impossible and that even if you feel cool about your sexuality, whoever you're trying to do has their own crazy host of sexual problems that they are hiding from you, and that basically sex is a big scary thing that hardly anyone does right, ever. That said, I still read her column, so I guess I shouldn't criticize.

  20. quiqui  

    Slapping a girl's ass in public just means you like ass and the girl likes having hers slapped. End of story. It's stupid to try to imply that sexual enjoyments put you into categories.

  21. ridiculous  

    It's always been baffling to me how Miriam got the job as Editorial Page Editor since her column shows that she's so manifestly lacking in the ability to write lucid, cogent, and well-edited prose.

  22. J Train  

    Why is this sex column even neccessary? Way to endorse old stereotypes about how no man will ever give you oral unless you look like a porn star or a ten-year-old. Bring back the cartoonist, make letters to the editor more frequent, and fer crissakes get a clue, Spec.

  23. also  

    miriam's column is incredibly heteronormative.

  24. Sam Champion

    Once upon a time; a long, long time ago -- someone said the Spec was the pretty good campus newspaper.

    I think he was referring to the 60s.

  25. just saying.  

    It's funny how anonymity erases both accountability and good manners.

  26. sheesh  

    gah, miriam's column is the stupidest crap I've ever read. at least kulawik doesn't drape his column in faux-progressive lingo and can actually write a coherent sentence. and how is she in charge of the editorial page? anyone with any sense would bring back Apostrophobia and kick out that stupid cartoon they run now. and look her website: http://www.miriamdatskovsky.com/

    why does anyone want to interview her?!

  27. Meh  

    I really, actually don't mind whether it's shaved or not, ladies. And yes, I'm a straight dude.

    Also, for a sex columnist, Miriam has pitiful knowledge of the female anatomy. Vagina=inside, pussy/vulva=outside.

  28. Geez  

    Why does Miriam assume that talking about her fucked-up view of gender dynamics has any place in a sex column? She seems to have fallen into the Carrie Bradshaw trap of assuming that having a "sex column" means that you can make ridiculous generalizations about how men and women interact (and god forbid that she actually write intelligently about same-sex relationships), rather than writing about actual issues regarding sex. Sex is not always tied up in issues of gender dynamics, gender dynamics are not complex because of sexual frustration, and Miriam is not supposed to make idiotic proclamations about what she views as "college culture". She's supposed to be a sex columnist, but apparently she hasn't figured that part out yet.

  29. ...  

    got to give miriam some credit for being able to market this meaningless drivel to the world. now if only she would apply that same persistence to improving her writing..

  30. DSouthers  

    Jesus Christ, people. There's exactly ONE person on this wall with the cajones to identify himself. Why does everyone feel such hatred toward Miriam (but not enough to voice it by name)? If the column is so bad, write a SIGNED letter to the editor or don't read it at all—no one's shoving the paper down your throat.

    Likewise, let's lay off the INCESSANT Bwog/Spec hair-splitting. They both do a remarkable job, despite occasional failings. Why should every single news item be an excuse to drive a wedge between them? We obviously read them both.

    And before everyone jumps on me, I'm not Miriam, I don't know her, and I've never worked a single day at Spectator. I just wish people would lay off the girl (and these publications) for like ten seconds.

    • err  

      I actually think I've written a signed letter to the editor about over half of Miriam's columns. Just because I don't feel like posting my full name and e-mail on a blog doesn't render my criticism invalid. And ignoring something you disagree strongly with and find hurtful and backward is a pretty damn stupid strategy.

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.