The obsession with 'good girls turned bad' sex tips

The latest issue of Men's Health.

The latest issue of Men's Health.

Men's Heath, with the help of Yahoo!7, is calling upon its readers to 'stand up for your rights, man!'

In an article titled 15 Ways To Turn a Good Girl Bad, the magazine laments that 'female emancipation' — such as voting and equal pay — has caused a 'princess-and-the-pea syndrome.'

Women now have the audacity to expect orgasms with the result being that 'The pea's demands will eclipse those of your penis.'

Back in the good old days when men were men and women were property, sexual pleasure was something that a woman gave to a man and chicks didn't have the over-inflated sense of entitlement to expect it for themselves.


But don't worry, Men's Health is helping to rectify the situation by enlisting 'Six sexperts…to make her great in bed (without her even noticing).'

Conveniently overlooking the messy grey area between 'without her even noticing' and consent, men are advised to school their princesses in handjob techniques. 'Be firm and keep going until you're done so that she can replicate the experience next time.'

Never mind the small detail that women are allowed to stop at any point, even before the man is 'done'.

There are other tips for what to do if she's too gentle — tough luck for her if she doesn't like it rough — and a suggestion to send her off to pilates if, 'her tunnel of love doesn't feel as snug as you'd like'.

As well as manipulating her physically — 'If she's shy, tires easily on top (or she just doesn't fancy you), turn her around to face your feet' — the article also recommends manipulating her emotionally, advising 'don't put out' for up to 14 days.

'Stop asking and you may find her sexual appetite gets the better of her, revealing a hunger that brings out her more confident side.'

And once men fully understand how to optimise their own sexual pleasure, without any regard for their partner, they're advised: 'Make it easy on yourself.'

'Getting her to the level of orgasm can be a hard slog,' so the article recommends the use of sex toys to get the tedium of female orgasm over and done with as quickly as possible and with minimum effort.

In the 1950s world inhabited by Men's Health editors, good girls are frigid, bad girls are horny minxes, and sexual appetite is unnatural for women. Their solution? Use a blindfold so she can explore her 'naughtier side without feeling self-conscious'.

This manifesto of male sexual dominance sleazily exploits the expert opinions of women to do its bidding. Five out of the six sexperts quoted in the article are women. Presumably the editors think that something can't be sexist if it's spoken by a woman.

I'm going to give the sexperts the benefit of the doubt and assume they've been quoted out of context and that they don't give advice exclusively to men, nor do they view women as merely sex dolls with a pulse.

Coming from Zoo Weekly, this article would be unremarkable. But Men's Health has carved out a niche in the men's magazine market as a (slightly) more respectable title.

That strategy has been largely successful with both advertises and readers alike. Advertisers have viewed Men's Health as a safe harbour to market to men without having their products and services tarnished by misogynist rubbish.

Not any longer, it would seem.

I wonder how Coles, Commonwealth Bank, Telstra, Toyota, Westpac, Citibank and Samsung feel about having their branding surround an article that treats half their customer base with utter contempt.

And as the increasing graveyard of Australian's men's magazines shows — remember Ralph and Australian FHM  — male magazine buyers don't go for this kind of thing. And, full disclosure, I was tipped off about this article by a man who happened upon it on Yahoo!7 and was appalled by it.

It's not the first time in recent memory that Men's Heath has used its slick machismo to reinforce male dominance. The US edition's response to the Isla Vista shootings framed the issue as women being weak and passive and encouraged men to act 'forcibly' to protect them.

'How fortunate, then, that with good reason, natural selection has endowed us with stronger muscles, aggressive tendencies, and a certain brute will,' the article states.

The irony is that if men weren't encouraged to view women as objects that exist for their benefit — and Men's Health didn't publish sexpert articles with a blatant disregard and disrespect for women — then men may be less likely to harm women and we wouldn't need men's 'aggressive tendencies' to protect us.

Kasey Edwards is a writer and best-selling author.


  • "I wonder how Coles, Commonwealth Bank, Telstra, Toyota, Westpac, Citibank and Samsung feel about having their branding surround an article that treats half their customer base with utter contempt."

    Does it help the magazines sell? Does it provide more profit through raising public presence than it does damage through bad publicity? If it does, then they will be happy.

    I mean, it works for the advertisers in the dozens of 'women's magazines' that constantly run similar articles, so I don't see why it would be different here.

    Date and time
    September 23, 2014, 9:41AM
    • Sounds a lot like the sort of garbage Cleo, Cosmo and their ilk have been printing for the last 30 years.

      Date and time
      September 23, 2014, 11:27AM
      • Yep, they really are all the same, and who actually buys these?

        Date and time
        September 23, 2014, 1:12PM
      • don't you know equality only matters when it works in your favor...

        Date and time
        September 23, 2014, 2:12PM
      • Agree wholeheartedly.
        I think it is the same tired, poorly written trash that Mia Freedman and others used to pedal in Cleo etc, just with the genders reversed.
        Can I suggest that the author read more widely and see that this i snot a "Men's Health" issue per se, and that much of what is written is not "anti female" as the writing attempts to portray.

        Date and time
        September 23, 2014, 2:32PM
    • Did you link the right article? Because I cannot see the same offense in the one linked--it was nothing compared to articles written in women's magazines. It was simply advice written for men about how to improve their relationships and written in such a way that men might actually read it.

      And you want to threaten advertisers and start a campaign over this?

      Men don't seek to criticize and censor everything written about them by women, so what make you entitled to nit-pick, take out of context, and be offended by everything that pertains to women? Men and boys have a long way to go before they will catch up to the amount of effort that women and girls put into 'shaping' their partners.

      Date and time
      September 23, 2014, 11:28AM
      • Its no different to the "me me me" focused "articles" in those similarly low brow womens magazines. If you look at most of the articles in the mens magazines its predominantly focused on how to please a woman, to the point where its actually quite sad. Nothing wrong with focusing on yourself or your pleasure.

        Date and time
        September 23, 2014, 12:02PM
        • "I wonder how Coles, Commonwealth Bank, Telstra, Toyota, Westpac, Citibank and Samsung feel about having their branding surround an article that treats half their customer base with utter contempt."

          Ermm its called "Mens Health" so they are not treating "half of their readership base with contempt" since it is a purely Mens magazine, correct statment would be that they are indeed treating half of POPULATION with contempt.

          The sister Mag is "Womens Health" which is polar opposite and is filled with articles like "Bigger is Better" where women are advised that it is perfectly fine to leave a men if he "does not measure up" in trouser department, is treating the other half of the population with contempt.

          I am little disapointed that DL only saw fit to take issue with one side of contempt, and play gender politics , rather than fire a well aimed salvo at both of these trash-mags masquerading as health publications.

          Date and time
          September 23, 2014, 12:12PM
          • i'm not sure men's health is a recognised health journal - its not really worth commenting on unless its for uggh...culture "studies".

            Date and time
            September 23, 2014, 12:17PM
            • Was the article written by Robin Thicke?

              Date and time
              September 23, 2014, 12:38PM

              More comments

              Comments are now closed