Eventhough most Hollywood movies don’t feature the explicit sex of porn features, there are plenty of movies out there that feature nudity. There are some great movies without any nudity and there are some bad movies that feature a whole lot of it. But every now and then there are great movies that also happen to feature some great nudity. So I thought I would go ahead and enlighten you with 10 Great Movies With Nudity As A Bonus. Enjoy!

Amanda Peet, The Whole Nine Yards

Yes, this movie fucking bombed. Yes, Matthew Perry is essentially playing Chandler from Friends in a feature film. Yes, it takes place in Canada. But honestly, folks, this movie cracks me the fuck up. I legitimately think that Bruce Willis is a terrific comic actor and wish he would ditch the macho action man persona permanently in his old age and just do funny movies. He was brilliant in Death Becomes Her and his funny moments in The Fifth Element are terrific. He’s equally hilarious in The Whole Nine Yards, so fuck you if you think this movie sucks. But even if you hate the film, you have to admit that the surprise full-frontal nudity from Amanda Peet is worth the price of admission alone. What’s so great about her scene is that it’s so out of left field…you’re watching the flick and going along with it, and then BAM: out of nowhere there’s a naked chick with a gun. I love it, this is easily one of my favorite nude scenes of all time.

Anne Hathaway, Love & Other Drugs

Anyone who knows me understands that my love and admiration for Anne Hathaway has no limits. I honestly don’t understand why everyone hates her so much. I think she’s funny, gorgeous, and she genuinely seems like a fucking awesome person. I’ve never met her so maybe she’s awful in person, but until I meet her I’m just going to keep assuming she is beauty incarnate. And while her best nude scenes are clearly in Havoc, her nude scenes in Love & Other Drugs are awesome and happen to be in a far better movie. Love & Other Drugs is particularly important to me because it deals with being in a relationship with a person who suffers from an invisible illness, which is something I know very well. Yes, the ending of the movie is lame as fuck and kind of ruins the whole thing, but up until that point Love & Other Drugs is one of the best (and realest) romantic dramedies I’ve ever seen. Plus, perfect boobs.

Maggie Gyllenhaal, Secretary

Forget that 50 Shades Of Grey garbage. When it comes to depictions of BDSM relationships on film, Secretary should absolutely be your go-to feature. Yes, the relationship between Lee and Mr. Grey (whose name influenced Christian Grey, no doubt) starts off very unethical and possibly even dangerous. But the way both of the characters navigate through their feelings and reservations about the alternative relationship they are forming is very real and very touching. What’s so terrific about Maggie’s nude scene is that it doesn’t occur until the end of the movie; all the BDSM stuff that happens on film is done with both actors totally clothed. It’s only when Lee and Mr. Grey finally give in to their “abnormalities” does she finally feel comfortable enough to be naked and vulnerable in front of him. Truly a terrific movie and a beautiful nude scene.

Angelina Jolie, Hackers

OK, so technically there isn’t really a nude scene in Hackers. It’s a PG-13 rated film, so of course there isn’t anything super sexual in it. But there are two times in the movie that you can very clearly see Angelina Jolie’s boobs, albeit for only a few seconds of screen time. As a kid, I thought Hackers was just the coolest shit, and I still quote the movie all the time…but as cool as the movie itself is, it was truly a sexual awakening in a lot of ways for my 12 year-old self being able to see Kate Libby’s boobs, because the character is literally my dream woman. Short black hair? Check. Insane fashion? Check. Loves computers and tech? Check. Super sexual feminist? Check. Being able to see her boobs for exactly two seconds was all I needed.

Sherilyn Fenn, Boxing Helena

You probably have never even heard of Boxing Helena. That’s because it’s so fucked up that it was pretty much just swept under the rug when it was released. I don’t even know how the movie got greenlit! It’s about a surgeon who kidnaps a woman and amputates her arms and legs to keep her trapped in his house. It’s weird and disturbing, in a good way, but then is absolutely ruined at the end when (SPOILER ALERT) it turns out it was all a fucking dream. What a cop out! Anyway, the movie features Sherilyn Fenn and her fucking amazing boobs. And let me tell you, after obessing over Audrey Horne in Twin Peaks, being able to finally see Fenn in the buff was ecstasy. Boxing Helena is a left-field movie that is incredibly interesting if not downright confounding, but when Sherilyn Fenn is naked how could you ever complain?

Erika Eleniak, Under Siege

Let me just get this right out of the way: Under Siege is a blatant Die Hard clone. It gave birth to the whole concept of calling something “Die Hard on a _______”. In this case, the “_______” is a battleship. Early on in the film, a stripper is brought onto the boat to do the classic jump-out-of-the-cake bit for the soldiers, but when the boat is taken over by terrorists (led by an absolutely bonkers Tommy Lee Jones) she is forgotten about. When she finally appears on screen, Erika Eleniak thinks this is her big moment and jumps out of the cake brandishing her absolutely perfect boobs. I know the whole scene backwards and forwards because I was 10 years old and used to re-watch my VHS copy of the movie over and over again for that scene. Because I was a young boy and obsessed with naked ladies. Duh. But seriously, aside from Speed this movie is the best Die Hard clone out there, and Tommy Lee Jones is so fucking over-the-top in the movie that it’s impossible not to have fun watching him be batshit insane.

Holly Hunter, Crash

In the same vein as Boxing Helena, David Cronenberg’s Crash is so fucking bizarre that it’s a wonder it even got made. The movie is about a semi-cult of people who fetishize car crashes. One of their biggest thrills is purposely crashing cars with them as the occupants, and fucking in the wreckage while they bleed out. Yes. How does one get into that fetish? Well, there’s one scene that’s stayed with me for years that sums it up: James Spader and Holly Hunter are two strangers who accidentally crash into eachother, and once the crash has calmed Spader sees Hunter take her seat belt off covered in blood and glass, and as she does she accidentally (or purposely?) exposes one of her breasts to him. It’s a strangely erotic and beautiful scene, and like I said it’s stayed with me for over 20 years. Although Crash is slow moving and in some ways incomprehensible, it’s a perfect match for Cronenberg’s obsession with the mixing of biology and technology. Worth seeking out if you haven’t seen it!

Uma Thurman, Dangerous Liasons

You may have seen Dangerous Liasons in its teen-friendly form when it was remade as Cruel Intentions. In reality both movies (and many others) are based on a French novel written in 1782, so I can hardly call Dangerous Liasons the OG. But it is vastly superior to Cruel Intentions, and the fact that one features Uma Thurman getting naked and the other doesn’t sends the point home even further. Uma has done other nude scenes before so it’s not like this is the only movie you can watch to see her in the buff, but this movie is so awesome that you really don’t need to see anything else. My only wish is that she was wearing the black wig she wears in Pulp Fiction…a Mia Wallace nude scene would be fucking incredible.

Salma Hayek, Desperado

Salma. Fucking. Hayek. Can anyone say anything bad about her? She’s gorgeous, a terrific actress, and from everything I’ve read a fucking fabulous person. And yes: she has probably the best body ever in the history of humans having bodies. The fact that she gets naked in a movie as fun and ridiculous as Desperado is like a gift to all humanity. It’s like Robert Rodriguez was standing around one day and said, “I’m going to remake my first movie with more guns, more explosions, and more camera tricks, and also show Salma Hayek’s perfect rack.” Who wouldn’t fund that movie? I can just imagine studio executives tripping over themselves to give Rodriguez suitcases full of money. If you’ve never seen this movie, you need to seek it out. Not only are Salma Hayek’s tits involved, but Steve Buscemi is fucking hilarious in it as well.

Linda Hamilton, The Terminator

Let’s be honest, a lot of nude scenes in movies are superfluous. The movie could survive just fine without a girl getting naked in it, but pretty much everyone will agree that if you can put beautiful naked ladies in your movie, you might as well put them in there. However, with The Terminator, the nudity actually is integral to the plot. Linda Hamilton’s character is creating the savior of humanity during her sex scene with Michael Biehn, and showing the viewer that intimate act is a testament to the very humanity we think needs saving. It’s a very vulnerable and beautiful moment in an otherwise violent and gross film, which only sends the point home even more. It just goes to show you that not all nude scenes are simply set dressing; some are integral to the story!

Well, actually, there is something we can do to better the situation: blame the cheater and stop shifting blame from the actual wrong-doer to a person who really shouldn’t be blamed at all. I’m not talking about the person being cheated on, but about the cheatee, of course.

Who’s the cheatee? In any cheating scenario there are at least three people: the cheater (the person who is cheating), the cheated (the person who is being betrayed by the cheater), and the cheatee (the person with whom the cheater cheats with). To put it more simply: Bill Clinton was the cheater, Hillary Clinton was the cheated, and Monica Lewinsky was the cheatee. In a lot of cheating scenarios (including the Clinton one I just referenced) blame for the cheating is not just put on the cheater: it’s also put on the cheatee. Monica obviously knew that Bill was married to Hillary and therefore when they engaged in sexual conduct she was facilitating his infidelity. Most people agree that the fact that she knew she was helping him to cheat means that she deserves a certain amount of blame…after all, the cheating wouldn’t have occurred if Monica had said, “Sorry, Bubba, but I won’t be the cheatee for you.”

But really all that attitude does is do a disservice to everyone involved, because it removes a partial amount of the blame for the situation from the cheater to the cheatee. Imagine that there is a finite amount of blame for this situation…let’s say 100% of the blame. If you say that the cheatee deserves part of the blame (let’s say 25% of it) then that leaves only 75% of the blame to be directed at the cheater. But that’s no good! That means that the cheater is getting less blame for something that is wholly their fault!

But you may not agree with that statement; you may think that both the cheater and the cheatee are at fault…hell, you might even think that in certain situations that the cheated should be held at fault! Maybe the cheated was being a royal pain in the ass and drove the cheater to cheat through being a miserable piece of shit. Then some of the blame should shift to them too, right? Maybe 10% of it…so now it’s 10% to the cheated, 25% to the cheatee, and 65% to the cheater.

This percentage analogy may be stupid but you see what point I’m trying to make: the more you say that it’s not ALL the cheater’s fault the less fully accountable the cheater is for the infidelity. And believe you me: cheating is 100% totally the cheater’s fault and the cheatee and the cheated should not be held accountable in the slightest. And I’m not saying this because I’m angry at the cheaters and want to see them scorned…I’m saying this because I want to protect the cheatees and the cheateds.

I met a girl once who was the cheatee for a guy who was in a monogamous relationship at the time they were having sex, which happened multiple times. She said that she had full knowledge of the fact that he was in a relationship at the time and even had met and hung out with his girlfriend on a few occasions. She also said that she really liked the girlfriend but, at the time, was so caught up in the sexual chemistry between herself and the man that she didn’t really care that what she was a part of would undoubtedly hurt the girlfriend.

Needless to say it didn’t end well…the girlfriend eventually found out (as is always the case) and the girl is now barred from seeing or even talking with either the boy or the girlfriend. She explained to me that this incident has left her feeling incredibly guilty, even to the point of it negatively affecting her current relationships. She referred numerous times to the cheating incident as something that was plainly her fault and something that she “did to them”. I felt bad for her not because of the incident, but because she is suffering such needless and pointless guilt over something that, by my accounts, is not even remotely her fault at all.

The cheater is the one with the responsibility not to cheat. The cheatee is simply there, a vessel unto which the cheater can do their cheating. In the situation above, the girl didn’t force the guy to cheat on his girlfriend. And who’s to say, had the girl not been around or had turned down his proposal for sex, that he wouldn’t have just shrugged and moved on to cheat with someone else? She simply went along with his infidelity and reaped the benefits of it. She wasn’t being betrayed by him and she had no responsibility to protect the girlfriend from her boyfriend’s cheating. Sure, she may have been doing herself a disservice by getting involved in something that would inevitably cause her pain and distress when the shit hit the fan and their sexual relationship was exposed, but she knew what she was doing and was fine with it. People know that drinking a lot of beer may cause them to vomit, but they like drinking beer so they accept that it may or may not end in vomit. That’s all this girl did: accept that this will be fun but may end messily…it’ll suck for the guy and his girlfriend a lot, but it will only suck a little bit for her. Why should she be made to feel bad about that?

Here’s another analogy: let’s say I lie to my boss and call out sick from work eventhough I feel fine and am actually going to an amusement park with my friends. Let’s say my boss gets word from a friend of his that they saw me at the amusement park that day and when I come to work the following morning I am fired for abusing my sick-time privileges. Whose fault is it that I got fired? It’s certainly not my boss’ fault…he’s the victim! And it’s certainly not my friends’ fault…they may have enticed me to go to the amusement park fully knowing that I would have to break the rules and falsely call out of work to go, but they didn’t force me to do so. The only person who’s at fault for me getting fired is me. It was my responsibility to go to work and I broke the rules to go do something else. I was caught, and I was fired. I should be getting 100% of the blame. I don’t think anyone would try to chastise my friends for inviting me to the amusement park that day, and I hope no one would blame my boss for having to cover for my lazy ass while I’m out having a blast riding rollercoasters, so why is it that most people would try to chastise the cheatee of a cheating situation?

Like I said at the beginning of this article: cheating sucks. It sucks for everyone. But let’s keep in mind why it sucks: it sucks because the cheater cheated. If we forget that simple fact and start saying it ALSO sucks because the cheatee didn’t put a stop to it, or participate in victim-blaming by saying that the cheated was part of the reason the cheating occurred, we are spreading out the blame for no reason and giving the cheater less of a reason to feel like a piece of shit. The blame should be laser-focused directly on the cheater’s face in an unwavering beam of solidarity…because that’s whose fucking fault it is. Blame the cheater.

-George

You’re assuming two things, both of which are only partly true. The first thing you’re assuming is that all guys in porn shoot massive loads at massive speeds, which is not true. Steve Holmes, one of porn’s biggest and most enduring male stars, almost never “shoots” his loads. They just dribble out of his dick like a leaky faucet (see a video compilation of Steve’s cum shots here). Granted, there are people like Peter North who have legendary amounts of semen come firing out of them like a small cannon (see GIF here). But for every Peter North there’s a Steve Holmes.

The second thing you’re assuming is that male porn stars have total control over their semen amount/firing intensity. Peter North has admitted numerous times that he does nothing special to achieve the insane amounts of semen he ejaculates; he was just born that way. Most male porn stars are in the same boat, they just ejaculate the way they ejaculate and leave it at that.

That all being said there are some ways to make your cum shots “better”, if one could put it in that crude of a term. I’ll let you in on the secrets here:

BIGGER LOADS: If you’re only blowing little tiny bits of semen naturally and want to have a big nice one when you’re with your girlfriend, the most basic thing you can do is “save up”. Don’t ejaculate for a few days so your body has plenty of time to produce a bunch of semen. Porn stars do this all the time: if they know they have a shoot the next day they abstain from sex the nite before so that they have plenty of cum for the scene. You can get your body to make even more if you also do some “edging“, which is a term used for getting yourself near to the point of ejaculation and then stopping so no ejaculation occurs. If you “edge” a few times a day, whether it be through sex or masturbation, the next day you’ll blow way more cum than you’ve ever seen yourself blow before. Finally, there’s a “cocktail” (pun intended, I’m sure) that some guy on 4Chan came up with that supposedly makes your body produce higher quantities of thicker cum. You can read about that here, but I’ve never tried it so I have no idea if it works or not.

MORE INTENSE SHOT: Getting your semen to shoot across the room may never happen if you’re naturally a “dribbler”, but there is a very easy way to make it happen on a more intense level than usual. Running the length of the bottom of your penis is your urethra, the tube which carries your urine and semen from its point of creation to the outside world. When you are about to ejaculate (like, right about to ejaculate) grip the base of your penis in such a way that your urethra is completely closed off, not unlike stepping on a garden hose to stop the flow of water. Hold it there for a second or two and then release and watch as your semen shoots out like an explosion. Once again, it may not shoot at Peter North rates but it will absolutely shoot farther and harder than you are used to. It also gives you a delayed orgasm which can be interesting and different in some ways, so that’s a bonus side effect. Obviously just make sure you don’t hold it too long otherwise complications could occur. Play around with it when you masturbate so you can get the technique down and then show your new found trick to your girlfriend’s boobs at a later date!

When I first heard of Emma’s performance art piece I will absolutely admit I applauded her. I said to myself, “What a great way to turn an ugly and horrible event into a powerful statement that will get the world to start thinking about feminism, rape, and the sexual assault crisis our colleges are neck-deep in whether they know it or not.” I even remember telling Eloise about it over dinner and saying how much I admired Emma and how great a boon this would be to feminism in the United States and possibly even abroad.

Then the story started to unravel.

As of today I feel very secure in saying that Emma Sulkowicz is a liar. That’s a bold statement for a guy who’s never met Emma nor had any special access to any material other than what I have found online, but believe me: I wouldn’t be saying it if I didn’t 100% believe it to be true. Did the rape actually happen? Maybe, but probably not. Did Emma’s FWB sexually assault other people? Maybe, but it’s also highly unlikely. Are there shreds of truth to Emma’s stories about how everything went down? Most likely yes. But is Emma Sulkowicz a liar? You better goddamn believe it.

Simply for the fact that I don’t want this article to be pages and pages long explaining the long-winded and confusing sequence of events that have occurred in this case, I will not be going over everything. You can read the story chronologically here or simply fall into the clickhole of searching for Emma’s name on Google. But here are the major facts to prove my statement:

Before and after the alleged rape took place, Emma was in constant contact with her alleged rapist. Transcriptions of their online chats are easily found on the web and there is not one where Emma expresses any kind of negative feelings towards her FWB. In fact, the opposite is true: almost every chat message is her saying that she loves him, misses him, and wants to see him as soon as possible. Now, this certainly paints a picture of a girl who maybe wasn’t raped, but it certainly doesn’t prove she’s a liar, right? Plenty of rape victims continue to have relationships with their assailants afterward due to a whole slew of reasons. But what Emma did lie about is the transcriptions themselves.

Emma’s FWB was the one who originally put the chat transcripts out into the public sphere. However, he only put out parts of them, e.g. the parts that were relevant to his plight to prove his innocence. Emma, in response, then posted an annotated document of what she claims are the “full” conversations between her and her FWB surrounding the incident. But guess what? Emma omitted parts of the transcript that are VERY relevant to the case at hand! You can see Emma’s annotated transcript here. Look closely at the message from her FWB on 8/29 at 9:33pm. See those black dots underneath the text? That is the cut-off top of another line of text. Why can’t we read that line of text? Well, that’s because Emma has chosen to conceal that part of the text. Also, the transcripts that her FWB posted have much more text to them than the one’s Emma posted here, which of course means that there are more things being omitted. So, to be clear: Emma says, and this is a direct quote from her, “…I have chosen to release the full conversation, plus the context in which things were said. I want people to have all the information so that they can make informed decisions for themselves, rather than seeing a redacted version of the conversation with bits and pieces picked out to make me look a certain way.” But what does she post? A transcript with bits and pieces picked out to make her look a certain way. So she lied.

Another major lie is her chronology of events. Throughout this whole ordeal Emma has alternated between several different versions of who she told about the rape and when. Sometimes she says she didn’t tell anyone until she went to Columbia officials, not even her parents or her “best friend”. Other times she says she told a “girlfriend” within 24 hours of the event. Other times she says that she told several people much later after the event who assured her that what happened to her was in fact rape and encouraged her to go to report it. They can’t all be true, so which one is it? Even if one of them is true, that would make the others…lies.

But maybe this isn’t enough for you. Maybe these things are being nitpicky and not giving her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she mistakenly omitted parts of her chat conversations and maybe she’s experiencing some sort of cloudy memory issues when it comes to who she told about the alleged rape and when. Well, how about these things, which I’ve literally cut-and-pasted from the suit filed against Columbia University by Emma’s FWB:

There were no witnesses to Emma’s alleged screams in the badly soundproofed student dorm.
There was no medical report, even though an attack as massive as described would with great likelihood have caused serious injuries in dire need of medical attention and would have left visible bruises on Emma’s body for days.
There was no testimony from Emma’s friends or family members who could confirm such injuries or changes in her behavior caused by discomfort from these injuries. On the contrary, in the days following the alleged attack, Emma participated in various social events on campus, such as parties with friends and social events with the fencing team. Given the multitude of social contact, any physical injuries would have likely been noticed by people on campus or those close to Emma.
Obviously, only two people know what really happened in that dorm room in 2012: Emma and her FWB. But since both parties tell wildly different stories, why are we believing a girl with a verifiable track record of blatantly lying…and ignoring the mountain of evidence that suggests no rape took place? Why are we also ignoring Emma’s narcissism and money grubbing?

Oh that’s right, I haven’t gotten to that yet.

During the height of Emma’s performance art piece’s notoriety, she was actually asked to attend President Obama’s State of the Union speech as a special guest of Kirsten Gillibrand, the New York senator. Let’s paint that picture very clearly for you: this is a US senator who is supporting a performance art piece that is based on the principle that a girl was raped, yet no case was ever brought against her rapist because there was no evidence to support her claim, and, in fact, there was a bunch evidence to refute it. Talk about a slap in the face to the justice system. Emma’s FWB is not a criminal, has not been arrested…nothing. But that doesn’t matter to Mrs. Gillibrand, apparently.

During the SOTU speech, Obama talked about a bunch of stuff, but he did not talk about Emma Sulkowicz. He didn’t bring up rape or the sexual assault crisis on college campuses at all. This greatly disappointed Emma:

“I am not going to lie, I was let down because I felt like there were points in his speech where he could have brought it up. I was really hoping he would mention it, since the issue has been raised to a new level.”

Obviously, Emma Sulkowicz thinks it has been “raised to a new level” by Emma Sulkowicz. Later she says:

“Just seeing the president in person was such a wild experience. And shaking John Kerry’s hand was also extremely surreal. He didn’t really know who I was, and even when Senator Gillibrand introduced me no one seemed to know who I was. But that’s okay.”

So Emma gets invited to the SOTU address and is disappointed that it’s not all about her. I mean, John Kerry didn’t even know who she was! You believe that?! The nerve of that guy!

But wait, it gets better. After her walk across the stage to accept her diploma (where the president of Columbia University notably did not shake Emma’s hand) her “Carry That Weight” piece was officially over. What happened to the mattress after that? Emma’s got big plans:

“I have a scenario planned for the exhibition of my piece…If some sort of museum wants to buy it, then I’m open to that. But I’m not going to just throw it away.”

Cha ching! There it is. Emma’s not going to donate the mattress to a woman’s shelter, or put it on display in an art gallery for people to come and see free of charge. Nope…gonna fucking sell that shit. Because, you know, it’s about the art. And women’s rights, or something…nah, how much money are we talking here?

You think this is over now, right? You think that this lying, narcissistic, manipulative money-grubbing girl couldn’t possibly get any worse.

My, how wrong you are. Because only a few days ago, Emma did something no one could ever have anticipated: she posted an explicit video re-enactment of her alleged rape.

You read that right: Emma posted another performance art piece (read: porn video) in which she has consensual sex with a man in her dorm room which eventually escalates into a simulation of a rape. Eventhough Emma’s statement about the video explicitly says that this is not a re-enactment of her alleged rape in 2012, the video follows her alleged sequence of events to a T: they are having consensual sex, eventually the guy slaps her, chokes her, and fucks her in the ass. The time stamp on the video? August 27, 2012, the exact date of her alleged rape. Come on, Emma…who do you think you’re fooling?

Why did she post this video? Her statement about it is so insane that I can’t even really figure it out, but as far as I can tell this “art piece” is intended to inform the viewer that by watching this video, they are participating in her rape. Eventhough Emma uploaded the video to the internet and then promoted it being there (and so did her mother), if you watch the video without her explicit consent (e.g. you know her and she said you could watch it) you are violating her and are a part of her rape. So don’t watch it unless you want to be a rapist! And you know, go to jail. For being a rapist. Because that’s what you’ll be.

As a side note, the video was taken down briefly and then reposted with the timestamp on the video blurred out. Hmmm…wonder what happened there? Probably had nothing to do with the idea that the tape could now be used as evidence against her in a libel claim that her FWB would absolutely fucking win. Nope. Not at all.

Let me wind down this rant here. You get it, right? Emma is cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. The evidence is all over the place that she’s simply not all there and has done some really questionable and sometimes even terrible shit. Then why is she being invited by senators to presidential events? Why are pieces being written on prominent sites like Jezebel, Forward, The Huffington Post, and many others, defending Emma? Why are people calling out anyone who questions what she says as a rape apologist, or a misogynist? Why is it that Emma Sulkowicz is being heralded as a feminist warrior?

Because we all believed Emma. Or at least we really wanted to.

At the beginning of this farce there were people who questioned Emma’s story…people who doubted her claims and saw this as a publicity stunt and cash-grab. Those people were eaten alive by feminist authors, bloggers, and the so-called “Social Justice Warriors” of the internet, who laid out the claim that if you choose not to immediately and unequivocally believe Emma’s story, you are horrible and don’t understand rape or the plight of women in this day and age. And now that Emma’s story has fallen to pieces and her mental instability has been cemented with her simulated rape video statement, no one wants to fall back. No one wants to admit, “Hmmm…those people who questioned Emma at the beginning were right.” No one wants to do that because that will make it easier for people to deny women’s rape allegations in the future. And that is a fucking HUGE step back for women and feminism.

I am a feminist. I’m a white cis-gendered heterosexual male, but goddamn it, I’m a feminist. Eloise is a feminist…most of the women in my life are feminists, and most of the men are too. Emma Sulkowicz doesn’t speak for us, and she shouldn’t speak for you, either. She shouldn’t speak for anyone, not even herself! The girl clearly has major issues and, if there is any justice in this world, is going to be caught up in a legal shitstorm in which she might even do prison time.

And although it may seem like I’m excited and happy to tear down Emma’s story and show you who she really is, believe me that couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m devastated. Because when I was sitting with Eloise at that dinner table talking about Emma’s story when I first heard it, I was filled with hope. I was hopeful that her statement would be the proverbial straw on the camel’s back and it would cause some real change to happen. That change could have come from the Rolling Stone piece about the girl getting gang raped, but since that was proven to be false only a few months prior, THIS one is going to be “the one”.

But no. Here I am talking about how yet another girl has most likely made up yet another rape that we all attached to as if it were truth. And with the closing of this article, we all have to sigh and brace ourselves for the fallout: our blind acceptance of Emma Sulkowicz’s story has hurt feminism instead of helping it. Shame on Emma Sulkowicz…but shame on us, too.

*Unlike a lot of news agencies, I have chosen not to use the accused’s name anywhere in this article. If that respect is given to victims of sexual assault, then that respect should be given to victims of false rape allegations as well.

NOTE FROM SCOTT: I realize that it can be difficult to share articles I write since Sexpressed is a NSFW website. If you would like to cut-and-paste my work here and put the article in a SFW format on your Facebook, tumblr, or something along those lines, please feel free to do so. Just make sure you give me proper credit and a link to the original page somewhere in your post. Thanks!

If you are looking to find out if a guy wants you bad, simply continue with this article as it contains signs that can help you know how badly a guy wants you.

Sacrifice

A sign a guy wants you so bad is he will not mind sacrificing for you to be happy. Making you happy might cost him a lot. But he will do it anyway. Although he will always be happy you get what you need, he will even be happier if you get it from him. He will be quite sad if he is comfortable but notices you are unhappy.

Increased Communication

The level of communication between two people is an indication of how close they are. If a guy wants you bad, he will always ensure you both have the right level of communication. If he is into you but not spending time with you on the phone, he most likely does not have your number yet. He, however, will go to any length to ensure he gets your number. He could do this from mutual, friends or even from you. As soon as he has your number saved in his phone, he will ensure he stays in touch with you constantly either through call or chats.

Beyond just being in touch with you through calls and chats, he will also want to spend time with you in person. If you are not interested in seeing him physically, he most likely will not allow your rejection to get to him.

He Will Avoid Getting You Angry

One sign to look out for if you are wondering how much a guy is into you is how much effort he puts into making you happy. Often, guys make a lot of effort to ensure the girl they are into always stays happy. They will do about anything to avoid her getting hurt even if it means them getting hurt themselves.

A guy that is very much interested in a girl will never hesitate when she has a need. A lot of times this is done to keep her happy.

He Will Shower You with Compliments

This is something to expect from any guy that is interested in you genuinely. Complimenting a girl is a way lots of guys make a girl know they are interested in her.

He Will Always Appreciate You

If all you do for him is say “hi” in the morning, you can be certain he will appreciate you for it. In addition to appreciating your greeting, he will also show a great deal of appreciation for any time you give to him. While appreciating you, he might not go-ahead to tell you what exactly it is that he feels. You, however, will not need to ask as he will reveal what he feels with his actions.

In addition to appreciating the little time you give him, he will also appreciate your words, your appearance and your smile every time.

He Will Always be Proud of You

Not everyone is proud of the people in their lives. Regardless of this, when a guy wants you bad, you can be sure he will be proud of you regardless of what the circumstance is. He will also want to show you to his family and finds without being ashamed. The implication of this is he will bring up ideas that will make you both go out together frequently. The only time he might want to keep you away from people, is if doing so will help you avoid getting hurt.

He most likely will not ask for Sex

This is an important sign to lookout for. When a man is sincerely into a woman, he most likely will not ask for sex. While he will not reject sex, he will let things happen naturally.

When a man is not truly interested in a woman, he will always pester her for sex because all he is really interested in is bedding her. Also, if you notice a guy is willing to spend a lot of time with you and does not disturb you for sex, he just might be very much into you and does not want to do anything that will make him lose you.