Strib Shocker: Sex column spiked over blowjob description
Sexpert Alexis McKinnis, author of “Alexis on the Sexes," seemed to be making that point exactly in her personal blog when she complained to her readers that her most recent column was "canned and replaced" by editors at Vita.mn due to her "apparent over-descriptiveness on how to give proper head to the man in your life."
I'm bitter, very bitter, about it right now, but my editor has my back on this one (as usual) and hopefully the informative column will see the light of day soon.
It's especially puzzling because the piece wasn't any more descriptive than my cunnilingus or anal sex tutorials. I've actually written about giving girl head more than once, but I guess someone had a problem with penises. I rather like them myself.
When the decision was made to yank the problematic penis column, that left a big gaping hole that needed to be filled. So the faux alt cobbled together online reader feedback from a recent column on "the Shocker." According to Wikipedia, the Shocker involves "inserting the index and middle fingers into the vagina and the little finger into the unwitting anus, hence the 'shock'…" Or, as one Vita.mn reader so delicately put it: "two in the pink, one in the stink."
Good thing we didn't have to read that offensive column about blowjobs!
Lucky for us, the nannies at the daily are hard at work removing the offensive language in the original column, which is set to debut Thursday. Vita.mn editor Simon Groebner tells us in an email that Alexis's column "was not killed or censored," but rather "it was held for revision." When pushed for further information about these so-called revisions, Groebner went frigid, writing:
I'm not gonna discuss my edit process. This is a non-issue. You can read it on Thursday at www.vita.mn; let me know what you think.
Next we reached Alexis herself, who had touched off the whole issue by blabbing on her blog. Apparently the ensuing days had quelled her outrage, because she sent us an email implying that somehow we were the ones in the tizzy. She asserted that it was all a tempest in a teacup, which was in stark contrast to the much more bombastic language she had used in the comments section of her own blog:
Well, by definition it was canned, censored and edited. And the quality was perfectly fine, unlike the replacement that ran, for which I am still receiving emails and text messages from friends to the effect of "what is this craptastic thing?" If they're saying what's on their mind, I shudder to imagine what the rest of my readers were thinking.
Posted by: Alexis | April 19, 2008 at 08:56 PM
We wish we could share with you her exact words from the email, but we can't, because Alexis threatened to sue us if we did.
It's ironic that a columnist from the Star Tribune--a newspaper that depends on freedom of speech and frequently advocates for more openness from public officials--would threaten legal action against us for reporting the news. It's a stark departure from Editor Nancy Barnes recent column, "How we respond to reader concerns," in which she promised that the local daily would be more open about how its decisions are made:
To help communicate what we are doing and why, top editors will share this column with me most weeks. We will also be available in a blog online, to post comments and hear your thoughts. You can find us at www.startribune.com/blogs/editors.
Some readers have told me that they no longer know where to call with corrections and concerns. We have staff members available to take your calls at 612-673-4414. If they cannot handle your concerns, they will find someone who will. In addition to these efforts, I have asked all top editors to be responsible for responding to reader concerns regarding their sections and any changes they are making. You'll find those names and numbers here.
We called the numbers and got the runaround. You'd have more luck trying to shake information out of MnDOT.
But what do you expect from a faux alt? It wants to be edgy, as long as it doesn't offend anybody. It wants to have a sex column, as long as it isn't too sexy. And it opposes censorship, unless it's doing the censoring, in which case it will threaten to sue you.
We haven't seen this much hypocrisy over a blowjob since the Republicans went after Bill Clinton!
We eagerly anticipate the expurgated column Thursday, but in the meantime, those who want to read a real sex columnist should check out Dan Savage.