>Anyone been watching Ruby Wax's interview/dinner thingy? I do think this is excellent - but was wholly put off when say David Baddiel telling Ruby:
>
>1) He likes anal sex with women.

Don't think this is a crime, to be honest. I imagine a lot more people have anal sex than you seem to imagine.

>2) When Rosanne asked him whether the women enjoyed it, just said "I'm not going to ask such a question".... makes me wonder whether he can remember or not, or did it not matter?

Imagine being asked this question yourself (if you were a man, obviously, or you could think of some corollary as a woman): would you answer on behalf of people you've slept with? You'd hope the their response would be 'yes', but perhaps, not unfairly, you might not want to bracket everyone you've had sex with with one answer. Or rather, you may not want to list your ex-partners in discuss their sex lives in detail. After all he was talking about a section of his book (and by extension his own experience) which was quite sensibly justified as an attempt to do a 'different' kind of sex scene.

>3) Said that he has dreams of watching volience (or accidents - can't remember) in which he is mastubating whilst watching (V DISTURBING!!!)

I believe he said this was one of the effects of being on Prozac. Not sure you can really read to much into people's dreams anyway, let alone ones that they have on prescription drugs.

>4) That he used to abuse his position as a "well known" comic (notice I did NOT say famouse) to sleep with women/girls ("But legal" as he put it).

I think probably every famous person comes up against this moral dilemma, and since most comedians are generally quite unconfident people (hence the brash onstage personnas), the opportunity to have sex with people who are throwing themselves at you can, I imagine, seem quite inviting. After all, this is the year 2000. Frivolous sexual relationships are not something we necessarily condemn anymore. And 'but legal' does indeed mean legal. Any more information on which to make a moral judgement just wasn't given to the audience.


>Hmm - nice bloke, think I might go and buy his book. I'm really persuaded by this alternative plugging technique.
>
>
>NOT!
>

Time for Bed is good entertainment, Whatever Love Means is a much maturer read. You may or may not like it, but it seems like you read to much into what he said on Ruby. I don't want you to buy his books, just to perhaps consider a little more which conclusions you are jumping to about people whose words are exposed to the public in such a conversational situation.

For me, Ruby has been one of the few shows I really enjoy watching recently, the Baddiel/Roseanne/LaPlante one in particular, as well as the John Diamond/Jonathan Harvey(?)/Faith Healer one. More power to Wax's elbow. And Roseanne's looking great don't you think? Seems to have got back some of her old spunk...

At least Baddiel was being honest. And loads of guys I work with enjoy anal sex, and so do their ladies.

I respect DB more for being truthful.

LaPlante and Rosanne were drooling over the subject of a serial killer who kept his mother's head in the fridge and fucked it, just minutes before they turned on DB for admitting to enjoying what ammounts to nothing more than a sexual act between two *consenting* adults...this showed up their distaste for the subject of anal sex as the homophobia-tinged reactionary bollocks it was. If Baddiel had been a gay man talking about anal sex, would their reaction have been so strong?

Heterosexual anal sex is actually illegal, but there are never any prosecutions. (True)

Except if there was a complaint of assault, of course. As with all sex crimes, a case can't start without one of the people involved giving evidence. Which they wouldn't, if they were consenting.

Remember the routine Baddiel used to do about the practice of inserting little descriptive nicknames into celebs' names? Ended with him shouting "Anne 'Cot Death' Diamond"?

David "Anal Sex" Baddiel, they'll be calling him now.

>Hmm - nice bloke, think I might go and buy his book. I'm really persuaded by this alternative plugging technique.


Tell us more about this "alternative plugging technique". Do you need any special equipment?

You just need a compliant lady, apparently.

As it happens, I was listening to R4 early on Sunday morning. They had one of those pointless 2-sided 'debates' between 2 people whose entire point is not to recognise each other's existence, discussing something neither of them can possible offer anything original about eg. (they might as well try:) a Mullah and a Baptist minister debate the existence of the Yeti - you know what I mean.

This time it was someone from "The Christian Institute" taking issue with some gay rights campaigner (can't remember who, it wasn't Tatchell though) about sex education, or something, but halfway through the Christian claimed that the blood transfusion service does not allow donations from people who've had anal sex within some time period.

Is that true, Doc?

And if it isn't, I think we should deluge 'Feedback' with complaints about how he got away with telling such a fib.

Gay men are never allowed to donate blood.

I don't think women are either, if they've had sex with a man who has had anal sex.

Pretty sure this is what I read the last time I went along.

>the Christian claimed that the blood transfusion service does not allow donations from people who've had anal sex within some time period.

They say you shouldn't give blood if you are 'A man who has had sex with another man'

"As with all sex crimes, a case can't start without one of the people involved giving evidence."

Except for the case of incest.

>4) That he used to abuse his position as a "well known" comic (notice I did NOT say famouse) to sleep with women/girls ("But legal" as he put it).
>

Well this isn't necessarily taking advantage as such. If you ask me comics who are as generous to 'give back' to the fans are rather commendable people. Often fans want a piece of their favourite celeb and providing them with what they've been pining for must require dedication. It's no wonder he likes to vary the girth of his gift. He wouldn't want the recipient to feel fobbed off.

>"As with all sex crimes, a case can't start without one of the people involved giving evidence."
>
>Except for the case of incest.

Why would the DNA samples then be too in inseperable?

The idea of Baddiel hanging out the back of some poor tennage groupie is making me sick.

Does that make me anophobic? Anti-semitic? Just someone who find s Baddiel's constant boasting about his sex life slightly unnerving?

I like the way this thread makes it look like we're all being interviewed by Ruby Wax.