She also *could* be held hostage by evil sex-loving aliens but I don’t see why we should assume that

Have you ever been invited to a fancy dinner but annoyingly not been in the mood to eat? What if it were like that for every meal?

Is it really as open and shut as that? I thought there was at least some reason to believe he might really not have done it.

Is it really that open and shut a case? I haven’t been paying especially close attention but I thought there was at least some reason to believe he might in fact not have done it.

They’re no sure whether there is a serial killer because sometimes sex workers disappear for non-serial-killer related reasons. I thought that was pretty clear from the statement honestly.

...with this one weird trick

Presumably their fame, physical attractiveness, glamour, and millions of dollars

Not to be pedantic, but I do think it is pretty clearly about making her look bad (otherwise it wouldn’t violate her privacy)

it actually seems quite likely that this was *literally* the work of ‘rebellious’ high school kids with sharpies

Okay yes but you actually wouldn’t break up with a guy who didn’t have a penis?

He also might have just made out with them or only gone down on them or something. Who knows?

r/tumblrinaction

The boundary is 100% acceptable. But there should be attention paid to your partner's enjoyment - orgasm or no - within those boundaries, and the article really makes it sound like she doesn't give a shit. Why not just get a vibrator?

Your attitude, while quite reasonable, is also very different from the one the article presents, which isn't so much "I have limits" as "I don't want to do *anything* for my partner's pleasure". Suppose I'm hooking up with you but I have a weird thing about performing oral. The correct attitude isn't "sorry I don't…

This would be true except that she is actually not willing to provide her casual guy with *any* orgasms (it says so in the article). At that point they really are kind of equivalent.

It's not so much the actual blowjobs as her general attitude towards sex that I find a bit off-putting: it's all about the raw physical sensation; any time I spend pleasuring my partner is time I'm not receiving pleasure so what's the point; my future partners are somehow accountable for my previous ones.

She really is kind of saying that though: The only thing I give him in return is a pat on the back for doing a good job.

Is that socially acceptable? I would kind of automatically assume the guy in question was an asshole. But I'm a man and run in pretty liberal circles so maybe my perspective is skewed.

Again, it's more her unwillingness to pleasure her partner *at all* than the actual blowjobs.

Okay it's the Internet and tensions can be high but honestly he didn't say anything remotely like that

No, not necessarily, but there's a heavy subtext in this specific case that she gets no enjoyment out of pleasuring her partners, which yes probably means she isn't much fun to sleep with.