“If the fact that sex existed prior to the 1950s blows your mind, this may be the podcast for you.
Any episode promising a broad topic is going to be maybe 2 minutes of interview time about the majority of the topics history before settling in probably modern europe. This would be less annoying if they changed the titles or description to reflect the content, like ‘sex toys in the 19th century’ or ‘the history of the vibrator’ for an episode that barely touches on anything else. Maybe I wanted to learn about ancient dildos in the ‘sex toys’ episode!
The interviewees sometimes have a notable agenda that strongly detracts from the history being presented. the corset episode is a good example, the interviewee is desperately trying to convince the audience that wearing corsets is radical and feminist throughout history, rather than just presenting the item’s actual complex history and the nuance surrounding it. (Lets be clear- there’s a huge difference between understanding and analyzing history through an intersectional feminist lens, and presenting a whitewashed or incomplete view to be appealing to your personal tastes).
The host’s questions tend to be observations of ‘Wow this is awesome and girlpower!’ ‘Oh no! This is NOT awesome or girlpower!’. ‘Wow, this is SO naughty!’ Sometimes it seems like she isn’t listening or doesn’t understand the topic, I would hope that’s just an attempt at being a voice for the audience, but it’s just irritating.
Maybe the show will improve as it goes on, but as it stands it’s a disappointment.”
hagfish slime via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
06/22/22