I know that as a feminist, i'm supposed to let him have it. But I think Howard Stern is trying to make two very important statements:
1.) Yes, white men can have geri curls.
2.) When you look like the unfortunate-looking love child of Slash and Keith Richards you are bound to have a successful career as a "media mogul".
I also understand that were it not for the Howard Stern Show, his current fanbase of ball-scratching Frat Boys with names "Donny" who drown their post-grad grief in an ice cold Budlight while Green Day blairs from the stereo in the background--these All-American guys would have nothing to watch. No where to go. No way of bonding with their fellow ball-scratching cavemen. No way of being entertained.
And isn't that the motive behind everything Howard-esque?
So when he features pseudo-lesbians who spend an entire ten minutes playing tonsil-hockey, he's trying to entertain you. And when he's interviewing some volleyball-titied ex-porn star with an I.Q of akin to a small hamster, he's trying to entertain you. When he pries his female celebrity guests for sex-life secrets and they make up outlandish stories about what turns them on for the sake of showbiz, both him, and her, are trying to entertain you. And of course, when he volunteers women for humiliating, dehumanizing acts (you know, like being handcuffed to a bed, legs spread-eagled, while being tickled with a feather) he's trying to--for the love of the gerri curl!-entertain you.
And he's trying to convey that message quite loud and clear.
But I hear you, Howie. I hear you.