Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/002988.php on line 106

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/002988.php on line 106
May 25, 2006
All About Them

It must be very strange to have a penis. All you ever think about is sticking it in something.

Okay, I'm done making obnoxious and sweeping generalizations.

We're all adults here, right?

Seriously, as the gender wars continue to play out, I think women should occasionally take a few moments to feel sympathy for men. Many of them have brains, compassion, ambition, talent, and great senses of humor. Sadly, they're entirely ruled by the functionality (or otherwise) of a three-inch nub of flesh. (Most men. Average. Resting state.) Changing this three-inch nub to a five-inch or six-inch nub for a few minutes a day is why they're on the planet.

Women have a real function. They grow babies and they can feed babies from their own bodies. Women have a whole, rounded purpose. Not just fifteen minutes of whoopee! followed by nine months of trying to manufacture a more reliable piece of latex.

It might not be so bad if "civilization" wasn't so screwed up about sex. I mean, is it not enough that a sentient brain is going to create problems and issues for itself without assistance?

No, "society" has to jump into the middle of one of the most fundamental of drives and make a lot of pointless and irrational rules, not only about what you can do and with whom (and in what position), but about how you're supposed to feel about it as you do it.

Society says, "boys want it all the time" and boys feel like they should want it all the time, regardless of whether or not their personal biological drive is that strong. If they don't want it all the time, they worry that they're abnormal. They feel guilty.

At the same time, of course, society says, "it's wrong, it's dirty, it's bad" so those same boys are lead to feeling guilty over even thinking about it. They feel guilty for not thinking about it enough and then when they do think about it, they feel guilty.

I imagine that this leads to confusion.

Of course, I hear about some guy molesting someone, and my first thought is that he should be neutered, but that's just wrong. The problem isn't in his penis. It's in his brain.

How much complicity does society share for this? How much punishment should be doled out to your parents?

We don't shape ourselves. We're formed by the craziness of our families and the conflicted messages drilled into us by the world around us.

Yes, we have the choice to act, or not act, in every situation, but that choice is only meaningful when it's a choice being made by a sane person.

Sometimes I think about weird things when what I should be doing is working.

Posted by AnneZook at 11:30 AM


I imagine that this leads to confusion.....

Yeah, but that's OK. If either of those messages were unadulterated, we'd be in deep.... trouble.

The problem isn't in his penis. It's in his brain.

Thus the invention of "chemical castration" using regular doses of (something, I'm not sure what) to reduce (not, apparently, eliminate) urges and function.

Posted by: Jonathan Dresner at May 25, 2006 12:44 PM

Thought you were a decent writer until this crap: "Women have a real function."

Posted by: man at May 25, 2006 07:49 PM

Chill, man. She's talking about sex and reproduction: if you're offended by it.... adopt, or something.

Posted by: Ahistoricality at May 25, 2006 08:16 PM

Jonathan - I hadn't thought about the potential problems from an unmixed message. Interesting thought.

I wouldn't care to see either of those messages delivered without leavening. There are saner options....

I'm no one's expert on the topic of crime, punishment, and psychology. The idea of chemical castration bothers me. It's not that I can't see the possible benefit to society (or potential victims) in certain extreme cases, but...well, I can't put it into words. In any case, I was really more pondering, forgive the ambiguous term, "normal" men more than those so messed up that such an extreme measure might be called for.

Posted by: Anne at May 26, 2006 08:22 AM

Thanks for addressing man's complaint, Ahistoricality. I swear, that possible interpretation of my words never crossed my mind.) (And I can't believe there's anyone who reads this blog who isn't under the impression that I'm a big fan :) of men in general.)

(Which very nearly leads me back to a side-rant I've made a few times about people getting what they expect. About if you're looking to be bashed, discriminated against, or mistreated, you're far more likely to interpret someone else's behavior in those terms. That you're more likely to perceive these behaviors because that's the filter you use.)

(I've been feeling rather psycho/sociological recently.)

(Not to mention excessively parenthetical.)

Posted by: Anne at May 26, 2006 08:27 AM

Anne, I'm not a big fan of chemical castration, either (policy, that is): there's evidence that it doesn't actually work all that well, and it raises all kinds of questions about perpetual punishment and the medicalization of criminal behavior (and the criminalization of medical problems), and predictibility....

I don't really think that either message -- gotta have it / dirty -- is all that healthy, and I'd like to se both phased out entirely, but they need to be phased out together, because any social environment in which one is dominant would be unhealthy.

Is it just me or is it odd that man chose to remain anonymous? Is he that frightened of you? Or is there really an Ur-Male running around the net.....

Posted by: Jonathan Dresner at May 26, 2006 02:41 PM

Very true. What we need is a new, healthier message. (Well, messages. For both males and females.)

Healthier messages could only be produced by a healthier society, which creates some problems. Parental and even school training is only going to go so far. As long as billboards, magazines, comic books, movies and television are preaching the same old message(s), nothing will change.

(How can man be afraid of me? Who'd be afraid of me?)

(I assumed it was someone who wanted to make the remark but didn't want to say it under a recognizable name. I could check out the IP address since my system logs them, but I don't care that much. If there was potential for my remarks to be misread in that fashion, I'd rather have it acknowledged openly so I can assure my readers that that was not what I intended.)

Posted by: Anne at May 26, 2006 04:20 PM

But in a way, that's the point.

Posted by: Darius at May 27, 2006 01:55 PM