Prev2a.gifWelcome

Shame! The de-erotization of the human lifeworld

"Why am I dying to live, if I am only living to die?" (Cat Stevens, aka: Yusef)


Homer Simpson eating a donut in preparation for dying for his country.

+2021.05.08. The more I learn each day, the more disgusted I become with ever more things. I this day came across a research article: Sigmund Freud and male genital mutilation. I think the ending of Italo Svevo's novel which I read when I was young and have completely forgotten except for the ending sums up what most of the social surround to which I have been subjected and subjugated deserves; not all of it, just almost all of it: For somebody to burrow to the center of the earth and there set off a huge explosion which would cleanse this part of the universe. "the Them", who, to modify a phrase from Nietzsche, have sunk so low that they have not done the right thing and killed themselves. If I had not been born I would not know, or a fortiori: have experienced, what "the Them" was/were going to do to hurt me. "the Them" has socio-political power so "theThem" gets away with it, from the Wokies to the Trumpies and most of the population in between. Have you, my reader, ever encountered "the Them"? You might have, because "the Them" is/are all over the earth, including, of course: Smilng faces.


Alas, as always, I (BMcC[18-11-46-503]) have failed to find the hidden meaning so I must take notes by rote. I always used Marcel Duchamp's "Rrose Selavy", and just assumed it referred to him having constructed a female persona for himself., which sounded like a good idea to me. But then I read in Wikipedia that "Rrose" is pronounced: "Eros", so the name means "physical love is life", which wheel I have reinvented in this page in APtS. so there is no point in you wasting your time to read it, my reader. I would say GOTO somewhere but GOTO's (in computer programing) have been verboten since the late 1970's thanks to great visionary schoolmarms like eponymous Edward Yourdon who hawked egoless programming, thank you Don [Nix].

I am so stupid to be unable to find hidden meanings that the St. Paul's Day Carcel for Pubscent Male Virgins ("See no jock sex, hear no jock sex, speak no jock sex → except for the big 2001 sex scandal...") should have expelled me and set me out to be run over be an automobile (or better, a big school bus) on Falls Road (the country road just outside the institution's main entrance gate, with a limited visiblility uphill curve just before the gate, perfect for setting out roadkill!), to become stew meat for élève bourguignon for their faculty lunch (OK, they prefer charcoal grilled student, no problem, we'll light up the grill...), perhaps with Mr. "Foggy" Warner's Alzheimers' brains tartare appetizer? I am sure all the faculty would agree that stewed (or grilled) student makes a 💗hearty repast, energizing them all to go back to hack teach the remaining students' afternoon periods (which are not menstrual but diurnal except on weekends). But there's a problem with this menu: If (e.g.) there are 31 students in the class, then after 31 school days there will be not more students left, and so this dish will have to go off the menu when the whole student body have been consumed. Let's give the kids pop quizes for our quick afternoon snack, men! Hike!


I have found a scholarly statement of what I have slowly been coming to figure out about universal the ravage and pilllage ("rape") by my social surround which destroys all value in living! I am enraged!

...the idea of "sexuality" (as in "hetero-sexuality" or "homo-sexuality" or "bi-sexuality") "implies the existence of a separate sexual domain within the larger field of man's psychophysical nature" and "requires the conceptual demarcation and isolation of that domain from other, more traditional, territories of personal and social life that cut across it.... nor did sexual preference constitute an identity any more than would any other preference: a love of hot baths of an antipathy to peas, for example."(Walter G. Andrews, "The Age of Beloveds", p. 13)

Actually, I am going to use this quote somewhat differently than I interpret its intent. I believe the original intent is ideologically offensive enough to make just about every right thinking person unhappy, including many of those who lean left: That until maybe The Enlightenment or some time before in Western Europe, in much if not most or all of the civilized world it was considered normal and natural for adult males to have sex with boys well under the age of sixteen and women relatively indiscriminately, with boys often being preferred to women. To be fixated on one gender would have been considered unusual in the same way as a male being attracted to only blonde females would be considered today: odd but not "deviant" like being attracted to sheep, or whatever.

Such behavior in 2021 USA would, of course, be felonious. What would have been frowned upon would have been gluttonous sex: f*cking everything all the time, but the objection here would have been similar to how it would be thought about a person who drank alcohol to the point of picking fights with people every nite and not remembering they did anything the next morning: immoderation. Let me note that the person writing this seems to have been a mild mannered married with children and not cheating on his wife professor of Medieval Islamic studies, not a fire breathing LGBTQ whatever Savonarola with flipped polarity professor of some kind of cooked-up Everybody-Must-Be-Politically-Correct studies or some such. And, yes the statement is doubly politically incorrect, for it seems to be stating things from a men are dominant perspective which I suspect the author does not himself subscribe to, but which, nonetheless he is not recanting talking about without crossing his heart and hoping to die: He is stating what should be obvious to everyone: Persons are creatures of their place and time, and things change in this world.

I want to use the quote somewhat differently, like I am using Simon the children's book cat's proclamation: "I am cat just like you!" not to mean he is cat like a lion or a tiger but rather that we humans are cats and for that reason he is just like us, i.e., in my repurposing of his assertion, we humans are cats just like Simon. I have not yet triued eating cat food, but it would be far better than having to eat crow, not avian but humiliational. Meow!

I am asserting that everything in the would human lifeworld (our social surround) is by nature infused with sexual energy. Maybe Wilhelm Riech thought something like this? But he was off on orgone generator machines to create erotic energy, unleess I am mistaken, whereas I am asserting that the sexual energy which was already there in social life and all its contents (things), has been ripped off, leaving only a tasteless Lumpenwelt, like punctured and deflated Baby Trump balloon with all the identifying features like his diaper and face effaced, or maybe a recycled condom from one of Homer's Cyclopeans. Who wants it? But for the man who has only a hammer, everything is a nail. So we get by.

I am not defending male penetration ideology. I would include women and children on the sending as well as the receiving side. Like bonobos, for the analogy of man's closest animal relative analogy: pygmy chimpanzees who make love as promiscuously as civilized men, women and others in our social surrounds make war. Chastity is sort of like anorexia or better: abstaining sex is like abstaining from food. (ESD)

Nor am I enraged that people cannot copulate all over the place. I don't care about reproduction of species life, especiallywith 7.94 * 10 ** 9 warm squirming human bodies already promiscuously breathing all over the place and it gets worse from there, of course. And I'm not talking about women (or man) going around in public with clothes that more exaggerate secondary sexual characteristics than modestly keep them private, or males exposing their nipples on public beaches. And part of it is not straightforwardly sexual at all, like I find perverse people's social custom of celebrating other people's happy life events (like having made it from foetus-to-infant for another year in one piece), by sending them dead flowers. Should public multi-user restrooms be "unisex"? I think the solution is to have all public restrooms be single-occupancy. If modesty did not mean chastity, it would be good.

And it's not even so altogether far-fetched. I was watching a show on the Smithsonian Channel about super-car factories in Modena Italy. Young men desire to get jobs in these places where automobile production is hand-work assisted by machines, not machines being served by humans, building the cars. These manly men caress their car bodies. (Might that encourage them to caress their wives or girlfriends when they get home after work if the latter measure up, too?) There you have it: Everything should be carressable. I can caress my coffee cup which was handmade by a master potter -- not so much a Styrofoam cup from a plastic bag of 50 of them stacked together and after the b/s meeting you're taking the coffee to is over the cup goes in the trash can if you're decent about it. I want a world in which handling objects of daily use make you feel sexy, even you have had a discharge of physiological hormonal excitation recently.

Picture of a bipedal hominid that in a telephone call recorded by Richard Nixon called United Nations ambassadors from Africa: monkeys. Clearly, this provides evidence it had some capacity to put together and emit parsable sentences in the English language.

The context of the original quote does, however, address another unpopular issue in current society: If you are going to have single gender environments, you should welcome same gender sexual interactions: Locker rooms in gyms are a prime example, although the historical context accompanying the quote was army maneuvers. Let's get rid of all single gender situations! Let a thousand flowers blossom! But "Just say no!" to weeds, such as Ronnie and Nancy Reagans of whatever gender or mix of genders or lack of whatever. I think it is OK to be nauseated by the behavior of prigs and the bodies of middle aging males who look like they pregnant. (I (BMcC) find pregnant females unattractive, as well.)

Sex without sexuality

Another statement in the essay cited above seems to me another indictment of my social surround of origin:

"...Christianity. Thus, in general, and over time, love was spiritualized and dissociated (or seen as separable) from the erotic; sexuality (the affective and imaginary part of sexual behavior) was regarded with suspicion, sex was strongly linked to monogamous marriage and reproduction; austerity in sexual matters was highly valued: and the body was divided into sites for various manifestations of sin" (ibid. p. 15)

In other words, a person can undergo various physiological processes such as same or other gender copulation and have no sexuality whatever, and the same or other person can maudlinly project incorporeal little red Valentine hearts above their brows without having any sexuality either. Thus we have protestants who approve contraception and grandparents who entirely innocently melodramatize and fawn over their grandkids, no matter how nubile the bodies of the latter. They think no impure thoughts and therefore they are free of sin. I was going to write they think none other than G-rated thoughts but that would miss the point that violence often is G-rated, provided its not realistic, of course, like Ronnie Raygun cracking a joke about jelly beans or something on his way to the operating rtheater to have a bullet removed that missed his cardiac organ (did he have any "heart" for suffering people?) by millimeters. You just have to win one for a gipper who was able to stay in role after a member of the audience tried to stop the show. It's a prude's paradise: gender without sex (separate schools for boys and girls, so jocks can fuck [whatever they call them]s they hook up with outside school somehow because necessity is the mother of invention; previously they visited prostitutes), and sex without sexuality (adults generally know where babies come from even if they can't tell their a**es from a hole in the ground, and it's not the stork, and how we sentimentalize over "blessed events" and potentially fatal postpartum hemorrhaging never occurs).

The author of my quotes even fesses up that in a previous book he had permitted the translating graduate student to substitute "she" for 'he" to avoid trouble. Parents and teaches tell children that honesty is the best policy: Confess your misdemeanors, kids, so we who have social power to block you from reminding us of our crimes can get off on punishing you with impunity! My thought du jour? Die Scheißestückwelt.

A caressable world, a world full of joyous, intelligent (wise) erotic energy, is what my social surround has deprived me of. Let them eat It's a wonder it's allowed to call it bread ("Wonder Bread")! Damn them all.  
 
 

+2022.11.19 v001
 Prev2a.gifReturn to Table of contents
⇒ Go to: Ornament and crimeNext2a.gif


BMcC signature seal stampInvenit et fecit


This page has been validated as HTML 5.