Rrose Sélavy

"different protect may have darkness troops rooted of world refuse of For freedom freedom and for for God sake of in hope decency democracy future live God free a in light this a victory Thank power and never and a you may dignity and to you patience a bless hopelessness principle Russia our all and Ukraine For brighter will remain future be and cannot defend possibilities and God's your our will man people God We in" (Authentic Dada Poem, source: Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr, POTUS №.46; temper tantrum in a press conference, March 2022, demanding the President of the Russian Federation be removed from office: here)

All human societies have to deal one way or another with the biological fact of sexual reproduction and its effects in the psychological sphere of each individual member of the society. They cannot avoid it. Parthenogenesis is not an option and all societies seek to perpetuate themselves to feed the faces of the few individuals who gain social control over all the rest, nominally, in almsot all case, for the latter's own good but mainly to feed their own faces at the latter's expense. Nor can they castrate them all for then they and their progeny would have to wipe their own asses which does not appeal to them. What is to be done about Eros?

In a misleadingly titlde book "The origin f sodomy in Chrisian theology", Notre Dame University professor of medieval theology spells out the general realisty of the situation clearly:

"The power of reproduction is for the good of the species, and the human legislator acts on behalf of the species in establishing monogamous unions of one man with one woman. Individual genital organs are to be used only for a power of the species. The organs are, as it were, on loan from the species and – more important – subject to an exercise of eminent domain by the city." (Mark D. Jordan, "The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology", University of Chicago Press, 1997, p. 126)

In "fighting for Life, Walter Ong finishes of fthe story: Males are the expendible gender since one male cn inseminate many females so we can kill a lot of them in wars and the society still reproduce itself. Females are the single point of failure since onf female can, on average produce at mos tone replacement/augmentation citizen per year, so the baby facgories do not get slaughtred on the battlefield, and, qhile Dr. Ong sods not say this, obviously, the femles are sentimentalized as vulnerablehelpless creatures to help motivate tht males to protct them b=frm being raped by their country's evil enemy. Woman have only one asset: their genital organs, which they are socially conditioned to only offer to males who protct them fro the evil enemy. And all good citizens dutifully do the necdssary biological act to keep he society from going out of business due to the existing soldiers and baby factories aging out (they all eventaully die, too).

In"The age of beloeds", however, Professor of Islamic stdies form The University of Washington (not Dr ong's Washingon University in St. Louis Missouri), spills the beans on the other half of this story: Societies don;t only like cannon foder and foetus factories; they also, within limits, like intelectuals: persons whose minds not just their bodies can contribut to the war effort. But ther eis a problem here: While the masses cannot control their hormones an etherfore need religion and "virtue", the intellectuals don't always buy it. So the people who run the society will often make a pact with the devil: The intellectuals can enjoy what the masses must be prevented from knowing about so long as they keep it themselves. If the sexually represses herd of 2-legged sheep ever find out about what they can't have, they will want it but cannot handle it since then they might not do their duty for their country, so then the rulers make a big dtodo about punishing th eintellectuals for their sins and the masses are kept happy, knwing tht all's right with the world.

Big choice for civilization, anent human persons' biologically given sexual component: Diminish or refine?

*      *      *      *      *      *      *

My (BMcC[18-11-46-503]) misfortune was to be born among the masses but not be one of them. Is= shoukd at birth either have been taken aay form my biological parents and given to an intellectual coupleto raise as an intellectual, or else have been killed. In ht Oedipus tragedy, Laius should either have shaped up or put a stake theough the baby's heart and hammered it in with havy axe, insead of giving the child to some shepherds to knock off, which they didn't, just leaving him on a hillside to die but somebody found him and sved him. Drats!

I have only recently (+2023.05.16) thought through the implictions that my Freshman college roommate's best friend was a sne of the last President of the Spanish Republic (I personally met him several time). NIMBY.

*      *      *      *      *      *      *

So let me tex your patientce no more with the problem but get on to the soluition: I chouls havvebeen childreared in a home where every thing swas of high quality craftspersonship and infused with subtle erotic energy. Not ses: orgasms not babies are the goal and there are many ways to enjoy the former without paynig the price of thel ter even without contraceptives. As the New York City Department of Public Health adviced at the start of the Covid pandemic:

"You are you own safest sex partner."

But, obviously, that's jus tthe fallback position(pun intendted) when all else fails. My parents should have hadfriends with girls like I ws a boy. And we should ahave all played nicely together. Again, NIMBY.

+2024.02.12 v049
 PreviousReturn to Table of contents
⇒ L.H.O.O.Q., Marcel Duchamp!Next
Unfortunate for themself, the person who lacks one; unfortunate for others, the person that is one. Don't be an a**hole!
This page has been validated as HTML 5.