There's a problem in this country, and even in this blogosphere and it's all about sex. More accurately, it's about lack of good information about sex. Everybody has a general idea of how it works, but the particulars are a little fuzzy to some of us. So let's address some of the problems that some people - ok, mostly men - seem to be having.
First, they complain about women bloggers talking about subjects that only affect women, like menstruation. Let me explain a little about this monthly event. Men and women both have the same hormones in their bodies. The balance of these hormones, specifically estrogen, progesterone and testosterone, are different in each gender, with testosterone being dominant in males and the other two being dominant in females. We all need all three in proper balance to be healthy. While male levels tend to be continual, women experience a monthly fluctuation that allows ovulation and then menstruation. We all know the stereotype of the hysterical, pre-menstrual bitch made famous in Midol commercials. What most people don't know is that when a woman is menstruating is when her hormonal balance most closely resembles that of a man. Think about that. Men are "menstrual" in their hormonal balance all the time
. Funny, how nobody talks about that. If women are irrational, moody, irritable and even violent when their body chemistry mirrors that of men, would it be fair to say that men are always "on the rag" emotionally and behaviorally? Could that explain their higher propensity for violence, infidelity, inconsistent and even irrational behavior? I think it does. That's going to piss a lot of the guys off, but I get a little paranoid and overly-sensitive around my period, too, so I won't hold it against them.
Now, let's talk about female anatomy. There's this doctor from Kentucky (wouldn't you know it?!) who was appointed by the pResident to make decisions that affect things like the availabilty of emergency contraception. He's a gynecologist, so I guess our feckless leader assumed he'd know his stuff. Unfortunately for Dr. Hager
's ex-wife, he didn't seem to know enough about women's "plumbing" to be able to tell her vagina from her ass. Hmmm. A doctor
, you say? That's a little hard to believe. I know doctors don't usually know all that much about the law, but I also find it hard to believe that this guy didn't know that having sex with a woman unwilling or unable to consent to it is a crime. Sleeping is one of those states, so having sex with someone in her sleep usually means she didn't consent to it before hand. So Bush
put a rapist in charge of our reproductive well-being. See what I mean about not knowing enough about sex?
On to the subject of breasts. We all have them, men and women alike, in various sizes and infinite variety. What a wonderful gift they are, and that's even before you consider the fact that some of them can feed babies! How cool is that? Breasts are not nasty or dirty, nor should seeing a breast unexpectedly, like at half time in the Super Bowl, ever be considered anything but a treat. Modesty is fine, but accidents happen and it is socially retarded to be offended by an honest mistake. It is absolutely unnatural and pathetic to object to a woman feeding a baby in public. That's what they're for, for Goddess' sake! Grow up! Europe is laughing at us!
Then there's this other guy, Rick Santorum.
Poor Rick got up on the Senate floor and made an ass of himself by comparing gay sex to bestiality. I thought Catholic schools were supposed to provide a better education than public ones, but I guess I was wrong. Because two happy, healthy humans doing anything sexual is a beautiful thing. Having sex with a dog, which Rick seems to talk about a lot
, is just creepy. Come to think of it, repeatedly talking about it is creepy, too. So how does a person equate something creepy and unnatural with a beautiful, healthy fuck? Frankly, I'm concerned for Ms. Santorum. Seems like one of them ought to know better, and if she does, I wish she'd fill him in. He's making the Senate look bad. The Europeans are laughing at us. Again.
Then we have Jerry Thacker
, whom Bush
appointed to the Presidential Advisory Board on HIV and AIDS
. This guy is really confused. He thinks AIDS is a "gay plague" when, in fact, most new infections are in women and most of them are getting it from their husbands. He thinks condoms don't stop the spread of the virus - they DO. He thinks homosexuality is a choice - it isn't. He advocates abstinence education, which ironically increases the likelihood of of a young person engaging in high risk sexual activity. The saddest part of this is that the poor man has AIDS, which he claims he contracted from his wife, who got it from a transfusion. Unless there's something he's not telling us, no gay activity involved there. Attributing it to gay sex could be seen as homophobia
is a symptom of repressed homosexuality. People who are not gay really don't think that much about gay sex. It It just doesn't concern them so it's not "on their radar" unless they know someone who is openly gay. I say openly gay, because at least one in ten of us is homosexual according to statistics. I think that number is really low. My guess is that it's more like 3 or 4 out of ten, but I'm only basing that on my personal experience. I've always known a lot of gay people, whether they were out or not, and I think that people just assume someone is straight when that is not necessarily the case. Whatever the number, it is a statistical impossibility for you to get through life without homosexuals, and a statistical probability that someone in your family is gay. And as I had to inform a relative's wife recently, homosexuality does exist everywhere in the animal world. The New York Zoo even has two couples of gay penguins that are fairly well known. You could look it up! Now, it is natural for a person not to be concerned with sex that doesn't include them. It is NOT natural to despise normal sexual practices, and if one in ten people is doing something, that's a norm.
Homophobics hate themselves for having homosexual feelings that they have been taught to despise. It's sad that they have learned to hide their feelings, to feel compelled to live double lives, to deny their own natural instincts. It is tragic that they will often overcompensate by trying to harm or otherwise inhibit gay sexuality. It's as if they feel they could be straight if no other gays existed to tempt them. So they try to legislate against it, beat it down, kill it off in any way they can. Our culture finds lesbian sexuality titilating, so it doesn't carry quite the stigma that male homosexuality faces, but crimes against lesbians are on the rise as gays finally
begin to enjoy a measure of social equality.
Homophobics want to believe that there is a "cure" for their urges. They think that they can choose to be straight, find God and be straight, get therapy and be straight, but those urges don't go away because they are inborn. That's when we see them lash out, or go to extremes. Show me a politician crusading against gay marriage and I'll show you someone cruising gay porn sites in his office late at night and hooking up with teenagers in parking lots. (You just can't make this stuff up.) When you hear a televangelist threaten violence against gays, or see a man going into great detail about gay sex and why it's wrong, or sick or like a man having sex with dog, be assured that you are looking at a closet case who will kill to keep his secret. It's only a matter of time before he gets caught cruising, has to make a tearful confession with his wife at his side, or is outed by a gay web site. Notice that no one has explained how Jeff Gannon
got into the White House. Repeatedly. When no other members of the press were there. One wonders why the White House Press corps hasn't asked W. about this, him being such a macho, homophobic... oh. Never mind.