The Hindenburg Stupidity Principle

"...men are ALSO free to NOT be reduced to a single part of their bodies nor over-value that trivial bodily spasm and so be free, FREE, I tell you, to go on and focus on career and the getting of power and money and... "

Christ, the legendary confederacy of dunces is back in the saddle again! It was IRONY. The sentence was I-R-O-N-I-C. Lampooning your childish notion that symmetry is the default structure of equality. You can't read well enough to pick up the obvious irony cues in that sentence you quote, but the same apparatus in that lil noggin of yours is finely calibrated enough to appreciate Proust, right? Right. High Culture as yet another consumerist option. Calling to mind, for example, stoners who think of themselves as patrons of the Fine Arts because they have that Dali poster in the kitchen. I bet I know which three Mozart melodies you can hum...

As for the 'simplicity' of The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle...I'm all 'ears'. You're going to explain it in a way that violates my expectation that it'll be the same inch-deep party-chatter I've been hearing on the subject for 20 years, of course. And you won't even have to pop over to Wikipedia first. I'm rilly impressed, LeCastor!

-- Steven Augustine

Oh steven augustine. if you're such a great intellectual, you don't need to go on the internet and make fun of people who love proust. If you really want to protect your knowledge (as vast or meager as it may be) of "High Culture" and decide that there's no way I could be "in the club," fine. I'm not going to sit here and drop increasingly obscure names to try to change your mind.

And yes, symmetry is more of less the default structure of equality. As much as possible, at least. Because as much as we focus on the diffences between men and women, they seem to be minute in comparison with the similarities, mental and physiological.

Plus, the trend that has lasted for hundreds of years is cloaking in some other nobler goals policies that restrict women's behavior. in the Victorian era, telling women that they are just too virtuous pure and moral and superior to actually work outside the home worked like a charm, and the women at it right up. This is the same argument of the men who put burkas on women and lock them up at home, in places like saudi arabia. now you're telling women that maybe them not having fulfilling orgasms is actually an advancement to a post-sexual plateau.

And do you have no replies to everything else i wrote? About sexy vs. sex vs. femininity?

Symmetry WOULD be the default structure of equality (broadly defined) if men and women were the same but they aren't so it isn't

this is why mockery of it in the context of sexual selectivity and desire is so often done. It's almost impossible not to see it.

-- anon

You could say the same thing about white people and Asian people -- they're not the same.

But, just as i said about men and women, the similarities far outnumber and outweigh the differences.

You could say the same thing about white people and Asian people -- they're not the same.

I find it difficult to belive that you actually believe the two situations are comparable. The differences between different racial groups have no essential bearing on how people relate. There may be some dispute about the extent and siginificance of innate gender but there is really no rational debate that it exists at all and has influence on things that matter to people. Saying that similarites outweigh differences doesn't shed any light on differences except to set an upper limt so high that there could never be any debate about it.

-- anon

They're similar points in that, the similarities outweigh the differences to the point that regarding such basic needs as sexual pleasure, there is little reason to argue that one group should simply forgo it. Both genders have orgasms, both genders masturbate, having orgasms and sex is good for both genders from a mental and physical health perspective, both genders experience sexual excitement, etc.

Saying that women should not care about orgasms because they have different genitalia or because "they're just not as horny as men" (which is yet to be attributed to purely physical features rather than societal conditioning) would be like saying to Asian people, because you, on the average (yao min excluded) have narrower eyes, you should just forget about going to college (e.g. pretty much, a nonsequitur sort of relationship that isn't based on anything except simplistic and baseless prejudices).

No, it's not me. I'm not an heiress, i'm a poor russian jewish immigrant. :)

I've weighed the same, give or take 5 pounds, since 8th grade (15 years). In 8th grade I wore a size 7/8. Today I wear a size 0/2.

I used to be a size 4, and now i am the proud owner of a banana republic skirt that's size 0 that fits perfectly, and a size 2 suitskirt that seems to be too big. Now, i know i'm not a real 0, or 2, so WTF?

Insights?