Can one be straight and create?

It seems I'm suggesting an absolute, but only for the sake of provocation. I do think that there's a corrollary between creativity and sexuality. I think creation is an attempt to close a wound. Since homosexual people tend to be wounded (by those who choose to practice the heterosexual lifestyle), they're more likely to be creative. Therefore, every tv show and movie is more likely to be gay.

Ernest Becker, in his mostly amazing book, "The Denial of Death," devoted a chapter to justifying Michaelangelo's homosexuality. Becker asserted that Michaelangelo couldn't be distracted by other sexness. The body of his work demanded that he confine his sexuality to similar bodies. I think it drove Becker bananas that the best of our species was gay. And I think Becker was silly in that chapter. If Michaelangelo hadn't been wounded by his difference, he might have painted ceilings beige. Just beige.

"One very interesting episode of the WWW had Jim West sneaking into the bedroom of a large, muscular, shirtless African-American blacksmith named "Dick January". The title of that episode? "Night of the Big Blackmail"."

Wow. So, the Right's screechings about Hollywood trying to corrupt youth isn't right, but Hollywood has tried to administer an IQ test, and, as a nation, we failed.

Hiking in a skirt is a splendid idea! The thing that hurt most when I hiked the AT was my inner thighs. All the hikers' inner thighs were rubbed down to the gooey pink stuff beneath the skin.

Say it, sister. Men once wore tights and high heels and they will again. We're sheep and submit to whatever fleecing fashion and culture foist upon us. Capitalism is the turbocharger. Manscaping is just a function of capitalism: it's another set of consumptions.

Heck, we're not just sheep. We're morons. Ever seen sheep scurry from one side of the pasture to another in a thunderstorm, whenever the thunder booms? That's us. Men scurry from skirts. Women scurry from wearing men's clothing, which is often far sturdier and more comfy. I just bought some shorts. I tried the women's shorts, but they cinched my ass. I tried the men's shorts, which gave me plenty of ass room. Many butch lesbians have shopped in men's departments for years and have been wise to do so.

Sure, blame Bush, but blame Bush voters too. Remember Bush voters? They voted for Bush twice to "protect" marriage by greenlighting divorces and adultery, e.g. John McCain, and bashing a relatively few gay citizens. They also elected Bush twice to care for the unborn and just never you mind that foster care begs for adults to care for their unwanted children and that many American schools beg for the money to educate their charges. But Bush voters still voted for Bush because they could imagine having a beer with him and because Bush pretended to be tough, which meant sending other parents' kids off on his imperialist misadventures.

Blame Bush voters.

Blame Bush voters.

Blame Bush voters.

"Why are men, taken on average and as a whole, funnier than women?"

Ms. Berman wrote, "I don't care what Christopher Hitchens says -- women are funny."

Ms. Berman implies that Christopher Hitchens asserted that women aren't funny. He didn't. The proof is the preceding quote.

Repeating the canard that HITCHENS SAYS THAT WOMEN AREN'T FUNNY isn't just bad journalism. It isn't just disingenuous. It isn't just bad form. It's a lie. And it's a lie that Broadsheet's writers will repeat, for they don't seem open to their readers, unless, of course, their readers echo their assertions.

Broadsheet can't undo my feminism. It is, however, steadily chipping away at my respect for the Broadsheet version of feminism, where its writers scour the Internet (including TMZ!) for reasons to be perpetually offended and for topics that apparently mezmerize its readers: Boobs! Bras! More boobs!

Linney Uston agrees with me, albeit in his/her typically ugly fashion.

Luckily, Asehpe also agrees with me, in his typically gracious fashion.

Asehpe, Hitchens likes to provoke. I'm guessing that he doesn't even knows what Broadsheet is, or even Salon, but he understands which strings pull which limbs of the social organism. Still, he has the intellectual honesty to concede that he's arguing in generalities. Rebutting with specifics, as Ms. Berman does in asserting that Ms. Cho is funny (She is.), isn't cogent given Mr. Hitchen's intent. Mr. Hitchens pre-concedes exceptions. He is a master of language.

Note the latitude in this quote: "Why are men, taken on average and as a whole, funnier than women?"

One can't infer that men are one or fifty percent funnier than women, but that, "on average and as a whole," they're funnier. Well, guess what? "On average and as a whole," one gender MUST be funnier. At least Hitchens cites a Stanford study and some erudite people to bolster his case, which is, of course, largely empirical.

Had Hitchens argued that women are funnier, then the Broadsheet writers might have rebutted, "Of course, we're funnier, you asshole! We contest patriarchy with humor!"