Once More Unto the Breach

If I learned anything by going to college, it's that there is, at times, more truth in advertising than is evident. For instance, a class titled "Human Reproduction" is going to be, with ironic deception, exactly as sexy as it sounds. In some videos, depending on the subject matter, a vagina can only be referred to by its scientific name. And without the lighting, the music cues, the plumber's costume, the contextual (if perfunctory) dialogue exchange about pipework--the whole mise en scène really--watching two humans copulate on screen is borderline disturbing. It's like walking in on someone picking their nose. With someone else's cock.

The second thing I learned in college is, if you have a choice between parties, always go to the one where you know chicks will be there. There's nothing more depressing than a room full of dudes sitting in a circle, neglecting a slowly warming keg full of vaguely beer-scented foam, silently ruminating about the particulars of women as a concept because it's become increasingly, deafeningly clear that none would actually be caught dead at this tragedy pageant of sausages and pathos. And then slowly, inevitably, with enough hard-up dudes behind the shielding veneer of alcohol, someone is going to wake up with a photo of someone else’s scrotum draped across some part of his head/face/neck area broadcast to facebook and/or twitter. Yep, put enough straight dudes in a room long enough, mix in just enough sexual frustration, and the "humor" will get ball-centric at a gallop. This is considered totally hetero behavior, by the way. Nuts across another man's nose, that's butch. Own one Pet Shop Boys album and wear the scarlet Q until you graduate. The idea of male sexuality being "simpler" than women's is always something I assumed was generated--like the early stand-up comedy career of Eddie Murphy--entirely out of gay panic.

All this is why I'm a liberal and a Democrat. Sure, social justice, fiscal humanism, foreign policy not based solely on Jesus and/or nuclear submarines, blah blah. We've got ladies out our shindig. Sure, some of those ladies are only going to be into each other, but that will be true for a certain percentage of the dudes too, so it all evens out.

Yes, fine, the Democrat record on human dignity has not been what I'd call 100%. There was that one period of time when Democrats tried to start their own country because the one we had wasn't slavey enough. But we learned that lesson. After like 100 years. We had FDR and Truman and LBJ and suddenly they wouldn't let us come to the KKK meeting anymore even though we were the ones who started that shit in the first place. Now we're all inclusive and loving to everyone: gays, blacks, Jews, Mexicans and, yes, even the ladies. We've awakened, Buddha-like, to the position of inclusive, even-tempered enlightenment on issues related to the subtle nuance of sexual dimorphics, but also open to the ultimate unifying togetherhood of the ungendered human. We really know how to treat our bitches right.

Or, I guess, at least we've figured this much out: if you're not careful, Roe v. Wade is a trap. It's been a long time coming, trying to tease out the ultimate logical endgame to the thinking behind the anti-Roe positions, especially the strongest ones. If you believe that all human life is both sacred and begins at conception, ultimately you have to be just a little, tiny bit pro-rape. Not as an act, but as a catalyst for the magic of manifesting God's will to implant babies in uteruses.

If you believe in no abortion exception for rape, what are you saying? For pregnancy from consensual sex acts, even though I believe pretty strongly (and self-evidently) that the ultimate decision comes down to the person whose job it would be to gestate the thing into a viable, living, separate person and then either raise it into an adult or face down the emotional minefield involved in deciding to let someone else do it, logically that will probably involve at least a conversation between implanter and implantee. Some sort of personal conclusion will be reached, even if it's just the act of informing.

With rape--the forcible kind!--there isn't going to be any sort of understanding or consideration between a crime victim and a violent sociopath who has already specifically targeted and brutalized this person. There's no consideration for father's rights or even human courtesy. Any contact--let alone input--would be a separate violation compounding the first.

So whose consideration is being taken on board when the decision is made to compel the raped woman to carry the child to term, according to the will of this God incapable of evil? It can only be the state, with all the political and paramilitary powers at its disposal, to deny access to abortion ab initio and persecute those who seek it in the act of searching or after the fact. You have to be in favor of the law enforcement arm(s) of an American state, local or federal government taking proactive measures to protect the parental rights of rapists. Because God says so.

This is what happens when you have a group of dudes sitting around for too long with no ladies around. Consequences go unconsidered, the seven-layer dip is criminally substandard and someone always, always ends up getting teabagged.