[lit-ideas] Gearyus interuptus
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 03:57:30 -0800
John,
I can understand why sex and violence are associated in someone's mind who
thinks the human race doesn't deserve to continue because it is wrecking the
environment, but why would Geary associate those two? He believes in the
perfectibility . . . wait a minute, he balked at that absolute term being a
relativist and nihilist . . . what was the term he used? Something like
vast improvability, but I'm pretty sure (though not willing to go searching
back through the archives for the exact term) he referred to the
"brotherhood of man." And now that he has associated sex and violence in
his recent notes, it comes hammered home to me (along with a headache) that
he might not have been using "brotherhood" in its inclusive sense to mean
both men and women. He may only have meant men, that is, brotherhood of
man, men getting along with each other while instead of war they take out
their biological aggression on women.
Wasn't that one of the slogans back in the 60s when Gearism was in its
infancy, make love not war? I always assumed the love part to be benign
and harmless, but now that we have this new insight into the Geary psyche it
takes on a more sinister character. And thanks to your biological insight,
John, I can imagine little brotherhoods of arachnid-like Gearies pouring out
of ant-hills to tear the heads off of females during coitus.
No doubt my lack of that desire accounts for my warlike wish to defend the
country against Islamists. I must sublimate my natural violent urge against
females (which is so sublimated I don't feel it) by taking it out on
innocent Islamists. That accounts for a lot.
And now, how can I go on? At the moment I'm in favor of heating up the
global-warming gun another six degrees and blowing all our brains out! . . .
or is that just the headache? At my age, one can never be sure.
Lawrence Helm
San Jacinto
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of John McCreery
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:05 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: For JL
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Why is sex so often associated with violence?
Because women are so uncooperative? I don't know.
At the risk of interrupting the humorous repartee, allow me to note the
most likely answer, a simple, literal fact: Human beings are animals. The
association of sex and violence is a common pattern found among any number
of species, but especially among those where the number of offspring is low
and copulation required to fertilize the egg. This pattern is strongly
associated with territoriality and defense of the nest. The mitigating
factor is typically the ritualization of violence that minimizes actual
injury. An alternative, found among several insects, but especially the
preying mantis, involves the killing and consumption of the male once the
act of copulation is successfully undertaken. There are, I believe, some
species of mantis in which the female beheads the male while the penis is
still inserted and pumping away.
Ah, biology.
John
--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
Tel. +81-45-314-9324
http://www.wordworks.jp/
Other related posts:
