Erosophia

Sexual Etymology: Sadism, Masochism, and Candaulism

2010-01-04T13:39:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Today's words are all etymologically interesting as they are not derived from other languages, but as a reference to the names of their originators.

Sadism - the enjoyment of another's pain or suffering, usually in a sexual context. The name is a reference to the Marquis de Sade, author of 120 Days of Sodom and Justine (among others).

Masochism - the enjoyment of pain or suffering being inflicted on oneself, usually in a sexual context. The name is a reference to Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, author of Venus in Furs.

Candaulism - the enjoyment of sexually exposing one's female partner to the view of others. The name is a reference to King Candaules from Herodotus's tale of Gyges (which is substantially different from Plato's account of the myth of Gyges).

It should be obvious that the term "Sadomasochism" is a combination of sadism and masochism and is intended to encompass the whole of the enjoyment of pain in relation to sex (whether giving or receiving).

I'm still taking requests for words. There are still the following words left:

-coitus
-procreation
-fetish
-paraphilia
-homosexuality
-heterosexuality
-sodomy
-annilingus
-erotic
-hysteria
-kiss

Unsafe Sex Toys?

2010-01-03T14:29:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Violet Blue, writer, sex educator, and sex blogger at Open Source Sex, has an interesting article about sex toys and safety issues. The article is "Unsafe" and it lists potential health concerns that any sexually active person should be aware of. For example:

* Nonoxynol-9 is a detergent that has been shown to cause cervical abrasions, strips away rectal lining, and only kills HIV/AIDS in clinical settings.

* Some cheap sex toys are made with high levels of phthalates and have been shown to cause adverse reactions in some women, from burning sensations to recurring infections.

She also has some good tips for keeping yourself healthy, such as:

* Avoid lubes with sugar, colorings, and flavors in them. Glycerin/glycerol (a common ingredient) is a sugar and sugar feeds yeast.

* Don’t use oil vaginally: oils are difficult for the body to flush out of the vagina. Silicone lubes and water-bsed lubes are the best.

Take a look at her article and remember that what you don't know, can hurt you; especially in sex.

Jason's Best of 2009

2009-12-31T20:55:00.000-08:00

by Jason

As I was looking back over the essays I've written this year for the OBloggers "Best of 2009 Carnival," I realized that there were a lot of good essays from this year. I had a really hard time picking out my favorite and so I decided to do my own Top 10 of the year. The order is somewhat arbitrary, but these are what I consider to be the best 10 essays that I wrote for the blog in 2009.

10. On Marijuana

In this essay I develop the position that while marijuana should be legal, I think it is immoral. I also analyze the role that religion has placed in the suppression of drugs.

9. On Bisexuality

In this essay I discuss the nature of bisexuality and argue that bisexuality is much more common than many people believe. Furthermore, I argue that bisexuality is natural and should not be thought of as a transitional state between heterosexuality and homosexuality.

8. Religion Kills Over Sex Again

This essay analyzes the religious hatred of sex and the harm it does, especially to teenagers as sexting becomes more prevalent.

7. Objectivism, Masculinity, Femininity, and Homosexuality: Initial Thoughts

This essay was adapted from my speech "Objectivism and Sexuality" that I delivered to the Ohio Objectivist Society in July. I argue that Ayn Rand's misidentification of the sexual essences (masculinity and femininity) is what led her to condemn homosexuality and that through a proper identification of the essences, we can reconcile homosexuality and Objectivism.

6. Shattered Illusions

This essay one of my favorite and most important essays I wrote last year, mostly because it was the first time I identified the phenomenon that I call "fundamental psychological needs" and their connection to the beliefs that people hold. I plan on developing this theory in to a more robust version that will likely appear in my book.

5. My First Nude Beach

This summer I moved to California and had my first chance ever to go to a nude beach. It was one of the best experiences of my life so far and I can hardly recommend it enough.

4. On Pegging 2: Gender Play

This essay is a follow up to my immensely popular essay "On Pegging" (#2 on this list) and deals with the idea of "gender play" through pegging.

3. The Christians Are Burning Witches (Again)

The rise of christianity in Africa, blending with their indigenous mysticism, has led to widespread persecution of witches and other demonic activity. Yes, in 2009 christians are still burning witches.

2. On Pegging

The most popular essay I've written so far, "On Pegging" is a philosophical investigation of pegging (female on male strap-on sex). In it, I discuss the nature of pegging, the philosophical implications for sexual orientation and the sexual essences, and how to successfully engage in pegging. If you don't read any other essays on this list, read this one.

1. What Causes Sexual Attraction

A revised edition of an earlier essay I wrote on the nature of sexual attraction. This was one of the first essays I attempted in sexual theory and the subject is one of my major interests. In it, I develop the thesis that it is our value judgments that underlie sexual attraction and that, consequently, we can understand sexual attraction in terms of these antecedent value judgements. The more robust and fully developed version of this theory is integral to my book and my overall understanding of sexuality. It is definitely one of my favorite essays that I've ever written.

I hope you've enjoyed Erosophia in 2009 and I look forward to an even more interesting year in 2010.

A Scholar and a Prostitute?

2009-12-26T03:13:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Europe and Me Magazine has published an interesting article called "Prostitution as as Student Job." The article discusses the rise of prostitution as a way that many female students are paying their way through college and grad school.

The common theme in the article is that the women are turning to prostitution for the money. However, not all of the women are opposed to this. Some are enjoying the lifestyle and the money, while others feel trapped by it and by financial need.

I think voluntary prostitution should be legal, this would alleviate most risks associated with prostitution. Now, whether it's ethical is a different question that I'm not prepared to give a full account of, but I think that the girls who are going into prostitution to pay their way through school and who are enjoying it, are making an ethically permissible choice.

Australia Following China's Lead?

2009-12-24T02:38:00.000-08:00

by Jason

I was incredibly surprised to find this article "Australia to Implement Mandatory Internet Censorship."

Apparently, Australia thinks that China is the country to model and doesn't think that its citizens have the moral or intellectual capacity to judge what they want to see on the internet. Consequently, in order to block "illegal material," that are going to institute a China-esque firewall that will block any material they deem objectionable. This, of course, is ostensibly all being done in order to "protect children" through attempting to ban child pornography. However, in fact, as the article notes, "the plan was first created as a way to combat child pornography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia." [Emphasis mine.]

The world seems to be descending to an ever lower rung of hell as the politicians, who know all, take our freedoms from us in order to "make us safe." Well, I, for one, would rather be free than be safe!

On Pegging 2: Gender Play

2009-12-23T09:00:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In “On Pegging” I wanted to examine the activity of pegging by itself. Consequently, I said that: “The point of pegging, then, is to stimulate a man’s prostate in order to give him intense orgasms.” I did this in order to provide an analysis of pegging stripped of the commonly attendant “gender play” that frequently goes with it and show that there is no necessary connection between pegging and gender play. On this point, I think I succeeded. Now, however, I want to reintroduce gender play into the discussion and analysis of pegging. It is certainly true that pegging can provide a great avenue for gender play and some people only do it for this reason.

Pegging Qua Gender Play

The primary difference between pegging itself, as we discussed in the last essay, and pegging as gender play, is how the partners handle it. That is, a couple could choose to engage in pegging in a way that challenges gender conceptions and roles, or not. This can be done from the way the partners approach each other, from the way they talk to each other, or just their beliefs about the nature of pegging itself (if they think that pegging is necessarily about role reversal). For example, if the female partner uses the words and phrases that are usually used to describe her in a sexual situation on her partner, this will challenge the gender roles: if her partner frequently tells her to “take my cock” and she uses the same phrase on him, then this will challenge both their genders in their minds as they are used to having that phrase be something that is said by a male to a female and now this is being inverted. Gender play can be very important in our sexual development as it helps us to understand not only masculinity and femininity, but also our own sexual desires and pleasure.

There are two primary kinds of gender play. The first is role reversal, where one accepts the boundaries of one’s own sexual essence, while still wanting to experience some aspect of the other sexual essence. Consequently, one assumes the role of the other sexual essence in order to fulfill one’s desires. The second is challenging the boundaries of the sexual essences. This means that one desires some aspect of what he currently considers in the province of the other sexual essence, but instead of reversing roles in order to satisfy his desire, he challenges his current conception of his gender role and attempts to expand it to include the aspect that he desires.

Role Reversal

In pegging, the penetrative partner is necessarily inverted: the female partner is penetrating the male partner with a strap-on. However, this does not mean that there is role reversal taking place, unless one’s conception of masculinity and femininity are rigidly and restrictively defined. If one thinks that enjoyment of anal stimulation is outside the boundary of masculinity and is entirely in the province of the feminine, then a man enjoying anal stimulation is engaging in a feminine activity: they have reversed roles. However, this is dependent on how you define the boundaries of masculinity and femininity. Most people’s conceptions of their sexual essences are very culturally influenced. Realistically, most people have never thought about what it means to be masculine or feminine and to the extent they can even articulate their thoughts on the matter, they will adhere to the traditional conception of their culture as this is all they know of the sexual essences.

This failure to form independent conceptions of the sexual essences, leads one to have restrictive and rigid conceptions of the boundaries of the sexual essences. In fact, because one has never thought about the boundaries of the sexual essences, one cannot challenge these boundaries. Consequently, if one wants to experience a particular activity or manner of behavior that one considers to be of the other sexual essence, one has no option but to assume the other essence in order to experience the thing that one wants. If, for example, a woman thinks that only men can be sexually aggressive and, yet, she desires to be sexually aggressive, then she will have to assume a male sexual essence in order to be sexually aggressive. Since her conception of the sexual essences is rigid, restrictive, and unarticulated, she has no choice but to engage in role reversal in order to have the experience she desires. To the extent to which she fails to think about the nature of femininity, is the extent to which she will feel trapped inside her conception of femininity and desire to reverse roles in order to experience more of her sexuality. Were she to consciously think about her conceptions of the sexual essences, then she could attempt to test the boundaries of it and challenge its restrictiveness.

On the other hand, some people gain a perverse pleasure from role reversal and do not want to challenge their rigid and restrictive conceptions of the sexual essences. For example, if you’re a man that’s convinced that men should never be penetrated, that only homosexual men could want to be penetrated, then you might want to act feminine in order to not “be gay.” This fear of being gay, or of having a “gay pleasure,” leads to you more strongly embrace the rigid categories in order to utilize acting feminine as a way around having to think about yourself as gay. After all, it’s perfectly within the realm of the feminine to be penetrated and as long as you are acting feminine, then you’re not gay. This line of reasoning is, of course, completely absurd. However, it is a logical consequence of a cultural conception of masculinity that completely excludes any sort of anal pleasure, branding it all as homosexual. The solution is obviously to challenge the prevailing ideas about what masculinity is and is not, but if your conception of this is inarticulate, then you will not be able to challenge it.

Challenging Boundaries

In order to test the boundaries of the sexual essences, one must first attempt to consciously understand the sexual essences: one must be able to articulate one’s conceptions of the sexual essences. Once one is able to articulate his conception of the sexual essences, then he will be able to identify the boundaries of the sexual essences. This step is crucial as until one can understand the boundaries of the sexual essences, one is trapped inside his conception of his sexual essence. This ability to articulate one’s conception of the sexual essences involves much introspection and thinking about not only what one thinks that the sexual essences are, but also about what one thinks that the sexual essences should be. This articulation of the sexual essences is the first step away from restrictive and rigid conceptions of the sexual essences. Until we can consciously examine our conceptions of the sexual essences, we cannot challenge them.

Testing the boundaries of the sexual essences is much like the case of role reversal, where one has a desire for an action or activity that one thinks is characteristic of the other sexual essence. However, instead of being locked in a rigid and restrictive conception of one’s sexual essence, one now has a conscious grasp on it and is able to examine it. This leads one to ask why certain actions or activities are only for one of the sexual essences and not for the other. Consequently, instead of reversing roles in order to fulfill one’s desires, one challenges the boundaries of one’s own sexual essences to see if they are able to include the thing that one desires. For example, if a man wants to be sexually passive in a sexual encounter and is unwilling or unable to challenge the boundaries of the sexual essences, then he will have to assume the feminine sexual essence and reverse roles. However, if he is able to challenge the boundaries of the sexual essences, then he can try being sexually passive while still retaining his masculinity. This could be done by finding a partner who enjoys being dominant or a partner who is willing to change roles with him and be sexually active sometimes and passive others. This means that he could still be masculine, that is experience himself as an embodied sexual man, while being passive in a sexual situation.

Once we begin the process of testing the boundaries of our sexual essences, we are better able to examine the boundaries of our own personal sexual desires. Whereas formerly we might have thought that a particular action or activity was closed off to us, or at least without assuming the other sexual essence through role reversal, we are now free to explore what we actually want through exploring the boundaries of our sexual essence.

Boundaries Redefined

In “On Pegging,” I noted that our cultural conception of masculinity is based on domination of the feminine, while our conception of femininity is based on submission to the masculine. Furthermore, I noted that it makes more sense to understand masculinity as rooted in the unique experience of being an embodied man in a sexual situation and to understand femininity as rooted in the unique experience of being an embodied woman in a sexual situation. In order to understand how these two different ideas of the sexual essences interact, we have to understand that our experience of our sexual essence is structured by our cultural conceptions of our sexual essences. These structures create boundaries for our sexual essences, based on the cultural conceptions. Thus, if we allow our personal conception of our sexual essence to be structured by the cultural conception of it, then we will find boundaries on our sexuality corresponding to the cultural conceptions. To be somewhat more concrete, if I allow my conception of my masculinity to be structured by the cultural conceptions, then I will not simply experience my masculinity as being an embodied male in a sexual context, but rather experience it as structured through the idea of domination, and bounded by the idea of appropriateness for domination.

Pegging, when used as a form of gender play, is great for helping us to challenge these boundaries in our conceptions of the nature of masculinity and femininity. A woman who does not engage in role reversal when she engages in pegging, necessarily challenges her conception of femininity as submission to the masculine, if she still maintains such a view, since the idea of submission and penetrating her male partner with a strap-on are completely incompatible. Now, one might think that a woman would not necessarily understand that this challenges her rigid conception of her femininity, but she would be unable not to understand this. We all, to the extent that we have thought about it, understand masculinity and femininity to be sexual concepts. It is impossible to think of a woman, who is engaging in pegging without engaging in role reversal, who understands that she is in a sexual situation, who is doing something that is blatantly contradictory to the cultural conception of her sexual essence, and to think that this would not challenge her idea of her femininity. The only way that it could not is if she were to purposefully evade all knowledge of what she is doing, but that does not seem possible to maintain: especially while one is doing it.

Obviously, the biggest challenge from pegging is to a man’s conception of his masculinity: it is difficult to combine the ideas of being anally penetrated by a woman with a strap-on with the idea of concurrently dominating her. As we noted earlier, the only way around this is to think that this means that the man is acting feminine (role reversal) or to challenge how he thinks of masculinity in order to accommodate anal pleasure. If he does not engage in role reversal, then he will experience pegging as a challenge to his masculinity, as long as he maintains the rigid and narrow conception of it. However, if he were to challenge his conception of his masculinity, then he will be able to accommodate anal pleasure into his conception of masculinity. It is simply impossible to try to combine the ideas of masculinity as domination and being anally penetrated together. The man who engages in pegging, without engaging in role reversal, will necessarily come to redefine his idea of masculinity.

Pegging as Perversion

Unfortunately, some men are so afraid of being considered gay, that they cannot accept the possibility of anal pleasure as part of masculinity. These men, as I noted earlier, cling to their rigid and narrow conceptions of the sexual essences, instead of trying to think about them openly or challenge them. Consequently, they take refuge in role reversal for psychologically unhealthy reasons: to escape from the contradiction between their desire for pegging and their conception of masculinity as domination and to escape their responsibility to think about it. They shield themselves in role reversal in order to enjoy anal pleasures without the fear of being gay.

However, this is even more inane than it appears prima facie. The strongest and most cogent denouncements of homosexuality come from arguments about the nature of masculinity and femininity and how homosexuality is a perversion of one’s natural sexual essence. This is obviously based on the idea that the natural ordering is between the masculine and the feminine, since the nature of the masculine is to dominate the feminine and the nature of the feminine is to submit to the masculine. So, the denouncement is contingent upon the conception of the sexual essences that would be challenged by openly thinking about the sexual essences. Thus, the more he hides in role reversal from his fear of homosexuality, the more he is bound into the conception of the sexual essences that creates his fear in the first place! There is, in fact, nothing unnatural about homosexuality and this is obvious once we abandon the impoverished conceptions of the sexual essences that are so culturally prominent.

However, while pegging used for role reversal is perverse if one is using it to evade the responsibility of thought, pegging as role reversal is not necessarily perverse. If a man wanted to assume the role of the woman, or a woman wanted to assume the role of the man, so that they could experience a little of what it was like to be the other sex in order to better understand their partner, or even the other sex in general, this would be legitimate. The perversity of using pegging as role reversal comes from trying to escape the responsibility of thought and from this being a denial of reality. In cases where pegging as role reversal do not involve evasion, they are not perverse.

Stages of Gender Play

From the way I have presented pegging as a form of gender play, it may seem that I am advocating the position that pegging as gender play goes through a definite series of discrete steps as a person begins pegging and gradually changes how they think about the sexual essences. To some extent I am putting forth this position, however I am not strictly advocating that this process is necessary. Indeed, a person may have been very conscientious and have introspected carefully throughout his life so that he never held an inarticulate view of the sexual essences. This person will obviously not proceed through the process, as he will never be at step one (he might have progressed to a proper conception of the sexual essences before he ever tried pegging).

In general, though, I do think that this is the way that most people will progress through their conception of their sexual essence as they utilize pegging as a form of gender play. They begin with an inarticulate conception of the nature of the sexual essences and they are slowly forced to consider the nature of these as they being pegging. The only exception to this, as I noted earlier, is the perverse case of pegging that is born of the fear of homosexuality.

Conclusions

So, as we have seen, pegging is not just about prostate pleasure for men. While pegging as a form of gender play can be perverse, it can also help us to come to understand ourselves and our sexuality better. Through pegging, people can challenge their inarticulate ideas about the sexual essences and come to have clearer conceptions of these that are devoid of metaphysically dubious baggage. Pegging can help us to understand our sexuality at the most basic of levels and help us to realize our sexual desires authentically.

Mexico City Approves Gay Marriage

2009-12-22T19:56:00.000-08:00

by Jason

(Source: Wiki-Commons)

Mexico city has just passed legislation that legalizes gay marriage by redefining marriage from a union of a man and a woman to "the free uniting of two people" (according to the Huffington Post). This is a surprising move since Mexico is a strongly catholic country and, obviously, catholics hate homosexuals.

The article also notes that:

Only seven countries allow gay marriages: Canada, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands and Belgium. U.S. states that permit same-sex marriage are Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut and New Hampshire.

So, although gay marriage is on the rise around the world, there is still a long way to go and much religious hatred to overcome.

Pregnant? You Could be Facing a Court-Martial

2009-12-21T17:08:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Gen. Anthony Cucolo, the General in charge of Northern Iraq, has come up with a brilliant new idea to prevent troop loss: punish women for getting pregnant. He tries to justify his position by saying:

"I need every soldier I've got, especially since we are facing a drawdown of forces during our mission," Cucolo wrote. "Anyone who leaves this fight earlier than the expected 12-month deployment creates a burden on their teammates. Anyone who leaves this fight early because they made a personal choice that changed their medical status -- or contributes to doing that to another -- is not in keeping with a key element of our ethos."

So, he has decided to target women who get pregnant as not being part of the team for making a "personal choice" that makes them unfit for combat.

In an e-mail to CNN, Cucolo stressed the rule "is just a small part of a general policy on behavior and actions," and is "lawful." The memo outlines a long list of behaviors that are prohibited, from gambling and using drugs to behaviors that would offend Iraqis, such as entering a mosque or religious site unless "required by military necessity."

What is truly disturbing is that Cucolo is targeting women instead of trying to protect the soldiers he does have. If he really cared about his soldiers and their combat effectiveness, he would get rid of the hideous philosophy of Just War theory that cripples our troops. Why should our troops care about "offending Iraqis?" Of course, what they really mean is that they don't want our troops to offend muslims, who are our real enemy. Realistically, it is the irrationality of all religion that is at war with rational men everywhere. It is just that muslims tend to be much more violent that other religions (at least in this time in history).

Health Care Bill Passes Senate Cloture

2009-12-21T16:50:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In a shady move last night, the Senate passed cloture around 1AM which will allow the Senate health care bill to be voted upon on the floor in short order.

This bill will represent the largest expansion of governmental power in a long time. Some quotes from a couple of articles are revealing.

From a NY Times article:

“Health care in America ought to be a right, not a privilege,” said Senator Christopher J. Dodd

From a CNN article:

Harry Reid said [the new bill will provide healthcare for] "all people, not just those who can afford it."

What is interesting is that the only clear underlying principles motivating the push for the healthcare bill is altruism. What happened to the American ideal of self-reliance? The ideals of America and the philosophical underpinnings of christianity have always been in conflict and it is only to the extent that the christians have been able to compartmentalize their minds and evade the true implications of their beliefs that they have been able to attempt to reconcile their beliefs. Unfortunately for us, the christians are becoming more and more consistent and attacking the secular ideals of america, which stand in stark contrast to the altruism of christianity.

I think it is truly sad that some people think that they have a right to enslave part of the population to support another part.

Sexual Etymology: Ejaculate and Cum

2009-12-20T14:25:00.000-08:00

by Jason

There are many words in our language to describe orgasm, but two of the more etymologically interesting are "ejaculate" and "cum."

ejaculate

1578, "emit semen," from L. ejaculatus, pp. of ejaculari, from ex- "out" + jaculari "to throw, dart," from jaculum "javelin," from jacere "to throw." Only other surviving sense is "exclaim suddenly" (1666).

Interestingly, until rather recently the more common use of "ejaculate" was the second form of "exclaim suddenly." It is not until recently that the rather obscure medical term ejaculate came into common parlance. Before that, it was common to see characters ejaculate "What?" or "So!" and people never associated this with orgasm.

The word "cum" also has an interesting history.

cum

(v. and n.) seems to be a modern (by 1973) variant of the sexual sense of come that originated in pornographic writing, perhaps first in the noun sense. This "experience sexual orgasm" slang meaning of come (perhaps originally come off) is attested from 1650, in "Walking In A Meadowe Greene," in a folio of "loose songs" collected by Bishop Percy.

They lay soe close together, they made me much to wonder;
I knew not which was wether, until I saw her under.
Then off he came, and blusht for shame soe soon that he had endit;
Yet still she lies, and to him cryes, "one more and none can mend it."

As a noun meaning "semen or other product of orgasm" it is on record from the 1920s. The sexual cum seems to have no connection with L. cum,the preposition meaning "with, together with," which is occasionally used in English in local names of combined parishes or benifices (e.g.Chorlton-cum-Hardy), in popular Latin phrases (e.g. cum laude), or as a combining word to indicate a dual nature or function (e.g. slumber party-cum-bloodbath).

I've always found the word "cum" to be rather strange. It's not as if I go somewhere before orgasm and then suddenly come back. It makes somewhat more sense to me as "it [my semen, orgasm] is coming," but that is not the general usage.

One of my favorite ways of talking about orgasm is the French "la petite mort" or "the little death." I think that, in general, the French have one of the best sexual vocabularies in terms of both descriptive power and accuracy.

Non-Religious Holiday Display Next to the Nativity in Arkansas

2009-12-19T16:30:00.000-08:00

by Megan

A group of freethinkers in Arkansas have successfully placed a non-religious holiday display next to a nativity scene in front of their state capitol building. I think it would be better if there were no holiday displays in front of governmental buildings at all, but given that the nativity scene was already there, adding a sort of counter-display was a great idea. The disturbing thing is that the majority of people polled by the news station thought that the non-religious display should not have been permitted, even though it was obvious that the state government would be violating the separation of church and state if it allowed one type of holiday display but not another. I would imagine that people would have responded in much the same way if the new display had promoted a non-Christian religion instead of no religion at all. It's alarming how people seem to think that if they feel strongly about something, the government should have to fix it, even if it means trampling on other peoples' rights.

A video about the display from a local news station can be found here: http://www.katv.com/news/stories/1209/688210_video.html?ref=newsstory

Swingers?

2009-12-18T08:27:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In our never-ending quest to learn and understand everything about sex, Erosophia is going to try something new. We're going to be having a candid interview with a couple who has been in the lifestyle (swingers) for some time now about what it is like and why they do it.

If you have any questions for them, leave a comment on here or email us (email found on the right side of the blog below our names). We'll be posting the interview sometime before the 1st of the year.

Your Sex May Not be as Definite as You Think

2009-12-17T13:53:00.000-08:00

by Jason

The Telegraph (UK) is reporting on a new study done with mice that could alter the way we think about the fixedness of our sex and our idea of sexual development.

The idea used to be that babies were of an undifferentiated sex until chromosomal activity caused the developing baby to head towards being male or female. Then, we found out that all early developing babies are female and that they only become male when the Y chromosome activates and causes the baby to start developing male characteristics. The baby then develops and is either a boy or a girl for the rest of it's life.

The new research, however, suggests that our static conception of sex is perhaps mistaken. Using gene manipulation in mice, they were able to cause a mature female mouse to lose her ovaries and develop testicles. This implies that sex is not static and has to be maintained by the body throughout the life of the organism.

This completely upsets the way that we currently think about our sex and it will be interesting to see where this research leads.

Muhammad Cartoons

2009-12-15T17:06:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Gary Hull has just published a new book on the Muhammad cartoons and the controversy they caused. You can pick it up at Amazon (Muhammad: The "Banned" Images) or at their website www.muhammadimages.com/ (it's cheaper on their website).

The statement of principle is so good that I have to repost it here:

Free Expression at Risk, at Yale and Elsewhere

A number of recent incidents suggest that our long-standing commitment to the free exchange of ideas is in peril of falling victim to a spreading fear of violence. Not only have exhibitions been closed and performances cancelled in response to real threats, but the mere possibility that someone, somewhere, might respond with violence has been advanced to justify suppressing words and images, as in the recent decision of Yale University to remove all images of Muhammad from Jytte Klausen's book, The Cartoons that Shook the World.

Violence against those who create and disseminate controversial words and images is a staple of human history. But in the recent past, at least in Western liberal democracies, commitment to free speech has usually trumped fears of violence. Indeed, as late as 1989, Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses continued to be published, sold, and read in the face of a fatwa against its author and in the face of the murder and attempted murder of its translators and publishers. In 1998, the Manhattan Theater Club received threats protesting the production of Terrence McNally's play Corpus Christi, on the ground that it was offensive to Catholics. After initially canceling the play, MTC reversed its decision in response to widespread concerns about free speech, and the play was performed without incident.

There are signs, however, that the commitment to free speech has become eroded by fears of violence. Historical events, especially the attacks of September 2001 and subsequent bombings in Madrid and London, have contributed to this process by bringing terrorist violence to the heart of liberal democracies. Other events, like the 2004 murder of Dutch film director Theo Van Gogh in apparent protest against his film Submission, and the threats against Hirsi Ali, who wrote the script and provided the voice-over for the film, demonstrated how vulnerable artists and intellectuals can be just for voicing controversial ideas. Under such threats, the resolve to uphold freedom of speech has proved to be lamentably weak: in the same year as Van Gogh's murder, Behzti, a play written by a British Sikh playwright, was cancelled days after violence erupted among protesters in Birmingham, England on opening night.

In response to rising concerns about fear-induced self-censorship, in 2005 the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published an article, "The Face of Muhammad," which included twelve cartoon images. The cartoons became the focus of a series of violent political rallies in the Middle East in February 2006 and a subject of worldwide debate pitching free speech against "cultural sensitivity."

For all the prominence of Islam in such debates, threats of violence against words and images are not the sole province of religious extremists. In 2005, a politically controversial professor's scheduled speech at Hamilton College in Clinton, NY was cancelled in response to alleged threats of violence. In 2008, the San Francisco Art Institute closed a controversial video exhibition in response to threats of violence against faculty members by animal rights activists. Later that year, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln canceled a speech by former Weatherman and education theorist William Ayers, citing security concerns.

The possibility of giving offense and provoking violence has entered the imagination of curators, publishers and the public at large, generating more and more incidents of preemptive self-censorship: in 2006, for instance, London's Whitechapel Gallery declared twelve works by Surrealist master Hans Bellmer too dangerous to exhibit because of fears that the sexual overtones would be offensive to the large Muslim population in the area; and publisher Random House canceled the 2008 publication of Sherry Jones' The Jewel of Medina because "it could incite acts of violence." The suppression of images in Jytte Klausen's book is the latest, but not likely to be the last in the series of such incidents.

Words and images exist in complex socio-political contexts. Suppressing controversial expression cannot erase the underlying social tensions that create the conditions for violence to begin with, but it does create a climate that chills and eventually corrupts the fundamental values of liberal democracy.

A Call to Action

The incident at Yale provides an opportunity to re-examine our commitment to free expression. When an academic institution of such standing asserts the need to suppress scholarly work because of a theoretical possibility of violence somewhere in the world, it grants legitimacy to censorship and casts serious doubt on their, and our, commitment to freedom of expression in general, and academic freedom in particular.

The failure to stand up for free expression emboldens those who would attack and undermine it. It is time for colleges and universities in particular to exercise moral and intellectual leadership. It is incumbent on those responsible for the education of the next generation of leaders to stand up for certain basic principles: that the free exchange of ideas is essential to liberal democracy; that each person is entitled to hold and express his or her own views without fear of bodily harm; and that the suppression of ideas is a form of repression used by authoritarian regimes around the world to control and dehumanize their citizens and squelch opposition.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, will get neither liberty nor safety.

Although I haven't read the book yet, I heartily endorse it based on their statement of principle and what I know of Gary Hull.

-----------
Since the FTC's draconian rules have gone into effect, you should be aware that if you click the Amazon link and buy the book, I will get some small amount of money.

Republicans Ask for Climategate Investigation

2009-12-15T16:30:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In an unexpected move, House Republicans are asking the Energy and Commerce Committee to investigate the Climategate scandal and how it is affecting American policy.

From the announcement:

WASHINGTON – Senior Republican members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee today asked House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif. to hold a hearing into the emails exchanged between global warming researchers that described their work with words like "hide the decline" and "travesty."

"The e-mails from the University of East Anglia raise serious questions about the production of influential scientific information concerning climate change," wrote U.S. Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, Fred Upton, R-Mich., and Greg Walden, R-Ore. "They raise serious questions about the quality of the process that produces climate assessments that Congress is asked to rely upon when making its decisions. The e-mails appear to show a concerted effort among well-connected climate scientists to influence inappropriately the peer review process and destroy or obfuscate scientific data.

"We note that many of these scientists include U.S. scientists who serve at federal agencies or are federally funded through grants and contracts to collect their data and perform their work, and that some of the information they appear to have sought to suppress concerns the analyses used in United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," they added. "Given the federal connection, and the apparent connection to influential information relied upon by federal agencies and the U.S. Congress … we cannot stand idly by while mounting evidence suggests scientific malfeasance."

The full text of the letter is available here [link].

Uganda Bans Female Genital Mutilation

2009-12-15T16:03:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In a welcome move, Uganda has passed a new law to ban Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

The World Health Organization estimates that over 3,000,000 women throughout the world are forced to undergo Female Genital Mutilation every year, or roughly 342 women every hour of every day. For those who don’t know, FGM ranges from the removal of the clitoral hood, to the removal of the clitoris, to the removal of the outer and inner labia, to effectively sowing the vagina closed (infibulation). This is frequently done with whatever implements are at hand, including rusty pieces of metal, scissors, pieces of glass, etc, and rarely with the use of anesthesia. It is done for various reasons, depending on the locality, but the unifying element in the “inherent dirtiness” of the female body and to “help” women conform to cultural expectations of chastity.

The practice is primarily located in Africa and some Asian countries, although it has strong ties to Islam and is therefore not tied exclusively to any location. FGM is a sobering reminder that our ideas about sex matter and that the consequences of bad ideas about sex are not limited to an unsatisfying sex life. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that bad ideas about sex can kill. It is for this reason that Sexual Ethics is vital.

I want to applaud Uganda for their move to ban FGM and I urge other countries who don't have such laws in place to make passing them a priority.

I also want to point out an interesting paradox. While all reasonable people agree that mutilating a woman's vagina is unethical and should be banned, not many people seem to have a problem with mutilating penises. They are the same in all respects and just because we are better at mutilating penises and men do not usually die from this, does not make it right. Anyone who is interested in Erosophia's position on circumcision can see Megan's essay "Circumcision: Is There Such a Thing as Too Much Penis?"

Male Prostitution Now Legal in Nevada

2009-12-15T08:04:00.000-08:00

by Jason

(Source: Wiki-Commons)

So apparently even though prostitution has been legal in certain Nevada counties since the 70's, it has only been female prostitution up until this point. However, this is about to change with the hiring of the first male prostitute at a brothel in Nevada. The Las Vegas Review-Journal is reporting that due to a change in the state law, men will now be eligible to be employed as prostitutes.

This, of course, is going to cause quite a controversy once it becomes well known and the implications are realized: men will be able to legally pay other men for sex! This, of course, is a sign of the end of times and we should all prepare for the rapture (mercy!). In all seriousness, though, do expect a large backlash by the christian reich over legal gay prostitution.

I, for one, think that it's great that Nevada is expanding prostitution and that now both women and men will be able to hire a male prostitute if they so choose.

Sexual Etymology: Hymen and Orgasm

2009-12-14T16:32:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In this week's edition of Sexual Etymology, we're going to be looking at "hymen" and "orgasm."

(Source www.etymonline.com/)

hymen

1615, from Fr. hymen (16c.), ult. from Gk. hymen "virginal membrane, thin skin." Originally any membrane; present specific meaning begins with Vesalius, 1550. Hymeneal "wedding hymn" is 1717, from L. hymenaeus, from Gk. hymenaios "belonging to wedlock, wedding, wedding song," from Hymen, Gk. god of marriage, represented as a youth carrying a torch and a veil.

So, hymen is obviously very similar in meaning to its original definition. One interesting thing to note, though, is the connection of hymen to marriage. This connection is almost ubiquitous in ancient cultures (even in some modern cultures) as a sign of a girl's virginity. This, of course, is rather strange as they are easy to break and are more often broken by a non-sexual activity, than by a sexual one.

orgasm (n.)

1680s, from Fr. orgasme, from Gk. orgasmos "excitement, swelling," from organ "be in heat, become ripe for," lit. "to swell, be excited," related to orge "impulse, excitement, anger," from PIE base *wrog- "to burgeon, swell with strength" (cf. Skt. urja "a nourishment, sap, vigor," O.Ir.ferc, ferg "anger"). The verb is attested from 1973, originally and usually in reference to a woman's sexual climax. Orgasmic is attested from 1935.

Orgasm also has a very clear progression and a very similar meaning to its original meaning of excitement and swelling. We'll contrast this with ejaculation, which we shall take a look at next week.

Incommunicado

2009-12-06T21:08:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Erosophia will be silent while we're traveling for a death in the family.

Regular blogging will resume sometime after December 14th.

Cyanide and Happiness

2009-12-05T13:15:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In case you need a laugh, check out Explosm.net for their comic "Cyanide and Happiness." Their comics are hit and miss, but they have a lot of really funny ones.

1. Bar Mitzvah

2. Haircut

3. Lincoln

4. Furries

Religion Kills Over Sex Again

2009-12-04T17:40:00.000-08:00

by Jason

Unequivocally, the greatest and most harmful result of the irrationality of religion is its hatred, absolute and unmitigated, of sex. There is nothing religion hates more than our human nature, especially our sexual nature.

Religion arises as an answer to fundamental psychological needs; among these needs are those for psychological continuity and an answer to death. However, it does so as a perversion. Instead of seeking real answers to these questions, it makes up the answers it wishes were true and then believes them to be true because it wishes them to be true (they call this epistemic perversion "faith"). The religious answer to our fear of death and attempt to understand it is this: death is an illusion, it's not real. The "real" you is a magical, eternal, thing we call the "soul" and this soul thing cannot die (immortality of soul), so therefore you cannot die either (identification of self with soul). Unfortunately for you, though, your magical soul thing is trapped in your body (mind/body dualism) and therefore it can't get to the magic realm of souls (heaven). However, you cannot just kill yourself! (Although it'd be reasonable if you actually believed this.) Because this would offend the maker of magical souls, who is himself a perfect uber-soul thing (god). The absurdity of it is apparent to everyone, except those blinded by faith - those who need it most.

Imagine that if you really believed that you were just your soul and that your body had trapped you here on Earth, you would justifiably hate your body and the needs it imposes on your soul. And we see that, indeed, this is the case. All religions that have a dualist doctrine hate the body and sexuality; perhaps more properly they feel it is shameful and therefore they hate it.

This hatred leads the religious to lash out at those who seem to be enjoying their bodies and so attacks them from the outside. Worse, though, is that the religious doctrine makes them ashamed of their enjoyment of their bodies and so shame and guilt attacks them from the inside. This dual attack on sexuality can be devastating to those who can't see past the illusions of religion.

In March of this year, a young girl named Jessica Logan killed herself in Cincinnati Ohio after she sent nude pictures of herself to a boy she liked, he spread them around the school, and then the students harassed her until she killed herself. I said then that morality has real consequences: people are motivated by the ideas they hold. In this case the religious ideals motivated the students to attack Jessica for enjoying her body and her shame over her enjoyment led her to kill herself.

Now, religion has killed again: this time in Florida. Her name was Hope Witsell and she was only 13 years old. She sent nude pictures of herself to a boy she liked and according to the story, a rival girl found them and sent them to other people and the pictures went viral around the school. Of course, since sex is shameful to christians, the students viciously attacked her and made her life miserable. Worse, her internal shame led her to start cutting herself. What was her parents response? To send her to a christian counselor. Of course, this only exacerbated the problem, since christianity was the problem to begin with, and she killed herself.

The paper notes that she was only 13 and that her parents "took her to church every Sunday." This is, of course, to assure us that she was a good christian girl (which was precisely the problem). Further, everyone acts surprised that a 13 year old could actually be sexual. This is patently absurd and only comes from the religious denial of sexuality and there refusal to want to think about it. Humans are naturally sexual beings and our bodies are sexual from the day we are born. In her case, it's likely that Hope was already in puberty and her body was sexually maturing. I'm sure her parents were incapable of seeing her as a sexual being and probably never gave her any advice about her burgeoning sexuality.

What is most heart wrenching to me is that Hope considered herself to be be completely at fault, according to one of her friends. At fault for what? For being human in a society tainted by religion. She was too young to be able to see past all of the religious lies and propaganda and just assert her right to her own life and sexuality.

And so, Hope Wisell is dead; killed by religion. For those who think ideas do not matter in life, look here! Here is an example of ideas mattering!

Although I'd like to think that things will start to get better, I know they will only get worse because of this. In order to "help stop it from happening again," legislatures and prosecutors will step up cases against the practice of sexting and start trying these kids for possessing nudes pictures of children. They will prosecute children for possessing pictures of other children, who took them consensually, and register them as "sex offenders." Especially the poor young girls who actually take the pictures of themselves: these girls are not only distributing felonious images, but creating them! This, of course, will cause more girls to kill themselves instead of facing a court for their "crime." All reason has gone out of the law on this. Thankfully the ACLU is starting to defend some of these cases, but they won't be able to stem the tide of it until people stop thinking of children as asexual and start recognizing that they are sexual beings too.

We cannot hope to have reason in our culture until we can rid it of faith.

Remember Jesus

2009-12-04T11:08:00.000-08:00

by Jason

I found this on tumblr and I just can't resist putting it up. It's not that I consider myself a militant atheist, it's more that I consider myself militantly for reason.

Without further ado, a poster for the holiday season.

The Health Care Bill Laid Bare

2009-12-03T10:22:00.000-08:00

by Jason

In case you are wondering what the 1990 pages of the House healthcare bill actually say, but you don't have time to read it yourself, head on over to Dr. John Lewis' blog and take a look at his analysis of the bill (link).

Just In: New York Still Hates Gays

2009-12-02T20:49:00.000-08:00

by Jason

CNN is reporting that the New York state Senate voted down a measure today that would have allowed gay marriage in the state. This comes after the bill had already passed their house and had support from their governor.

Those opposing the bill are citing the fact that in states that have taken it to a popular vote, it has been voted down. There are two problems with this. First, two recent surveys show that a majority of New Yorkers support gay marriage. Second, as we have known since Plato - democracies do not work (see the Republic). The fact that lots of people believe something does not make it right, look at christians or "flat-earthers." Belief is not a criterion of truth and just because a lot of people share that belief, does not make it true. Rather, we should legislate based on a rule of law that grants equal protection to all citizens, regardless of race, gender, orientation, ad nauseum. This is because all citizens are equally citizens under the law; our country does not have classes or castes.

Since no one seems to understand this, let me repeat it: THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY, IT IS A REPUBLIC. We are supposed to have, and should have, a rule of law and not of men. Unfortunately, this is one of the things that holds back the statists in their lust for power and so it is rapidly being eroded. Importantly, though, it is one of the last bulwarks against tyranny and when it falls, we should all be aware that tyranny is imminent.

Democracies weren't viable in Greek city states that are smaller than our towns, why would anyone think that they could work on such a complicated and large country as the US? Further, to the extent that one has a democracy, one has no rights. A democracy is not constrained by rights or law: vox populi, vox dei. Under a democracy, not only would gays not have rights, but we'd have slaves, women wouldn't have the vote, etc, etc. Remember, that in old democracies, anyone that didn't look like the ruling class was not a full person (anyone remember 3/5 doctrine?).

Frankly, if we could return to the principles our country was founded on, we wouldn't have to witness this shameful spectacle of people being denied their basic human rights, to choose who they will love and make a life with, because of the beliefs of others.

Democracy makes me sick.

A Second Amendment Question

2009-12-01T09:35:00.000-08:00

by Jason

For a while now I’ve been wondering how it is legal that California can deny a citizen the right to carry a weapon on their person, for whatever reason, if the Second Amendment guarantees to all United States Citizens the right “to keep and bear arms.” [Assuming, of course, standard exceptions about mental competency, et cetera, apply.]

I’ve been wondering about this for a while now and I’m in the process of writing an essay on Concealed Carry (CCW), Second Amendment rights, and gun control. Look for it sometime in December.

Comments welcome.