As we have seen, patriarchy relies for its continued success on precise regulation of penis placement.
Which as every Libertarian and Fiscal Conservative/liberal knows, means that only the total deregulation of the penis placement market can allow the invisible hand of Feminism to free us all from the...err... other invisible hand of patriarchy (unlike feminism's invisible hand, which is soft and caring as only a "post gender" invisible feminine hand can be) which is always trying to cop a feel when you least want it to).
The whole peice is interesting, not just because Twisty for once actually deigns to come up with some thing akin to a mechanism for her whole nihilistic "Oh it's the end of civilisation as we know it and I feel alright I suppose, I have badminton practice* and my food to keep me occupied and all" thing that seems to be the only bit of unifyng theoretical frame work that stops the radfem community dissolving in a squidgy mess of autophagy.
But any the, crux of the whole peice is really that Salon has finally noticed the existence of asexuals (when New Scientist had a peice from the guy who runs AVEN way back in 2004 ffs) and Hilarity promptly ensues:
But some experts see a potentially damaging downside to the asexual pride welcome mat and are concerned that freshly "validated" asexuals, rushing headlong into acceptance, may be so quick (and relieved) to call their condition an "orientation" that they'll buy the T-shirt before they've fully explored how they might have gotten that way.
"I don't think that masses of people -- who might be confused about sexuality, or afraid about sexuality, or who have not yet experienced sexual attraction and sexual pleasure, or who have experienced sexual trauma -- should be encouraged to define themselves as 'asexual,'" says Aline Zoldbrod, a Boston-area psychologist and sex therapist and author of "Sex Smart: How Your Childhood Shaped Your Sexual Life and What to Do About It." "I worry about boys and girls, men and women, finding an 'asexual' Web site and accepting their asexuality as an identity without even trying to understand its genesis. Some of these people need help."
What's that you say Twisty? People going on paternalistically about how people who've probably put quite a bit of thought into their life style haven't really, according to the randomised and arbitrary standard that they invented back when blacks drankfrm different fountains, and man-on-man was a crime, exained their choices is a tool commony used by the patriarchy to force women to live within patriarchy affirming lifestyles?
Next you'll be saying that the patriarchy also works by pinning women and men between two mutually exclusive sociological dichotomies, and then squeezing them together till we give up or die.
However the doctors do have a point that some asexuals probably are a bit damaged, for instance;
Jay, who started calling himself "asexual" when he was in high school, says he has many close friends, develops crushes on both men and women (more of an urge to see them 24/7 than to see them naked), and enjoys watching "Sex and the City" with friends anthropologically, as a way of observing how the other 99 percent lives.
Now you can't tell me that's normal. The thinking that S&TC is representative of how the other 99% live that is, not the platonic relationships thing, which I think we've all experienced in some form or another, but they tend to get eclipsed somewhat by the emotional rollercoasters that makeup sexual relationsips.
Do you know what? I'm just gonna cut this post here because the ironic dissonance between the two peices is kinda obvious, and I've gotta see a man about an auxillary dingus anyway.