That's a LOT of semen.
TV detectives pore over semen stains, and find evidence of crimes. Over on A Voice for Men, B.R. Merrick pores over TV detectives poring over semen stains, and finds evidence of “anti-man mentality.” On Law & Order: SVU, he says,
Every time I chanced upon seeing a bit of it, someone somewhere said “semen.”
You know the show focuses on sex crimes, right? When you’re investigating sex crimes, I’d say the chances are pretty good you’re going to run across some semen from time to time.
This is a show that has been on the air for more than a decade, a spin-off from another program more than two decades long, dedicated to entertaining millions of Americans every week using salacious, graphic language about terrible crimes. Semen. Semen stains. Semen samples. Semen on a dead body. Crime. Law, order, crime, and semen.
Spam, eggs, bacon, semen and spam. Spam, spam, bacon, semen, and spam. Semen, semen, spam eggs sausage and semen.
Sorry, I got distracted.
Semen is disgusting, if I am to conclude anything from watching this program. How is it that a show that continually mentions semen in connection with horrific crime can remain so popular for over a decade?
Christopher Melonimania? No, nothing so straightforward as that. Clearly what we’re dealing with is anti-semen propaganda of the sneakiest sort.
Millions watch, but virtually no one notices. It is as if the ejaculation of semen is something that the world puts up with but secretly detests. Since only men make semen; since it is usually voluntarily ejaculated except for certain cases of rape and nocturnal emissions; and since the voluntary giving of this life-giving substance is usually frequent; what are men supposed to think if the culture embraces mainstream entertainment that virtually equates semen with crime?
If semen is outlawed only outlaws will produce semen?
The conclusions we are supposed to draw seem pretty obvious to me: Women and sexless children are the victims of semen, the victims of men. Men are too quick to indulge their semen-connected desires. Pornography is directly connected to men, semen, and the oftentimes unavoidable crimes that result.
So jerking off into a sock has been criminalized?
Once you indulge a penis, all bets are off. Unless, of course, he’s been thoroughly trained.
Penises can be trained? Really? I’ve had very little luck training mine.
Men who are raised not to take their feelings seriously will probably feel a little tinge that is quickly ignored when semen is mentioned in a silly television program. Men who are used to being teased will grin along with the giggling girls who laugh at a man whose penis is not only severed, but shredded in a garbage disposal, so that he can spend the last several decades of his life without one.
So Law & Order: SVU is secretly preparing men for a dystopian future in which all untrained penises will all be shredded in garbage disposals?
Stay tuned, I guess.
@kirbywarp
dicipres’ book is the one that squicked me out. The cookbook I thought was hilarious.
@cloudiah:
Ah, my mistake. In that case I agree. The “young patriarch’s guide” thingy is just a sugar-coated exercise in pushing the same misogynistic crap that’s always been around…
…
You know, now that the cookbook has been brought up, the title of this post has an entirely new meaning… O.O
Well, since I’m a domme I guess when I have kinky sex with men I must be acting out my anger at men in a really direct way? Not sure how this links in to the theory about kinky women then being angry afterwards, thus feminism. Shouldn’t I in theory feel all satisfied and thus not need the feminism?
I’m also confused about how the cuddling that tends to happen afterwards fits into all this.
In other news, MRAL thinks that feminism is a religion. How did he get into college? I guess maybe if you’re a math major they don’t make you do essays.
“Example for a self prayer:
I am open and unapologetic about my sexual desires. In any sexual interaction with a woman, she will be submissive to my power. Women may dislike me and even hate me, but I make their knees weak and their vaginas wet.”
Um…I can’t say that “I hate you” and “now fuck me” have ever coincided in my case. Generally speaking, if I am in the company of a man who I hate my vagina somewhat resembles the Sahara, but with a padlock. Free advice from a woman – please do not try this particular affirmation, it’s not going to end well.
@hellkell
NOOOOOOOOO!!!! I won’t get that song out of my head all night now!
To be fair, the hang up on respect is not so much an MRA hang up, as it is standard social conditioning for men. Which is why the whole men=always rational thing constantly cracks me up…. ain’t nothin rational about most of the brawls that we get into.
Also, I have very rarely come across people that had any particular liking for semen or vaginal juices (myself included, so it could just be a birds of a feather thing). It’s always been more like busting a nut means that your partner’s been satisfied so you put up with it because that’s what you want. It was kind of a culture shock when I started reading posts by sex-positive people.
Oh wow! My phone died, and dicipres gave me a response!
LOLOLOLOLOL
K thanks that clears it up real good.
I don’t know how MRAL got into college, but before he was banned from the forum he did say something about failing his classes.
He’s very manipulative, and I think he genuinely doesn’t understand why that no longer works here.
Germaine Greer wrote that that: “women have no idea how much men hate them.”
Based on the stuff you’ve been posting, I can’t say Germaine Greer is wrong.
I’ve got an old collection of letters from Ms. Magazine, all from the ’70s and early ’80s, and it seems there was a pretty intense debate for a while about how to reconcile BDSM with feminism. Fortunately, things ultimately shook out in favor of getting it on any way you like and not worrying about how it affects your politics.
The exception, of course, is getting it on with one of those “the free market will cure discrimination, just like in the golden days when women freely chose to be fired if they got married and black people freely chose not to eat at lunch counters” Ron Paul libertarian. That’s a sick kink.
They weren’t rhetorical though. Rape is about non-consent, not physical force and I really do believe that, that’s why I found your assumptions about physical force being an integral part of “real” rape so problematic and why I asked you to clarify. From what you’ve said now it seems like you do think this is true? I’m still not 100% sure it’s what you’re saying, but it sort of sounds like it. Am I wrong here?
Snowy, I do think sex without consent is rape, but I suppose, in some ways, my views as to what constitutes consent are still in flux. Obviously, a person cannot consent to sex if they are not cognizant, for example. However, in the personal situation I referenced, my assumption is that the man assumed my consent when I asked him to use the condom. However I might have experienced the event, I do not believe he would have considered the sex unwilling. I don’t mean to muddle things by bringing up an uncomfortable incident from my past, but I still struggle to understand what consent means when matters become so nebulous. If a woman or man told me they were raped in similar circumstances, I wouldn’t dispute that interpretation of events. It does not necessarily follow that I feel I was raped; I feel I failed to communicate. Was it reasonable for me to fear that he would have forced sex on me if I had been more vocal about my refusal? I don’t know. He had already overpowered me several times in order to touch me and kiss me, we were alone, and I had no means of leaving the location unless he let me. He had been drinking. He was older and more experienced. The situation was too volatile for me, but, objectively, I don’t know that that was his fault. But, again, if someone construed a similar experience as rape due to non-consent, I would not object.
It’s not my intention to make distinctions between “non-consent” and “real rape”, as I am well aware that physical force is not the only means of obtaining sex from an unwilling individual. However, I had interpreted the comments about female-on-male rape to carry the assumption that physical force was the primary method of obtaining sex from an unwilling male. I can think of many situations in which a woman could force sex on a man, perhaps a boss propositioning a reluctant subordinate, but the physical force scenario seemed like it would be a minority one.
I don’t really know what the point was of bringing up your story, it seems irrelevant to the discussion at this point. You aren’t using it as proof that rape has to be forceful and it doesn’t really add anything. It feels like it was just a emotional appeal because you know rape is a sensitive topic for many here. I’m sorry if this is way off.
Again you don’t know this for sure, you are just assuming this because you don’t seem to think women are capable of overpowering a man if it came down to it. I don’t know why you feel the need to dismiss male rape survivors or why it matters if most of them “are physically over powered or not”.
@malcontent, I’m a 180-pound woman who was raped by a 120-pound man. I could have kicked his ass in a fight, but it was an acquaintance and I froze up and didn’t know what to do. He didn’t physically overpower me, just ignored a couple of ‘no’s and I kind of gave up.
I don’t know whether he assumed that me giving up meant that I was consenting, but it was still rape since I did not say yes.
I’m sorry that happened to you, by the way 🙁
I’d like to re-visit some of my commentary and expand my apology.
When I referred to women-raping-men, I meant the forced occurance of PIV sex, not other types of sexual assault, which I am well aware happen between women and men. Having spent some time looking into this, this does indeed happen – notably in Africa, although it is rare compared to other types of assault, this doesn’t reduce it’s seriousness. I also accept, with sorrow, that male victims of this type of sexual assault by females suffer as a result of societal dismissiveness.
Finally, I’d like to extend my apologies to MRAs who frequent this site.
Yup, semen is considered the most disgusting of disgusting things ever. This would be why I had to explain slowly and patiently to a seventeen-year-old male student of mine the other day that putting your semen in someone else’s drink is not an ok thing to do.
What did he want to accomplish with that maneuver? And how the hell do you get to be 17 and not know that body fluids should only be shared with consent?
That seems to be a thing, men wanting to put their semen in women’s drinks, food, etc. It seems to happen with some regularity in offices, as part of a pattern of sexual harrassment. I don’t quite grok why forcing a woman to unwittingly consume your semen is so satisfying for the men in question, and I think I’m probably happier not understanding.
Apart from anything else, all bodily fluids are a potential biohazard. No feeding them to other people without their knowledge and consent, please.
CassandraSays
Feeding women semen in their drinks is a part of office culture? Please tell me your just kidding…
Not normal office culture, I’d hope, but I’ve seen multiple news stories in which it was something that was done as part of a pattern of sexual harrassment.
These hypocrites who made these laws want to oppress men in every possible way. There is nothing except that.
Hi, EN. Bye, EN.
What laws, anyway? In your mind, what gender does the people who make laws belong to, mainly?
Apart from Joyce McKinney, has there ever been a case of non-statutory rape, of a man, by a woman? And if so, what tiny percentile does it constitute?
Yes, and larger than we probably know, because the reaction to being told about it is so often derisory. I am pretty sure that partner rape, of the “persist until they say yes” is perpetrated by people of all genders.
And it’s reprehensible, no matter who does it.
Happy: I’m sorry for jumping on you so soon. I didn’t wait to see if anyone else had commented, or if you’d made reply.
These hypocrites who made these laws want to oppress men in every possible way. There is nothing except that.
As far as I can decipher, EN either thinks that men are horribly oppressed by not being able to rape people, or that men are horribly oppressed (in every possible way, you guys!) by not being able to put semen in people’s drinks. Also, apparently lawmakers all themselves put semen in people’s drinks, because they’re hypocrites?
He really is fairly amazing at cramming the maximum amount of “WTF” into a very short comment, isn’t he?
I still think it is interesting to ask, and seems reasonable.
This is from asshole 101. “I was only asking, and it seems reasonable”.
But when someone asks, “why shouldn’t women treat every possible male they see as a potential rapist, because she can’t know his intentions”, that’s a horrible accusation with no basis in fact.
dicipres weasled out of a charge he admits he can’t support, but which is really interesting, and “reasonable” and which we ought to think about.
What about me? I’ve engaged in light BDSM, and I think feminism is swell. I’m a dude, and when I play in BDSM situations I’m the dommy one.
Fuckwit.
I think one of the the takeaway points re: rape, is that acquiescence does not equal consent. If a bunch of big guys on the street come up to me and demanded 5 dollars, and I gave it to them to make them go away, even without the explicit threat of violence that still doesn’t mean I consented freely. I doubt it would hold up in court, but it still wouldn’t mean I had given it freely, either.
You’d be surprised what holds up in court, CB. We’re not talking about rape, after all.
Yeah, I know Rutee. (sigh!) All the more reason to hold rape to the same standards we hold other crimes.