Erotic retardation II

[Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>]

Dear visionaries,

Everybody take a few deep breaths. If that doesn't help, put your head
between your knees for a few minutes.

Just a couple thoughts.

"We Americans look like bumpkin country jakes to most of the
civilized world . . ." There is a difference between fin de
siecle jadedness and civilization. I've been around the world also,
and when some of these other countries start mastering the basics of
hygiene and central heating I'll start worrying about their views on
American rubes.

Second, why did this hubbub happen? We had no laws on this at all for a
few years. The controversy was not started by conservative women wearing
burkas, offending all the feminists downtown. It was caused by those who
do not know what it means to live charitably in community with others.
The need for hyper-legalistic definitions was therefore insisted upon by
those who want to abuse their freedoms at the expense of others. Instead
of a law, I would have been happy to continue with a community consensus
that simply asked everyone not to be a jerk. But apparently this concept
is beyond some people.

And last, I reiterate my point that this represents a profound form of
erotic retardation. We resist those who want us to agree with their
attempts to make a woman's body a commonplace object with no more erotic
value than a street sign or a mailbox. Trinitarian Christians object, not
to the wonderful sexual expression of the marriage bed, but to the sexual
vandalism of your dull egalitarian flatness. What a boring and ugly world
you want!

But, if you don't agree, as is your constitutional right, I am still
waiting on the proposed wording of the law equalizing male and female
bodies in all sexual harassment situations. You know, a man can currently
pat a male co-worker on the chest. You mean he can't do this same thing
to Suzie Q in the next cubicle? Thunder! Lightning! Blue ruin! Tyranny!
Dragons! Flood! Goose-stepping soldiers! O tempora! O mores!