(I've posted this at various places before, but recent events have prompted me to remind myself of it as a constant in my overall philosophy regarding our persecution.

The ideas themselves aren't new or even all thaoriginal in expression. But they are still constants in our lives.)

Some people are slaves to the Rule of Screwing.

Some people aren't.

For those who are slaves to it, there are two kinds of people in their perspective: those who do the screwing, and those who are screwed.

  They define the screwers as the males, and the screwees as the females. 

Anything that “allows” itself to get screwed is a screwee — and, therefore, female (which has connotations of inferiority).  So, when a man allows himself to get screwed, or a woman fails to allow herself to get screwed, they are violation the rule of screwing — and they simply can’t handle that breakdown of what they perceive as the “the way things are supposed to be”.

Worse: since they consider it their *job* to screw, suddenly having something that isn’t female be screwee, it leads to the suggestions that since they are supposed to screw those things which are screwable, they are supposed to screw these screwee men.

And that scares the crap out of them, on a sub-conscious level. 

Why?

Because if they can screw another man, it means that men are screwable, and that would place them in the screwable position as well.

  Which means they would be women.

Which scares them even more, because that would mean that they’d have to give up the privileges of being the screwer.

Its all nice and simple for them until this change to the heteronormative patriarchy raises its head. 

They can’t deal with it. It becomes a logic bomb in their heads, and, in the end, what we get is a person for whom the most apt description, in light of the rule of screwing, is…

…screwy.

dyssonance

dyssonance