Hey all.
Welcome to an episode in the Mature audiences only series here on you’re listening to radio revel. How would I categorize this episode? Is it social commentary? Is it civic behavior? Is it truth telling?…. What it is is an episode called The women will take them down. You all know I’m not a disclaimer type of guy with this podcast, but this episode certainly falls into Mature audiences only as I will make several references to sex. Nothing too scandalous, but it’s there.
Lysistrata, who’s name evidently means “army disbander”, came up with a bird-brained plan to get the menfolk to stop a war. She gathered the womenfolk around her and swore them to not have sex with the men until they swore to end that war. In the Greek comedy by Aristophanes, Lysistrata gets what she was looking for, the war is brought to an end and men get to have sex with their wives again.
A bit to my chagrin, I’ve seen a couple of videos about something called “pre nut anxiety” and “post nut complacency” or something like that. You’ve got this guy in his 20s, he cute, he’s driving his car to work while making his Vlog, today’s theme is what happens after a man has sex, or at least has an orgasm. What caught my eye and kind of discouraged me about young people, was that in his introduction in which he talks about “pre nut anxiety”, he asserts that men (and he’s hardly been a man for more than a year or two), when they are in a “I want sex” mode, don’t think about anything beyond what we’ve all called “thinking with their penis”. Nothing can be done about it and women have to accept it.
So, in an earlier episode, I think it was Episode 7 of this season, I point out the irony of Donald Trump’s legal team attempting to disqualify an Attorney General from one of his legal woes through some kind of sex-scandal-corruption accusation. Now, this Attorney General is a woman, so there’s little chance of “thinking with her penis”, though the salacious details that came out of the whole fiasco certainly seemed to indicate that someone was thinking with that appendage.
Then there’s the fact that the first case to be brought to trial against Donald Trump is the one that involves a sexual-affair-hush-money coverup. The sex part aside, it does seem that Trump was involved in some shady activity around his first bid for the Presidency and his very questionable business practices. While the case is important, what he allegedly did was against the law and he should be held accountable, there are many who lament this being the first case, rather than the more “serious” cases involving mishandling of secret documents, election interference and incitement to insurrection.
It has to be the victims, the people who suffered harm that makes these cases different. In the sex-affair-hush-money case, it is the American voter, who was denied information that might have had an impact on their vote. Or it might have been the IRS or New York State Tax Agency, who don’t like people making things up about why money moves from one side to another. It could have been the lawyer who made the payment then ended up in jail for his participation in the unlawful activity while the boss walks Scott free. Let’s expand and say the victim has been the world at large, what if Trump had lost that election because of the information leading voters to choose differently? On whose behalf is this case being brought to trial?
It certainly isn’t on the behalf of the two women involved. One, a self-acclaimed porn actress, another a former Playboy Playmate of the Year. Both women clearly involved in activities that cater to the pre-nut instincts of the men around them. Both claim to have had consensual relations with a then moderately powerful man. I don’t know if they were paid for their services, nor do I care. I also don’t care that that man, Trump, was married to someone else at the time of the supposed sheet-ruffling. What I do find interesting, though, is how Trump was willing to pay these women to keep their stories quiet, perhaps with a valid concern that those very stories would have a negative impact on his campaign.
I don’t know what he had to worry about. The entire “grab them by the pussy” incident had very little impact on the results. The people who were going to vote for him were the kind of people who admired a man who is virile, who has no difficulty with satisfying that pre-nut anxiety when and where he wants. That’s the kind of man we need in the White House. While those two sex-scandal stories might have swayed a few people with some remaining moral compasses, I don’t think the results in the end would have been significantly different.
That doesn’t matter, though, none of us can accurately post-predict what might have happened, what should’ve, could’ve, would’ve happened. We certainly didn’t expect the guy who never bothered to look closely at secret documents while in office to abscond with boxes of them on leaving office. What possible interest could he have had with all that paper? The January 6th incident was also not expected, we actually expect more from our fellow citizens in these situations. So, those two could not have been post-predicted.
The attempts to commit election fraud and interference, well those are not way outside of what thinking people would expect of this man. It’s often pointed out that people from New York know Trump for who he is, a tabloid bully, a loudmouthed snake-oil salesman, a purported playboy. So, that he poured concrete controlled by the Mafia would not have surprised us. Nor were we probably surprised that he actually called someone and asked them to break the law. His ego is just inflated enough to lead him to think, not with his penis but rather with his toupee, that the mere privilege of speaking directly with the Don would automatically sway anyone to do his bidding.
Yet, it was the woman who got him into this particular mess. Trump was thinking with his penis, did something with that woman which she later felt gave her leverage over him, maybe only on an economic level, but leverage nonetheless. And it is his actions with that woman, which seem to have nothing to do with anything else, and shouldn’t have anything to do with anything else that are part of the very first attempt to bring this man down.
Women have not always had much luck in using this weapon against men. I’m thinking Anita Hill who felt the need to bring personal ethics into the calculation of approving a Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas. Is it right to put a man on the highest court who has a history of sexually harassing women? I’m thinking Monica Lewinski, she got Clinton in trouble, but there were few enduring consequences, that impeachment was a circus but as we see with Trump, the pre-nut anxieties of a President have no direct impact on his ability to do the job. I’m thinking Christine Blasey Ford who described a drunken, spoiled preppy pre-nut anxious teen sexually assaulting her, Brett Kavenaugh later put on a sobering, spoiled preppy pre-nut anxious, “I like beer”, teary-eyed self defense that only seemed to support the idea that past character traits will impact present character.
The track record of women going after men in this fashion is not very good. While they are believed, while some may even have evidence of the attacks, the male mindset has not changed at all, I’m thinking about that cute guy in his ’20s who actually believes that there is nothing to be done about pre-nut anxiety, it’s just how guys are gals, have to face it.
That does not mean, though, that men have the upper hand on women. While women seem to only have sexual-misdoings accusations as a weapon against men, the truth is that women seem to have more control over their own pre/post nut reactions. Lysistrata did not find it easy to convince her females-in-arms to abstain from sex for a higher cause; indeed, some of those women almost betrayed her, citing their own sexual needs over the cause. Lysistrata was able to reel them in, though, and taking advantage of that weakness men demonstrate when they allow their genitals to think rather than their brains, she and her females-in-arms were able to stop the war. What they didn’t count on was that post-nut return to reason that would bring the men to realize what they had succumbed to and how easily they could return to the status-quo.
I do think women will bring the men down, though. While some may have chorused the “fastest way to a man’s heart is through his stomach” refrain at one time, I’d say the “fastest way to take a man down is through his genitals” is, unfortunately, the most cutting arm women have, and that weapon is not quite honed to the edge that will effectively cut.
And, on the larger stage, it’s just so human for a society to get all wrapped up in the use or misuse of genitals as a reason for correcting the behavior of people with some type of privilege or power. It’s valid, I think, to consider a man who treats a woman as an object unfit to hold certain positions of power, to have sway over the behavior of women and other men in any social construct. I do think, though, that there are other things to take into consideration, of much more weight, in considering what to do with the malfeasance of men. It’s not that women only have the sex weapon, it’s that men are so pre-nut anxious that they don’t allow the women any other weapon to work with.
We might get to the serious stuff, finally. Trump will certainly try to use that woman’s weapon again, as he did with that Attorney General, but that weapon is not wielded well by masculine fingers with directions coming from below the belt rather than above the collar. Women only seem to have this power in this particular case, even though the wrong-doing is not specifically about women or Trump’s attitudes about them. One of the hush money details involves a doorman, so the sexual part is of little import. And Trump is way too old to be considered sexual — ugh!
Americans need to stop thinking with their genitals in general. Secret documents were stolen and shown about and improperly stored and the criminal who did so tried to obstruct investigations into the crime. Mob-boss phone calls were made and documents falsified and sent to official offices in an attempt to manipulate the process of electing a leader. Calls to arms and to fight and to violence led to destruction, a few deaths, many more injuries and a forceful wobble of the basic tenets of the system. None of these cases involve genitals. They involve rules in place being broken. The person breaking those rules needs to be called out. And he certainly should not be rewarded by being given a job. In the real world that would not happen. What makes this situation not “real world”?
Full disclosure, I would like to see Donald Trump in orange, behind bars without a cellphone. I would like to see his financial “empire” totally dismantled. I would like him to take his place in history, not as the man who paid a porn star to keep quiet about a one-night tryst in order to favor the results of an election, but rather as the criminal he will be proven to be on all of these fronts. No technicalities, no creative defense, he did this or that, the law says it’s wrong, people who did this or that face these or those consequences, Donald Trump is just a man suffering post-nut confusion. Let’s finish with him, shall we? Aren’t you all just bored with this?
Thanks for listening. Remember, the above is not about politics, it’s about crime and punishment. Let’s keep focused please.
Cheers.
you're listening to radio revel 