The latest concern on male toxicity (homo toxicitus) focuses on male sexuality as somehow related, leading to a myriad of new theories.
The essential question is: What is “the real man”? Versus “the toxic man”?
The male toxicity thesis: males have become poisoned with aggression, anger, coldness, and violence, and think this psychopathic behavior = “masculinity.”
This past weekend Satwell Conference Scholars, from Satwell University, took on this subject, beginning with an old controversy—male response to the female short skirt.
Is “toxicity” a factor in male response to the short skirt, especially worn by any female considered “hot” in society?
A Satwell Survey indicates males (generally) report increased arousal with the short skirt (versus the long dress), and a tendency for their hands to plead for exploration.
Additional behaviors include: eyes rolling, legs crossing, panting, fingers twitching.
But feminist experts in the conference from the group “Fem-All & Baring” (FAB) responded:
“No, no, no. All this is directly the result of the very syndrome—toxic male aggression on steroids—and no reason women should restrain their styles!”
As with nude hiking, nude demonstrating, nude carrying a cross over your shoulder, nude dangling yourself as a tidbit in the country?
Immediately, however, a barrage of male protest started up that “natural tendencies” in the male cannot be considered “toxic.”
FAB experts rejoined:
“Why is it that females, generally, although difference in clothing styles must be considered, do NOT engage in groping behavior?
Satwell Conference experts then applied the term “head” as in the old Navy admonition to males going on shore leave: “Think with the bigger of your two heads.”
They pointed out the average male “head” is much larger than the average female parallel organ, as to a disproportionate sex arousal drive.
FAB experts: “Irrelevant.”
The next case was even more difficult to consider.
“No pants day” is a celebration calling for public exposure (freezing weather or no) and underwear exposed.
Women’s underwear in this respect may tend toward bikini thong and be dangled in front of males, for example, in a crowded subway car.
Version A: “the real man” (not toxified) in this situation remains: imperturbable, eyes smiling a little, in control, not a single tingling arousal anywhere on his person.
Version B: “the (heavily) toxified male,” as with crowded conditions in the subway car, reaches through, up, and into an available female.
FAB experts maintain this behavior is no way the responsibility of the female’s attire on this occasion.
They insist it is not a matter of biological stimulation run amok for the male, besieged by the clamoring of his smaller head.
No. It is the toxic stereotypes dictating that “a real man” dominates the female whenever and wherever, a la the beasts in the jungle.
The Satwell Conference descended into brouhaha at this point, participants vociferating and quivering.
In one heated dispute a female called out: “Eat my p***y!”
The battle of the sexes continues.