May 24, 2016, 06:45AM

Transgenders, Bathrooms, and the Apocalyptic Orgasm

Younger men will be willing to don drag to visually violate women.

Rsz getty 151329025 xlarge trans  3ijmnsiobjllmjmgdxat1bxe4iqashodp fob1b9mym.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

In a recently posted essay on Teen Vogue, transgender person Eli Erlick asks the following question: “Why would someone go through the trouble of dressing up as a woman—for long periods of time—just to violate someone else?”

The answer, of course, is the orgasm. Men, especially young men, would be more than willing to dress up as women if it meant they could have an orgasm. The orgasm is why men work out, fight, travel great distances and even go to war. The orgasm is why when I was 15 I climbed a pine tree that was about three stories tall to get a peek into the bedroom of a hot girl named Stacey.

It’s why allowing men dressed as women into women’s locker rooms is a bad idea. This is what the social justice left doesn’t understand—or maybe just refuses to. The problem with the new federal guidelines that require transgender people be able to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with instead of their biological gender is not that transgender people are a threat. The problem is with men, particularly young men, who, contra Eli Erlick, will be more than happy to wear a skirt for long periods of time if it means getting a glimpse of a naked woman.

It’s an obvious reality, but in a world that’s upside down with political correctness, stating the obvious becomes a countercultural act. Sane and healthy men won’t be willing to dress as women to physically violate women. But men, especially younger men, will be willing to don drag to visually violate women. So will pedophiles or other types of predators. When it comes to sex men are more visual than women. They’re also far more driven. Dispute that all you want; then go to a nearby bar or club and spend an hour observing what goes on.

Virtue-signaling bathroom apologists like Erlick and their media friends contemptuously declaim that it’s ridiculous to think that a man will construct an entire false persona to get access to the women’s restroom. These pundits, perhaps beta males with low sex drives, seem to think that drag presents an obstacle far too difficult for the average dude to attempt. But guys have done far worse to get to the orgasm. We’ve driven days without sleep, climbed the outside of buildings, and killed. The Trojan War was launched over a woman. Tossing on a dress and wig for a few days to see some ass? That’s cake.

The left is hypocritical on this issue. During the 20th century liberals tried to “liberate” the orgasm. Whereas they once celebrated the power of the climax, with the locker room controversy they now dismiss it as a non-issue. James Joyce got censored for writing about the orgasm in Ulysses in the 1920s. Arthur Miller praised it in The Tropic of Cancer. Norman Mailer practically made it a religion. In his seminal essay “The White Negro,” Mailer praised the 1950s hipster ethos of the “apocalyptic orgasm.” In the square world of postwar America, “sex is sin and yet sex is paradise.” It was the emerging hipster who was honest enough to crave the orgasm: "If everyone in the civilized world is at least in some small degree cripple, the hipster lives with the knowledge of how he is sexually crippled and where he is sexually alive, and the faces of experience which life presents to him each day are engaged, dismissed or avoided as his need directs and his lifemanship makes possible.”

And then came Playboy, Cosmopolitan and the sexual revolution. Cosmo’s editor Helen Gurley Brown celebrated “the ostentatious orgasm” while Hugh Hefner hacked away at America’s vestigial puritanism. Sex education entered the schools, erecting a new orthodoxy. Sexual urges are natural. Masturbation and orgasm are biological imperatives. To deny that is to be a blue nose. Who wants to go back to the repressive days of equating the orgasm with sin?

The left won that battle, but have now conveniently changed its argument. Whereas before liberals held that sexual urges are powerful, even overwhelming, and shouldn’t be suppressed; now they argue that it’s absurd to think that a horny 18-year-old bro would wear a wig to see girls showering.

The ironclad unreality of this argument is staggering. When I was growing up in Maryland I had girls living on either side of me. In one house was Lori, a pretty blonde. On the other were two cute brunette twins, Pam and Leslie. There were nights when my desire for them was so swamping that I literally felt dizzy. I’d either seek relief in the age-old way, or try to exhaust myself with exercise. One time I jogged five miles to a buddy’s house and, without breaking stride, fell into his pool.

Then there was Stacey, Lori’s cousin from Seattle. She came to visit for a week one summer. Stacey looked like Phoebe Cates. Her window was on the top floor of the house, and one night a buddy and I climbed some pine trees adjacent to the house to get a better look. Unfortunately she saw us first, and I was marched to the front door for a lecture from Lori’s mom.

Had a dress been the ticket to seeing Stacey nude, my closet would have looked like Helen Gurley Brown’s.

  • When an article is so stupid you can't tell if it's satire or not...

    Responses to this comment
  • Mark, you and others who make this ridiculous argument forget a few major facts. 1. The boy pretending he is trans is also nude. Despite what they may say in front of their peers, few would have the "balls" to be the only naked guy in a room full of girls. Most teenagers of either sex are too insecure. 2. I'm sure that their would be a major issue if the naked boy were walking around the girls locker room with a full on woody alerting all to his real purpose of being in the locker room. 3. Since there is no law in most states covering this issue (at least until recently) and no large-scale problem being reported, what is going to change all of the sudden to cause all these boys to change their behavior? Magic, devolution, a quantum shift in social norms caused by plague? 4. Do girls have no sex drive that they would never try the same?

    Responses to this comment
  • Texan. Couple of problems: Eventually the boy (generic) who is too shy to make the attempt grows old enough to go ahead with it. Some boys will have what it takes. An alternate persona is not necessary. One simply claims one's identity and it can't be challenged. You speak in generalities. Perhaps you're right that some guys won't do it, for whatever reason, and maybe most guys. But you haven't explained why it's so impossible that being concerned about it is a waste of time. Explain how it can't possibly, ever, not even once, happen.

    Responses to this comment
  • Liberals have been celebrating the orgasm? Liberals are in favor of sex ed, which is different (to put it mildly). James Joyce thought he was above politics. Arthur Miller was a liberal but didn't write "Tropic of Cancer." That was Henry Miller, who thought politics was a waste of time. Norman Mailer despised liberals because they (as noted) tend to favor sex ed over sex. Hugh Hefner was a little left of center last I heard. But saying this is proof that liberals celebrate the orgasm is like saying conservatives are really big on putting things into bags because the owner of a paper bag co is Republican. That leaves Helen Gurley Brown. Was she liberal? I don't know, maybe.

    Responses to this comment
  • Richard, please don't go the NockBitch route by creating straw men. I said "ridiculous" and never suggested the absolutes you claim I did. 2. Do any of the existing laws state that you have to take the word of individual and nothing else. 3. There are already plenty of laws against rape, voyeurism etc. How does the creation of this law reduce risk? 4. Of course one has to create "an alternate persona" How else could they claim to be of the opposite sex?What about children being accompanied by the opposite sex to the bathroom? Did you ever consider what is truly unhealthy is the puritanical social views held in the U.S. regarding the naked body and not silly laws about who may or may not use what bathroom? This is not a problem in most European and African nations where coed restrooms are common.

    Responses to this comment
  • Texan. Missed a couple of points: First, the only alternate persona one needs is for the varsity defensive line to claim to the gym teacher that they identify with women and that's where they want to shower. They must not be challenged. It's not required that it be similar to a CIA's fake person construction. The laws against rape and voyeurism are easier to enforce if the potential perp is required by law not to be where the potential victim is most vulnerable. Do any state laws requre formal certification of "identity"? No? Then you have to take the word. Europe's most important export is whatever it is that makes Americans think what Europe does is a better idea. Apparently, women's need for safe spaces ends at the restroom door. I have a relation who is all about rape-culture, women as victims, patriarchy, and she's confident my eight-year-old granddaughter can defend herself. That's a really dumb argument, but it's the best I've heard.

    Responses to this comment
  • Never mind. You've obviously been unduly influenced by the NockBitch. Just because the law doesn't require "certificate of identity" means nothing. One does not need certification of identity to be arrested for any crime. First you get arrested, then booked, the after a few years, you get tried. If you needed certificate of identity to get arrested, just leave it at home and steal, rape, kill anyone/anything you want because Richard says they can't bust you if you don't have id. "My existence is my I.D." My friend Caleb when once asked for I.D. At River Run Bar and Grill

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment