Without a Penis, I Feel Empty & Incomplete
Things that obsessively preoccupy me as a single woman in America
CONFESSIONS
Berate me for honestly speaking as a woman. I failed to meet that biologically encoded and metaphysically enforced purpose that defines a woman. Women need men to feel whole. I know that — because I am hollow right now. I awoke today unsure what to eat for breakfast, blankly staring in the cupboards. No one to cook breakfast for. No school lunches. I settle on coffee and get ready for work. No one tells me I am pretty anymore, so I feel ugly all the time. Look at all the magazines and the culture of beauty. Ugly is unlovable. And that means yoga is the best stretch toward couples outings, a husband and a fulfilled womb. I flip through dating websites at my desk, unable to concentrate or think about anything except how much I need a penis in my life. Because, who am I without one?
Oh, wait. That is all terribly absurd. Unfortunately, it could be taken verbatim from bits of romance novels and women’s lifestyle websites. But those are anxious, boring, synthetic women made for plastic men and homunculi Trump-its.
Unbelievably, this thread runs under a lot of cultural discourse. It structures impossible-to-meet and constantly shifting definitions for “female” success. All achievement and expression is pretranslated, considered affected, by the fact that I have a vagina — or, more importantly, I lack a penis. So quick biology lesson, which will conflict with the sociopolitical quagmire that follows it.
ANATOMY LESSON
A woman is defined by more than the nearby penis. She is not empty or incomplete without one. Woman is not scientifically defined as a man-without a genitalia. Her genitalia is not a hole.
Female biology is so elegantly complex it requires a whole extra set of chromosomes. There is no absence of purpose or identity based on the physiological lack of a penis or propinquity to an auxiliary penis. We should be further along than this.
The TWO FACED POLITICS of INFIDELITY
Conflating the actions of Trump with the philandering of Bill Clinton is undisguised, full-frontal misogyny. Never would a woman cheating on a man be widely considered his failing, just punishment or responsibility. (All cheating women are Jezebels and Delilahs). Currently, we have politicians and everyday people excusing men of any sexual overstepping.
“26,000 unreported sexual assaults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?” — Trump
Clearly penises control men; men don’t control men. How can men be held accountable for actions towards, or responses from, women in proximity? The penis has it’s own preordained, exculpatory purpose. Oddly, a cuckold is still trustworthy, even rational. For the owner of a penis, reason and genitalia are separable faculties. Character remains in tact, valorously getting through his ordeal with strength.
When a woman cheats, she is a slut or some iteration of bad woman. When she is cheated on, she is also a bad woman. Obviously she failed her nature, intelligence and social obligation. She is deviant — too narcissistic, corrupt or stupid to realize her existence depends on that penis. And her entire character is summarily defective and should be tossed into the incinerator. But first, we should shorn her hair and parade her through the court of public opinion.
The castigations of Hillary Clinton show we are sliding backward. Rebutting Trump’s chauvinism with Bill Clinton’s infidelity is a strange move. Strange that is could make sense so many years after the Civil Rights Act (1968). She is defined and even weak because her husband had an affair. She is a failure. If she cannot govern the marital bed, how can she lead the country? (Untrustworthy seems the appropriately dismissive epithet de ri·gueur.)
THE SOCIOPOLITICAL QUAGMIRE SWOLLEN BY ELECTION 2016
This election, the political pool is a moral Superfund. We are blinded by its toxicity. Americans adored JFK despite rumors of glamorous affairs. Roosevelt was a dog. Yet, an easy web search reveals how purposefully sexualized the oppositional rhetoric is towards Hillary. Terms like “cunt” and “bitch” have become fair impugnment of a political candidate. Beyond her duty-based failure as a woman, images that depict her as ugly or grotesque are used to convey ugliness inside. It echoes the genuinely disfiguring and sadly prevailing belief that a woman’s worth is determined primarily by her beauty. Out of this climate Trump is forgiven for venomous vulgarity while Hillary is unabashedly assaulted with it. You do not have to like her, but that should be an argument not a sexualized attack on the basis of being a woman.
Tragically, the mindset that allows this is rooted in men and women alike. There are ample good men who see people as people. We are more than the few inches of dangly bits and ripply parts. Sadly, we are socialized to count a few inches of our bodies as more important than the sum of our parts. We are raised to see people for their differences from us instead of empathetically connecting where we are the same. We have more in common beyond our skin than we are different because of them. But culturally, we have lost touch by only defining ourselves by the physical and assigned hegemonic roles.
From childhood we are separated by toys and dresses (that restrict by threats of skinned knees). We are enculturated by good parents and Barbie dolls that a girl is defined by her relevance to others. Little girls get crying plastic babies, fake lipstick, tiaras and plastic kitchens. Boys get erector sets and legos, whirring robots, dinosaurs and rocket ships, and outdoor sports. Boys get to imagine themselves as cowboys and pirates, heroically exploring the frontiers alone. Girls get to imagine various iterations of home in princess castles, dollhouses and tea parties. For a vast majority of women, our context from infancy is that we are incomplete without being tucked away in some safe place with babies and a man.
Well, Hillary Clinton has all those traditional real woman categories checked: mother, wife, grandmother and public servant. But, she still fails because her husband cheated over a decade ago — and they repaired their marriage. Women are still measured by someone else’s “stick” for too many people. At this cultural moment, that “stick” measures a woman vying for authority as a “bitch” out of the yard and an ugly “cunt”. Those who are offended by my language, should be more offended by the voices and silence that allow its proliferation.
REAL WOMEN MADE IN PLASTIC KITCHENS vs. FAKE SPIES IN THE YARD
We all live hearing the demeaning, contingent, backward notions of what it is to be a real (not abortive) woman. It is why I hate most weddings. The first probing question with family and strangers alike, “So, are you dating anyone? Are you married yet? Do you have children?” Prepare for the awkward stagger in conversation if all you have is “no” and pray for an appetizer you have to have across the room.
As you get away, the in-crowd regathers around baby talk and man-bragging. They compare husbands like test scores.
I had the right dolls and aspirations toward marriage, but in my childhood backyard my purpose was finding weird bugs, building forts and making worlds with stories. I was happier there than playing “house” with girls who named all their dolls Barbie. At school, I obstreperously wore frills and still played spies and strategy games with the boys.
Overriding my success is my status as the perpetually single woman. “There must be something wrong with her.” So, I (shamelessly) sit at the men’s table and talk about politics and the things erector sets made possible. I don’t want to play in roles. The aspirations of childhood, cooked up in plastic kitchens, are make believe.
A democracy requires a public where we can be human first, so that we can self-determine. We cannot democratically, justly have a society that is shaped by divisive derogations — where speech is outshouted by ugly and irrelevant acts of rhetorical terrorism. Freedom begins with protecting identity blindly. We accept personhood. Where every thought and voice gets to carry. This is the foundation of American democracy protected under the first amendment. But laws cannot replace how we treat each other. And a population that creates an environment hostile to democratic inclusion and equitable treatment has not truly democratic. Misogyny has no place in democracy. Even identity politics exists within an overarching framework of inclusive human value. A voice has no genitals, no color and no category it cannot transcend if it wants. When we force it into a body we can abuse, we are killing the spirit of freedom.
[Bonus: Why Hillary “talks like a man” by the Washington Post. Or how we metaphorically crossdress for leadership.]
Side note: to the above
If it doesn’t matter that she is a woman, why bring it up at all?
Would it make sense to say, “Trump for President? No Thanks, I’m not impressed with the fact that he is actually a man.”
Regarding the “full of shit” appropriation of art for vulgarized political commentary, well this sort artistic use of the body to debase authority goes back a long time. I personally love Voltaire and Rabelais. But in my memory, a random search of a different candidate wouldn’t unveil such a crassly embodied depiction. The Trump statues this election were also reprehensible, showing how absurdly shallow we have gotten. It is unfair to any candidate. Our politics should not depend on memes and name calling.
#AbuseCulture #Sexism #Humanity #Culture #Politics #Rhetoric #Sociolinguistics #Trump #Election2016 #HRC
