Species Is Just A Social Construct

     In overturning the most ancient and oblivious idea that marriage was a special union between a biological man and a biological woman, the Supreme Court seemed to endorse the idea that gender (if not biological sex) was a “social construct” and thus didn’t really mean anything as it pertained to marriage or other institutions that have historically acknowledged the obvious fact that humans are a sexually dimorphic species. Of course, if the scientific reality of biological sex is irrelevant, then is any biological scientific reality safe? According the penguins, the barometers of sexual scienceof course not.

“Former swimsuit model Elizabeth Hoad, 49, went on live television Tuesday in the UK to wed her 6-year-old golden retriever, Logan.

“‘I found the one and I love him,’ she says.

“Hoad, from Ascot, Berkshire, was a swimsuit model in the ’80s and had relationships with stars the likes of golfer Seve Ballesteros and Formula One driver James Hunt. But after a slew of unsuccessful dates over the years — some 221, she recalls — and giving birth to a son, now 25, Hoad decided the only man she could count on was her loyal Logan.

“Hoad and her lucky pup appeared on British morning talk show ‘This Morning’ to say ‘I do’ live in front of thousands of viewers.”

     O brave new world…


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Species Is Just A Social Construct

  1. avatar The Sage says:

    That graphic accepts MLPony loving perverts but not those with cat-girl or other anime waifus.

  2. avatar jabrwok says:

    I’ve thought a lot about the institution of marriage, and I’ve come to the conclusion that no one (other than myself of course!) knows what it’s actually for.

    Love? Nope, people will love one another or not, regardless of State recognition.
    Children? Nope, they’ll happen regardless.
    Property? Nope, that’s what wills are for, and there’s no property requirement for marriage.

    So what then? What would a legally-binding, sexually exclusive relationship, between on man and at least one woman bring to the table such that every civilization in human history has recognized and rewarded and enforced it?

    Answer: recognition of paternity.

    Men have no natural way of knowing whether we’re fathers or not (we don’t get pregnant), and if women are free to sleep around then the paternity of their children will always be in doubt.

    So why does recognized paternity matter? Because men have no significant emotional stake in the future beyond our own lifetimes unless we have children we recognize as our own. Our children are our immortality. Without them we have no reason not to just eat, drink, and be merry. Once we die, the world ends as far as we’re concerned. Without children of our own, we have no reason to build bridges, walls, roads, sewers, armies, or civilizations for subsequent generations to inherit. Not unless those generations include our own flesh and blood.

    Marriage gives men fatherhood. Fathers will step up and lead and protect and improve their communities for the sake of their children. Leadership by fathers (Patriarchy) gives us civilization.

    Tell us marriage is just welfare for live-in lovers and that we’re toxic and that fatherhood doesn’t matter…and the outcome is no likely to be pretty. We’ll just go Galt and watch as our inheritance burns to the ground.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *