"Physical assault definitely violates most society's [sic] idea of a moral order, which perhaps explains why aggression plays some kind of role in most humor."

"Freud theorized that humor serves as a way to dissipate sexual or aggressive tension in a socially acceptable way. Thomas Hobbes argues in the Leviathan that laughter arises from feeling superior, and that it's an extension of a feeling of 'sudden glory' arising from recognizing someone else's comparative defect or weakness.... The brain gets its wires crossed when confronted by someone else getting hurt. As a pain-filled situation unfolds, a witness doesn't experience the negative emotional valence that the person in pain does, but the brain still registers an emotional arousal. It can mistakenly categorize the sudden spike in emotion as positive....."

From "FYI: Why Is It Funny When A Guy Gets Hit In The Groin?" — a 2013 Popular Science article — which I'm reading this morning after blogging about last night's "SNL" cold open which featured "Joe Manchin" punching "Chuck Schumer" in the balls. There was a lot more in that sketch, and I didn't find any of it too funny, but in the comments to my post, Meade wrote: "in this era of That's Not Funny, at least we still have male-on-male sexual assault to laugh at."

Is hitting a man in the balls a sexual assault? It depends on the meaning of "sexual." I remember the definition of "sexual behavior" used by Rachel Mitchell (the prosecutor) in questioning Brett Kavanaugh. It specified the outward behavior and excluded intent. If you were doing the behavior — e.g., rubbing your clothed genitals against another person's clothed genitals — it didn't matter if you weren't doing it for sexual gratification. It could be mere "horseplay," and it would be "sexual behavior." That's adopting a broad view of "sexual," and that was done, I think, to take the perspective of the person on the receiving end of the behavior.

What about the man on the receiving end of a hit in the balls? First, are we talking about real life or a comedy scene? Getting hit in the balls is extremely common in comedy — it has a TV Tropes article* — and that's one reason to avoid it. But let's think about whether it should be avoided because it's not taking sexual assault seriously. We don't laugh to see a woman hit in the genitals. I don't think I've ever seen that used in comedy. It's not a cliché, but why isn't it a hilarious twist on the old cliché? We know it's not. Violence against women! And now, remember the 1970s feminist ideology about rape: It's a crime of violence, not sex. Rapists are not doing something sexual. See how that fits with Rachel Mitchell's definition of "sexual behavior."

Now, let's get back to the Popular Science article:

Besides the Freudian implications of the aggressive and sexual tension in the situation, there's also the suddenness with which a blow to the 'nads can take down even an otherwise big, strapping man.... Add that to the theories already at play with physical humor—benign violations, mistaken commitments, aggression, emotional arousal....

And you don't have women to tell you "That's not funny." It's male on male and the men are free to laugh fraternalistically.... until the women crack down on that too. And why wouldn't we? You're not taking sexual violence seriously. Or do you think it's not sexual? Maybe if we get you to think of it as sexual, you guys will stop laughing at other men's pain. And don't try to fend off the ire of women by purporting to take pride in man-on-man sexuality. The sexuality is on the rape continuum and therefore not funny in the Era of That's Not Funny.
_____________________________

* It was all the way back in 1995, that "The Simpsons" was trying to instruct us that this form of humor is so bad that only Homer Simpson is laughing:



ADDED: A reader sends a link to this example of a woman getting kicked in the crotch:



"King of the Hill" felt it could get away with that, I suspect, because: 1. It's a cartoon, 2. The woman is portrayed as stronger than men (not having balls is a super-power).

Read More

Senator Whitehouse, just now: "I don't believe 'boof' is flatulence. I don't believe 'the devil's triangle' is a drinking game."

"And I don't believe calling yourself a girl's 'alumnius' is being her friend. And I think drinking 'til you 'ralph' or 'fall out of the bus' or 'don't remember the game' or need to piece together your memory the next day is more consistent with Dr. Ford's and other's testimony than his own. If Dr. Ford's testimony is true, I hope we can all agree that Kavanaugh has no business on the Court. And I for one believed her."

On the front page of Urban Dictionary right now:

Devils Triangle
A threesome with 1 woman and 2 men. It is important to remember that straight men do not make eye contact while in the act. Doing so will question their sexuality....

by W_J May 11, 2008

boofed
to have taken it in the butt; had anal sex.

Nick boofed Mal last night.
by Andrea M. October 11, 2004

These definitions go back to the early 00s, so they're not concocted to hurt Kavanaugh, but they don't go back to the early 80s, so they're somewhat weak as definitions used by teenaged Kavanaugh in his yearbook.

Also on the front page at Urban Dictionary because of (I presume) the Kavanaugh hearings (WaPo transcript):

7 f's
Find them
French them
Feel them
Finger them
Fuck them
Forget them
Forever

I did the big 7 f's last night
#find#french#feel#finger#fuck#forget#forever#them#7#f#f's#club#big
by * * February 21, 2007

The 7 f's relates to this part of Whitehouse's questioning of Kavanaugh yesterday:

WHITEHOUSE: And there are, like, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven F’s in front of the Fourth of July [on Kavanaugh's high school yearbook page]. What does that signify, if anything?

KAVANAUGH: One of our friends, Squi, when he said the F word starting at a young age, had kind of a wind-up to the F word. Kind of a “ffff.” (LAUGHTER) And then the word would come out. And when we were 15, we thought that was funny. And it became an inside joke for the — how he would say, “Ffff” — and I won’t repeat it here. For the F word. 

In the same questioning session, Whitehouse had asked Kavanaugh about "Devil’s triangle," and Kavanaugh had said, "Drinking game."

WHITEHOUSE: How’s it played?

KAVANAUGH: Three glasses in a triangle.

WHITEHOUSE: And?

KAVANAUGH: You ever played quarters?

WHITEHOUSE: No (ph).

KAVANAUGH: OK. It’s a quarters game.

Asked about "boofed," Kavanaugh had said "That refers to flatulence. We were 16."

WHITEHOUSE: OK. And so when your friend Mark Judge said the same — put the same thing in his yearbook page back to you, he had the same meaning? It was flatulence?

KAVANAUGH: I don’t know what he did, but that’s my recollection. We want to talk about flatulence at age 16 on a yearbook page, I’m — I’m game.

ADDED: Do I agree with what Whitehouse said "I hope we can all agree" about? I think many people, when they are young, drink and say crude things about sex, including things like that 7 fs business and voicing enthusiasm for anal sex and threesomes, and I don't think any of that junk is even relevant to the question whether a person with a long professional career has the character needed to serve on the Supreme Court.

But Whitehouse only asked us to agree that if Ford's allegations are true, he should not serve on the Court, and I will agree to that. The question remains whether Ford's allegations are true, and Whitehouse is using Kavanaugh's testimony about the meaning of "boofed" and "Devil's triangle" to attack his credibility. If we think he lied under oath about that, then it's more likely that he lied about other things, including his denial of Ford's allegations.

Read More

"I'm a sentimental sap, that's all/What's the use of trying not to fall?/I have no will, you've made your kill/'Cause you took advantage of me!"

That's a 1928 song with lyrics by Lorenz Hart.

I'm thinking about it this morning after reading the questions Michael Avenatti proposed that the Senate Judiciary Committee ask Brett Kavanaugh: "Did you ever witness a line of men outside a bedroom at any house party where you understood a woman was in the bedroom being raped or taken advantage of?” and whether "he ever tried to prevent men from raping or taking advantage of women at any house party." I called "taken advantage of" a "strange locution." You're inquiring about rape, but you're lumping it together with sex where there's "taking advantage."

I'm so hot and bothered that I don't know
My elbow from my ear...

Or — to read Ronan Farrow in The New Yorker — you're so drunk you don't know a plastic penis from a fleshly one.

Here I am with all my bridges burned
Just a babe in arms where you're concerned
So lock the doors and call me yours
'Cause you took advantage of me

The Wikipedia article about the song says it "can be sung by either gender, but has traditionally been sung by women." Here. Check out the feeling when a man sings it (and here's my 2005 post "Songs transformed with the sex of the singer"):



I have no will, you've made your kill...

What's the use of Brett Kavanaugh trying not to fall?

I'm just like an apple on a bough/And you're gonna shake me down somehow...

Read More

With the devious use of the disjunctive "or," Michael Avenatti raises a cloud of "gang rape" suspicion around Brett Kavanaugh.

I'm reading the shockingly titled Daily News article "Brett Kavanaugh and pals accused of gang rapes in high school, says lawyer Michael Avenatti."

“We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them,” Avenatti said in an email to Mike Davis, chief counsel for nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Gang rape??!!!

Yes, Avenatti wrote "gang rape" in his email to the Committee. And not just one gang rape — multiple gang rapes. What is the sudden, breakout hysteria?!

Avenatti did not disclose any details or identities of his witnesses.

All eyes on Avenatti. What a trickster this man is! Let's look at what he dropped on the public last night, just as we were hearing the weird new allegation that came out in The New Yorker. We'd barely had the chance to begin to process the story of a Yale college woman who, while seemingly too drunk to be sure if she was looking at a real penis or a fake one, saw Brett Kavanaugh pulling up his pants and heard — as she remembers it — somebody say his name. And then along came Avenatti to waggle his teaser at us. Boldface added:

Avenatti hinted at the nature of his allegations when he suggested to the Senate Judiciary Committee a series of questions to ask Kavanaugh.

One of his questions: “Did you ever target one or more women for sex or rape at a house party? Did you ever assist Mark Judge or others in doing so?”

Also, Avenatti suggested asking Kavanaugh: “Did you ever attend any house party during which a woman was gang raped or used for sex by multiple men?”

And: “Did you ever witness a line of men outside a bedroom at any house party where you understood a woman was in the bedroom being raped or taken advantage of?”

Avenatti also said Kavanaugh should be asked if he ever tried to prevent men from raping or taking advantage of women at any house party....

Are those the questions Avenatti used when collecting his witnesses — with "rape" never asked about independently from "sex" (or the strange locution "taken advantage of")?

Should Kavanaugh opponents welcome Avenatti's entrance onto this scene? I hear in him the echoes of a longstanding fight against fraternities and the accusation that they are a conspiracy of rapists. We got deeply into this issue back when Rolling Stone published its piece on the University of Virginia which turned out into a fiasco for those who sprung at an opportunity to describe a specific incident to stand in for all the bad behavior they wanted to alarm us about. Here we go again. I assume — but what do I know? — that there is horrible sex going on in the context of college drinking parties. I assume a lot of young women and men get hurt. They are used for sex and taken advantage of and — especially if you broadly define the word — raped.

You could cast aspersions on every man who ever belonged to a fraternity that held drinking parties. But should that serious problem be suddenly dumped on Brett Kavanaugh?

What Avenatti is doing resonates with something I wrote on September 18th: "The question that can destroy Brett Kavanaugh: Have you ever been so drunk you could not remember what happened?"

College happened. There is a drinking culture. It's tied to cheap, drunken sex. Can Kavanaugh assure us that he was never anywhere close to that?

Are you and everyone you care about free of the fraternity gang rape stink? If Kavanaugh falls, are you ready for the fall of every man who had drunken sex in college?

Read More