Disappointment in the commentary of strangers
I was downtown the other day, watching the people move about on their lunchtime errands, and saw --
-- saw what? how do I describe the sight? What words have not yet been used to convey the intense attraction, the subtle movement, the elegance; the indescribable? None. So I'll just say it -- I saw yet another excellent female rear end.
Women do not understand the draw of certain of their own anatomy, because they are not men. That sounds sexist, or lacking empathy; but is it? I don't think so. Look at the numbers. The industry dedicated to showing women naked -- enormous. Men naked? Also large, but who buys? Men. Face it, folks, men are visually oriented. We like to watch, always.
And this eyeballing orientation caused me downtown to watch without much thought of concealment-- that is, shamelessly -- a buttocks that proportioned itself beautifully; that swayed with unconscious grace, pivoting on the base of the slender waist without overt, gradiose exageration; that supported the lithe legs and gave, in the junction of those thighs, the hint, just the hint, of what always lay nestled at the scissor center of those legs.
My reveries were shattered by some oaf of a comment from some construction guy to another:
"Nice pooper."
Oh, fuck, you moron! Nobody in his right mind stares at an ass of quality and immediately associates the swell and the sway with the bodily function of excretion. Why? Do you go home to a partner, stare at an ass, and beg to be shat upon?!? Do you stare at the bare crack and, rather than follow it to from the base of the spine to the treasure at the gap, wish the crack to spread forced from within by the bilious product of digestion and perhaps to pinch off that offal letting it fall with disgusting ceremony into your approving face?!? You sick dog.
Do you attend concerts, you Shit-for Brains, and rather than hear the music, marvel at the lacquer job on the instruments? "They sound so good because they are well polished," would be the height of your critique. Wrong, moron! Wrong!
You deserve every splatter of shit the Poopers of this world can deliver, right into your Idiot face. The butt is an attraction beyond its function, just as the breast is more than the delivery mechanism for a child's milk. The curves of both, the forms of both, and the body that carries both are an inexplicable signal to those that hold eyes, testes, and an orientation toward those sacred forms. We cannot explain it, and should not.
This is not the first time such mistakes have been made.
The founders of the modern architectural movement looked upon the ravages of the First World War and decided, wrongly, that the institutions that brought and fought the war were to blame. They therefore decided to build buildings that did not in any way celebrate institutions, perfering each building to conform only to the function for which it was to be build. "Form follows function," Mies Van der Rogh famously instructed, to the detriment of all forced to dwell in and around the uninspired boxes that followed his edict to the letter.
"Form follows function." It does not! If this were true, Construction-Boy would be right. We would all admire butts not for the shape that so illogically attracts us, but for the quality of the product of peristalsis, for the form not of the muscles but of the turds. We would judge breasts by the quanitity and nutritional value of the milk they produce, and would -- here's the irony! -- then be living in a world without much use for that milk, for fewer children would be conceived and be therefore around to drink!
For without the stimulation provided by breast form, by butt form, by navel fascination, by the hypnotic attaction of the flair of the ankle, the cute nub of the toe, the elipsis of the neck, the bulge of the lip, the nose, the chin, the symetry of the face framed by the eyes -- without the function-less aspects of attraction, there would be no attraction, and therefore less sex!
No, there may be no real need for a cathedral to soar with majesty, for the door to be much, much larger than it needs. A castle need have no grand hall, and the furniture would fit probably better in a square block of a building for the king and queen. But, I'm sorry Mies, the forms of these buildings, of all buildings, in fact, do not inspire simply because the church and the monarchy, the legislature and the bank, are important in and of themselves. The human eye seeks the curve in a powerful design in real estate, in painting, in sculpture, just as it does in the butt of a random woman walking to lunch ahead of me.
They eye does not seek the shit within. "Form follows function" my ass.
-- saw what? how do I describe the sight? What words have not yet been used to convey the intense attraction, the subtle movement, the elegance; the indescribable? None. So I'll just say it -- I saw yet another excellent female rear end.
Women do not understand the draw of certain of their own anatomy, because they are not men. That sounds sexist, or lacking empathy; but is it? I don't think so. Look at the numbers. The industry dedicated to showing women naked -- enormous. Men naked? Also large, but who buys? Men. Face it, folks, men are visually oriented. We like to watch, always.
And this eyeballing orientation caused me downtown to watch without much thought of concealment-- that is, shamelessly -- a buttocks that proportioned itself beautifully; that swayed with unconscious grace, pivoting on the base of the slender waist without overt, gradiose exageration; that supported the lithe legs and gave, in the junction of those thighs, the hint, just the hint, of what always lay nestled at the scissor center of those legs.
My reveries were shattered by some oaf of a comment from some construction guy to another:
"Nice pooper."
Oh, fuck, you moron! Nobody in his right mind stares at an ass of quality and immediately associates the swell and the sway with the bodily function of excretion. Why? Do you go home to a partner, stare at an ass, and beg to be shat upon?!? Do you stare at the bare crack and, rather than follow it to from the base of the spine to the treasure at the gap, wish the crack to spread forced from within by the bilious product of digestion and perhaps to pinch off that offal letting it fall with disgusting ceremony into your approving face?!? You sick dog.
Do you attend concerts, you Shit-for Brains, and rather than hear the music, marvel at the lacquer job on the instruments? "They sound so good because they are well polished," would be the height of your critique. Wrong, moron! Wrong!
You deserve every splatter of shit the Poopers of this world can deliver, right into your Idiot face. The butt is an attraction beyond its function, just as the breast is more than the delivery mechanism for a child's milk. The curves of both, the forms of both, and the body that carries both are an inexplicable signal to those that hold eyes, testes, and an orientation toward those sacred forms. We cannot explain it, and should not.
This is not the first time such mistakes have been made.
The founders of the modern architectural movement looked upon the ravages of the First World War and decided, wrongly, that the institutions that brought and fought the war were to blame. They therefore decided to build buildings that did not in any way celebrate institutions, perfering each building to conform only to the function for which it was to be build. "Form follows function," Mies Van der Rogh famously instructed, to the detriment of all forced to dwell in and around the uninspired boxes that followed his edict to the letter.
"Form follows function." It does not! If this were true, Construction-Boy would be right. We would all admire butts not for the shape that so illogically attracts us, but for the quality of the product of peristalsis, for the form not of the muscles but of the turds. We would judge breasts by the quanitity and nutritional value of the milk they produce, and would -- here's the irony! -- then be living in a world without much use for that milk, for fewer children would be conceived and be therefore around to drink!
For without the stimulation provided by breast form, by butt form, by navel fascination, by the hypnotic attaction of the flair of the ankle, the cute nub of the toe, the elipsis of the neck, the bulge of the lip, the nose, the chin, the symetry of the face framed by the eyes -- without the function-less aspects of attraction, there would be no attraction, and therefore less sex!
No, there may be no real need for a cathedral to soar with majesty, for the door to be much, much larger than it needs. A castle need have no grand hall, and the furniture would fit probably better in a square block of a building for the king and queen. But, I'm sorry Mies, the forms of these buildings, of all buildings, in fact, do not inspire simply because the church and the monarchy, the legislature and the bank, are important in and of themselves. The human eye seeks the curve in a powerful design in real estate, in painting, in sculpture, just as it does in the butt of a random woman walking to lunch ahead of me.
They eye does not seek the shit within. "Form follows function" my ass.