Re: Castration.

"P Diddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "P Diddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "David Lee Kollberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "P Diddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > "Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > P Diddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message:
> news:RGSwb.28321
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Yin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > >> What do you think about castration for sex offenses?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you mean chemical or physical?
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think of either?
> > > > >
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > Neil
> > > >
> > > > I would think pyhsical would be worse than chemical. If it was
> physical,
> > > > that in effect would take away some of your masculinity, wouldn't
it?
> > > > Chemical would mean you'd still have your penis...just not a lot of
> > blood
> > > > going up there...I think.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yours is a rather theoretical view on this matter, and doesn't take
into
> > > account any true aspects of what masculinity is really about. Would
your
> > > reply have been similar if the question had been "What do you think
> about
> > > chemical or physical brain removal"?
>
> Ok, I've had a chance to think.

Well, we're all born with it, and some of us are perhaps too profligate. I
admire the frugality with which you exercise your chances...

> I'm not sure a physical brain removal is
> possible
> with the subject still living. But with castration of the penis, a person
> wouldn't have to die.
>  If that is true, then there is no comparison between what I said, and
what
> you asked.

You do have a talent for incomprehension, don't you? What he meant was that
the mechanism by which one's brain was removed would have little import to
the hypothetical victim. He would effectively be dead. Similarly, the
precise mechanism of castration would have little relevance to the
hypothetical eunuch. He would have lost his masculinity, since the objective
of a penis (sexually) is to achieve erection - it's mere presence is moot in
this regard, rather as the presence or absence of a physical brain which is
unable to achieve consciousness is of little concern to its owner.

It's called analogy BTW. The essence of analogy is not that one compares
like with like, but that one compares an abstract quality shared by both
examples. The less obvious that quality is, the better the analogy. In this
case the quality was 'fitness for purpose'.

HTH.

John James (JJ)
Resident t.r. White Supremacist.