Rolling Maleness and Masculinity Discussion Thread

It’s slightly more accurate to say that women are socialised into thinking of others first. This goes in personal relationships and the workplace. Don’t be too assertive, don’t push yourself forward, be nice, hold your tongue, all that shit comes from centuries of women being told to be non threatening and to make themselves less.

― (who is an amazing ice cream maker by the way) (gyac)

hmmm. i think that men just like women are given mixed messages. women get all these messages of "girl power" and are told to be more assertive and so forth, but at the same time we're told to be subservient and not challenge men too much or bad things will happen and it will be our fault for stepping out of line.

anyway, men are told the opposite, they're told to stand up for themselves and push back and "fortune favors the bold" and all that stuff, but men have to do it in a _certain way_. and if men don't uphold these increasingly rigid forms of masculinity, if they wear the wrong hoodie or, i guess in 1965 if they smoked the wrong cigarette, they're not really men. and if bad things happen to these "beta males", well, it's their fault for not being Really Men. you gotta be alpha. you gotta...

You gotta be crazy, you gotta have a real need
You gotta sleep on your toes, and when you're on the street
You gotta be able to pick out the easy meat with your eyes closed
And then moving in silently, down wind and out of sight
You gotta strike when the moment is right without thinking

that's being a man.

(by the way that's a good contrast above, for caesar, "fortune favors the bold", but caesar's wife must be above suspicion.)

---

so even though i was supposedly "socialized male", i was also socialized into prioritizing other people's expectations of me. i learned to value others first, and myself not at all. a lot of this toxic behavior, at the root of it is self-loathing. people who exhibit narcissistic behavior hate and are ashamed of themselves. people who exhibit bpd behavior hate and are ashamed of themselves. incels? incels, beyond their mask of entitlement and rage, hate and are ashamed of themselves. they blame other people as a way of lashing out against what they were told, which is that they are really "betas" who don't deserve love from _anybody_.

you know who's socialized into thinking of others first? abuse victims. i hear it all the time, i mean, i heard it just last night from one of my friends. other people don't deserve to be abused, but i do. i deserve it, i have to deserve it. that's what she tells me. and patriarchy? patriarchy is an institutionalized form of abuse.

the male privilege i had, it was _contingent_, contingent on me not violating norms of maleness. i did have a lot of freedom. i didn't have to dress well. i could wear ill-fitting clothes that looked terrible on me, i could be fat, i could do all these things and nobody would even notice. i could go a long way, but if i crossed that line - by, for instance, wearing a dress in public - all the forces of hell would be unleashed on me. that's the thing that... i think particularly men face. everything is fine and you deserve _everything_ or, if you cross a line, you're bad and evil and you deserve _nothing_.

---

Although 90% of my local male friends are thoughtful bros who read and listen to good music and vote correctly, I sometimes balk at these exclusively het spaces. None of these guys are obviously machista yet the presence of so much het maleness annoys me enough that I have to push back by being more camp. Maybe I'm wrong by connecting to a small degree masculinity + sexuality. If I feel the love, what's the problem?

― the dreaded dependent claus (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn)

no i get where you're coming from, i feel that hard, and for me it's that phrase fgti uses, "the privilege of non-engagement". cishets can mean well, but while you and i, we _have_ to be aware of the cishet male experience, there's so much... i mean it's not just a matter of being a "good man" or voting the right way, that's what weinstein said at the end, right? that he voted D, and that exculpated him. it's so hard for someone who doesn't have that experience to be _able_ to look at the world the way we see it.

like, here's an example of "the privilege of non-engagement".

yesterday morning i went into the lab to get my blood drawn. it's a long line and even though i sat by myself people got up and sat down and at some point i had a guy sitting on each side of me. and i was _very aware_ of this, and i was _very aware_ that i was a woman, and before transition, i wouldn't have been, wouldn't have assigned any special significance or meaning to that. they were older white guys, both of them, it's mostly seniors who go in for labs. i doubt that either of those guys assigned any special meaning to their being seated next to a woman. if they'd clocked me it would have been different, probably, but it also probably would have been _very obvious_ to me if either of them had clocked me.

that's a privilege i _did_ have, and that's a privilege i gave up when i transitioned.

---

so here's some random stuff i wrote last night when i couldn't sleep. i really... i have really strong opinions about gender and masculinity and i'm really afraid to express them, because i'm afraid i won't do it in the Right Way and people will go on the attack, which they do. that's a systemic bias that people don't acknowledge, women get held to a much higher standard than men across the board. and trans women get held to a higher standard than cis women. it's not a universal standard, it's fucking difficult to statistically measure, but i've seen it, all my transfem friends have seen it. i don't have direct experience, but i think it does also affect transmascs, that transmascs, their transness means they have _less_ privilege, so even if their being men gives them _more_ privilege than a woman would have, their transness kind of works against that.

i don't have any like intrinsic knowledge about gender or any of that stuff but the past four years in particular i've had the exact opposite of the "privilege of non-engagement". i've thought about this stuff, a lot. i don't know what it means to be a man. i know, though, that people are taught a lot of bullshit about what it means to be a man, how to behave as a man, and since i'm not a man i know that it's bullshit. it's a "god of the gaps" approach, except that there's very little dispute over whether or not men _exist_.

---

for instance, i was taught that the entirety of the way i interacted with any given woman needed to be centered around the extent to which i wanted to stick my dick in them. which was really frustrating to me because i didn't want to stick my dick in _anyone_, although there were certain women i found _very attractive_, and it was just my terrible luck that they all turned out to be lesbians. there were, as we say, no signs.

---

i was watching "the big lebowski" with my girlfriend recently. she'd never seen it. and there's this scene where jeffrey lebowski is all "what makes a man? is it the willingness to do what's right at any cost?" and the dude quips, "that and a pair of testicles". the joke is that the dude is puncturing jeffrey lebowski's self-serving bullshit, this idea that manhood is this lofty, elevated thing, like women _aren't_ willing to do what's right? manhood isn't about that, i was taught. it's about _literal testicles_. balls. all you need are balls. to succeed are balls. here, kitty kitty kitty.

when i came out to my department at work, one of my co-workers, steve, he came up to me afterwards and said that he was proud of me, because "it takes a strong man to do what you're doing". that man, that poor man, he genuinely had no idea what he was saying. it's "getting an orchi takes balls" but with no sense whatsoever of _irony_. i'm not a fan of irony, but i don't know of a better way to describe that experience.

there are so many people, so many people who, when they learn i'm trans, conclude that i'm "really" a man. and that's so fucked up. but it's also just... i mean it's not just people who _conclude_ that, it's because we're taught _so much_ to believe that. it's not a logical conclusion, it's an _instinctive reaction_. trans woman = penis & testicles = man. anybody over the age of 30, and probably most people under the age of 30, has had that association drilled into us so hard that wasn't intentional but i know what it implies, i'm leaving it. to have a healthy idea of what needs to be a man, one needs to let go of _unhealthy_ ideas, and that's _work_, and _everyone_ has to do, or has had to do, that work.

but at the same time we're told to be subservient and not challenge men too much or bad things will happen and it will be our fault for stepping out of line.

i have always thought of poor impulse control - meaning quick/thoughtless/violent/destructive/stupid behavior - as being essential to biological maleness in a way. i don't know if this made me an essential biologist or a bio essentialist. i am not a scientist but i had always assumed it was the result of adrenaline created by testosterone.

― scott seward

oh, hi! i can talk about this!

not from a scientific perspective, of course, just anecdotally, from my own experience and what i've heard from friends, _particularly_ transmasc friends.

for me, going from a T-based to an E-based endocrine system, there are some positive changes. when I was on T, I _needed_ to nut. not nutting... you know how "hangry" is a thing? i get real hangry to this day. but i used to also get the equivalent from not nutting. having to do that sucked and i hated it because dysphoria. it was the sense of relief, from not having to think about it for a little while, like thank god i can just be a normal person again.

a lot of stuff gets essentialized that to my mind isn't. testosterone is associated with rage and violence. the only emotion men are allowed to express is anger - more than _allowed_ they're openly _encouraged_ to express it. it's part of aggression. it's something i struggle with a lot because i am a woman and i am _extremely_ angry. that's why susan stryker's article on "performing transgender rage" resonated so hard. the ways in which i can express the level of rage i have in a healthy manner are really limited, and they're limited for guys, too - it's just that expressing rage in an _unhealthy_ manner is socially accepted. boys will be boys.

anyway, transmasc guys, i've heard transmasc guys talk about when they start guy puberty. they're adults and have the wisdom and maturity of adults but dealing with that rush of testosterone is challenging. there is more anger, more aggression, and it's difficult to deal with. trans men really aren't any different from cis men, and that means they can behave in ways... ways they didn't before the testosterone, ways that aren't necessarily healthy.

but of course, they don't have the privileges that teenage cis boys do. if they manifest _maleness_ in any way that's deemed to be unhealthy, it's instead attributed to their _transness_, used as an argument against allowing trans people to start hormones. well of course hormones are bad, i heard of this one person who started T and then they started hitting their partner... that was how it was portrayed on The L Word at least, back in the day.

and transfems, sometimes without meaning to we do perpetrate that myth. we talk about the Evil T, because for us, it _is_ like that. for transmascs it's not like that. it's good. it makes them better, healthier people. and those experiences are ignored, overlooked, it's way easier for me to get E than it is for trans guys to get T, because as always, the cis male experience is prioritized. T gets seen as dangerous, gets seen as being a drug of abuse. what's most important is not that they get gender affirming care, but making sure that guys can't juice.

T does change you, does change a person's feelings, but if you give guys the tools and the skills to manage it in a healthy manner, they can. Boys just don't get that.

I’m extremely aware of that, and have posted about it a number of times.

― (who is an amazing ice cream maker by the way) (gyac)

oh yeah to clarify this is something... most women are pretty acutely aware of it. most guys aren't. they're the audience for that comment.

that was very helpful info. thank you, kate. and i totally agree that boys aren't given the tools and skills that they need. its like the war on drugs. with kids its all about stamping out the bad behavior without really looking at the causes. and this just makes things worse. (or, to be fair, not having the time to care about the causes if you are a teacher or a cop because you are so overworked.)

Weird to characterize the resurgence of explicitly masculinist and avowedly male-supremacist thought as a crisis of masculinity and not as a crisis of misogyny.

— Moira Donegan (@MoiraDonegan) July 11, 2023

If there's no such thing as a positive masculinity then explain this? pic.twitter.com/11NnNXYZxX

— Isaac_kh (@isaac_kh) July 11, 2023

Just leaving this here because it deserves to be seen.

A stunning late 70s advert for Jovan Sex Appeal aftershave, animated by the late Richard Williams, was based on the Frank Frazetta painting 'Against the Gods'. They don't make 'em like this anymore. pic.twitter.com/lQlkDzraIQ

— Scarred for Life (@ScarredForLife2) July 12, 2023

omg, i have been watching the original Equalizer t.v. show - yes i own the complete dvd box - and aside from realizing that it is the best musical work that stewart copeland did BY FAR - holy crap it is just a treasure trove of cliches about manhood on the gritty streets of new york in the early 80s. in one the equalizer stares at this terrified woman and tells her I WILL SAVE YOU AND PROTECT YOU AND I WON'T LET ANYTHING HAPPEN TO YOU in a really creepy way and then she falls in love with him of course. and then in one of the very next episodes the equalizer has to tell a father whose daughter was kidnapped by adam ant (to be sold to a very SWARTHY AND EVIL MIDDLE EASTERN LOOKING MAN of course) how to be a strong man and....its just nuts. but that spurs the dad on to action of course. DEADLY action! the equalizer is like the ultimate benevolent right wing dad who can do no wrong. i wonder if that's why my father loves Blue Bloods so much.

i mean i'm sure its not anywhere near as bad as some shows. a show like starsky and hutch will make your hair stand on end its so wrong. i saw all this stuff as a kid and i don't even know what i thought at the time. i know that i loved how the equalizer would stand up for the little guy by murdering people and i don't know what that says. revenge against bullies. its an easy sell to a kid.

(mostly fun now to play that game of hey that's david allan grier! hey, that's melissa leo as the russian ballerina! that kind of thing. hey thats richie from the sopranos!)

i've never seen the equalizer but i have seen _callan_, the pilot episode stars joseph furst who was so incredibly amazingly camp in as professor zaroff in "the underwater menace" and it's pretty great

all i know about starsky and hutch is that they were one of the most popular slash pairings in the '70s. and also that there was an episode set in a gay bar that was not totally unrealistic (unlike the murder she wrote episode set in a drag bar where everybody was inexplicably heterosexual, because reagan)

like don't get me wrong drag is not indicative of any particular gender or sexuality, you _can_ be a heterosexual man who does drag, there _are_ heterosexual men who do drag, but an entire drag bar where every single person there is heterosexual strains credulity a bit.

maybe it was virginia prince's drag bar (and no i don't expect anybody here to get that joke)

Callan is amazing

sorry i don't have much further thoughts right now but yeah

there's more thoughts to be honest i was just

i was introduced to that show by my dad and his admiration of what Woodward representd as actor and character, and what he represented to my dad was, i see now, something important in his eyes as masculinity

dad who very deliberately kept me focused on depictions of his idea of masculinity and aslo on his idea of how to look at women - i found the porn mags hidden in my bedroom closet before i hit puberty ffs - i track back, recall the conversations and the encouragements, was a long time later i thought about this as being a (subconscious?) plan to make sure i was straight, in the way that ogling objectification was his concept of straight

later, later, shit was weird, it builds a portrait of terror of not being a boy tho

drunken cross-referenced two things - all things being equal, Callan and my other 70s boy-models weren't evil in themselves

only just seen the positive vision alongside the page 3 push tho

oh god don't get my started on my dad's porn. he tried to be discreet but after he left my mom had no such compunctions, she'd take the spartacus catalogs he got in the mail and show them to all us kids and point and laugh at them. _lotta_ force fem stuff in there, which was a totally cool and fine and healthy way for young me to have gender incongruence modeled

of course if you ask the transphobes that's just SOCIAL CONTAGION and clearly seeing that _made_ me trans, because that's _totally_ how gender works.

i hear you boo

a certain flavour of men are FUCKED UP

lol that insight will never stop me questioning my own fuckery

Rewinding about about "talking to women" - lots of men talk to (or at) women. If there's a deficit, the deficit is not in talking but in listening.

mmmmm. see, it's not that simple. like, first off, there's nothing wrong with force fem, if someone's into it that's fine. i was never into force fem, because i could never get behind the idea that femininity was somehow shameful or humiliating. to me, womanhood was something to aspire to. i _wished_ i could have been a woman! (there were no signs.)

second off, while _plenty_ of cis men are into force fem, there are a lot of people into force fem who eventually figure out that wait actually they're just trans women, including some who are pretty well-known today. there were only certain paths available for gender exploration when i was young, and none of them were what i'd personally consider "healthy". like, yeah, i do have tons of trauma about the way gender incongruence was modeled when i was young.

anyway, a lot of us have stories about our dad or grandfather or uncle, that's what casey plett's novel _little fish_ (which i still haven't read) is about. "trans ghosts", i've heard it called. people who aren't trans, because they aren't, it's self-identified, and if you don't identify as trans you're not, but also, you know, didn't exactly have the opportunities that people today have.

sorry if i wasn't clear there, i don't feel that my dad's paranoid propaganda did change me and i'm damn sure it wasn't fully planned thru, i'm just talking about how weird it was, looking back now, that he had this inarticulate fear that his oldest prepubescent son needed to have his hetness reinforced

i can't imagine how that nonsense would feel from a place where that wasn't my experience

I hated my dad and then finally was completely indifferent to him, but at least he was too Catholicly repressed + uptight for any of that foisting porno mags on kid stuff. Fucking dads, man.

like, since i was never into it i can't say for sure, but in theory it makes sense. if it's not something you're free to choose, the only way it's ok is if somebody _makes_ you, right? that way it's not your _fault_.

is it crass of me to say that the only time you really question that indoctrination is if you don't end up indoctrinated?

my parents dislike TV, gambling, and pornography. when they found my stash of XY mags and my lone issue of Drummer, they flipped their fucking lids, which of course sent me back in the closet for five more years

My parents didn't have porn but they left The Joy of Sex and Our Bodies Ourselves in the family bookcase, correctly assuming we would avail ourselves. Even tho the OG Joy of Sex had some dubious stuff in it, it was still progressive for the time, lots of talk about women's pleasure, orgasms etc. And I read pretty much ALL of Our Bodies Ourselves looking for anything about sex (of which there was at least some, including detailed anatomical depictions), which indoctrinated me as a '70s granola feminist along the way. Also I entered adolescence with at least a general idea of where the clitoris was lol.

My dad meanwhile was/is an outright pacifist — he was granted CO status when he was drafted for Vietnam — plus also a Buddhist vegetarian, so not a whole lot of macho posturing around the house. I think the most butch thing about our relationship was baseball, which he loved and made me a fan too. I played baseball every summer from when I was about 7 to 16, which was sort of just enough male athleticism to make me feel like "a guy" without any big hangups about it I guess.

In retrospect though my dad also bought into and evinced this basic idea of the taciturn masculine loner. He was self-employed and ran his own business (a pottery studio) and came into the house from the pottery every night with his clothes and arms streaked with clay, definitely a real workingman vibe (especially for a guy with a history degree from Stanford). So I think he did very much have his own ideas and models of masculinity, and he also assumed that my mom would be cool with being the potter's wife, taking care of the kids, etc. The biggest stress they had in my growing-up years was when my mom asserted herself and went and finished her college degree and then went to work as a teacher. I don't think he'd really banked on that, he still carried a lot of unconscious assumptions about male and female roles.

is it crass of me to say that the only time you really question that indoctrination is if you don't end up indoctrinated?

― orcas who sign their posts like it's a freaking email (Noodle Vague)

oh we're all indoctrinated, cis, trans, all of us. that's why most queer people have imposter syndrome, because we were told, over and over and over again, that we were imposters (cis queers too, most people don't remember "the other martin loring" but it wasn't a lone outlier by any means). it takes a _long_ time to be able to let go of that belief.

i mean you want to know what i was taught about sex? my parents got me a book and showed it to me when i was ten and they were like "when a man and woman love each other very much" and it was a bunch of diagrams of fallopian tubes. that was "the birds and the bees". when i went to school they did have sex ed, when i was a freshman in high school, and they brought the gym teacher in to do it because, you know, it's a sensitive and delicate subject so you definitely want to get the guy whose specialty is showing people how to do squats right to teach it.

honestly the only thing i remember about it is that one of the kids - not me, i wouldn't have _dared_ - kept asking the gym teacher how transsexuals have sex. maybe he was just trying to get the teacher's goat or maybe he was genuinely curious. i don't know. all i remember is that the gym teacher eventually got fed up and said "why can't you ask any _normal_ questions?"

and the assumption was that you were just supposed to know all this stuff naturally, "let nature take its course". and i just _didn't_, it never made sense to me, i never had any idea what the fuck people were talking about. i didn't want the things boys were supposed to want. i didn't know _what_ i wanted.

good points

i have vivid memories of lying in bed listening to my mom shouting at my dad about why the fuck he needed to keep those magazines in our bedroom, and this is one of the few experiences i have of my mom calling my dad on anything

i went through my dad's dresser once when i was a kid and on top of a men's mag there was a note from my mom that said "You are sick!".

tipsy's experience sounds very similar to mine except my dad is an extroverted ex-beatnik turned liberal capitalist

neither one of my parents believed in god but i learned sex-ed in a unitarian church sunday school. i was bored. i just wanted to go home and watch abbott & costello.

i love my dad a lot but he has always been totally sexist and homophobic. i don't think he is even capable of saying the word woman. everyone is a girl. the girl at the bank. his favorite girl singers. that's probably where he got it from. the swing era. everyone was a girl singer back then.

tipsy's experience sounds very similar to mine except my dad is an extroverted ex-beatnik turned liberal capitalist

Definitely some of those in my parents' social circles.

US aggro fundieism is so alien to me that i wouldn't presume to think about it, but i've got enough experience of my own upbringing to believe that a lot of the church stuff is a secondary excuse to cover reactionary politics in a way that feels honourable and socially normie?

i definitely knew what not to do and say when i had kids though. all that stuff my dad said that made me cringe. oof. (though i make them cringe in my own special 21st dumb dad ways.)

to be fair, and somewhat strangely, i don't remember any racism coming from him. though he does say he'll treat us to dinner at the Chinaman's restaurant sometimes...

and he's completely xenophobic in a generic way in that he distrusts travel to other countries and doesn't understand why anyone would go to another country and needless to say he has never been to another country. but there isn't a specific people that he is afraid of. he is leery of "exotic" food.

but other than that...

and i did grow up in a house where i ONLY heard people of color blasting from his stereo unless he was playing one of the beloved white big bands of his youth. so, hats off to dad for that. black art was alive and well at our house. that was the foundation of my music love.

"21st century"

My parents didn't have porn but they left The Joy of Sex and Our Bodies Ourselves in the family bookcase, correctly assuming we would avail ourselves.

My parents had a copy of How Babies Are Made which I read — or had read to me, I can't remember now — as a kid, and years later I found a copy of Andrea Dworkin's Pornography on the main living room bookshelf (right next to a novel called Mom Kills Kids And Self; I think my mom may have been Going Through Some Shit), and since our house had an "if you can reach it, you can read it" policy, I read a bunch of it and became somewhat confused about what constituted sex and what constituted pornography (I remember a lot of excerpts from Bataille's The Story of the Eye were in there). Some years later, my dad caught me watching porn on VHS late at night and his response was to tell me, basically, "You know, that's not what real life is like. Women won't just have sex with you, just like that." He also told me that there was no reason to ever sexually assault someone, because you could always just jerk off.

"He also told me that there was no reason to ever sexually assault someone, because you could always just jerk off."

words to live by!

they should embroider that on the american flag.

my parents didn't care what i read. i read their copies of breakfast of champions and fear of flying when i was a kid. i don't think they really paid any attention to what i did though. so, books weren't going to be a problem.

one of my kids actually brought that up not that long ago. that we didn't care what they read or what movies they saw and that their friends had much stricter parents when it came to that stuff. i had no idea. apparently i didn't care what my kids did either. just like mom & dad!

there is a thread for everything these days:

Movies My Dad Took Me To When I Was A Kid - The Poll!

My parents got divorced when I was 11 or 12, so my dad took my brother and me to see so much inappropriate shit — Walter Hill's Extreme Prejudice, the 3D horror movie Parasite (my brother and I were so scared we actually left after the titular alien slug burst out of someone's face and shot right at the camera; my dad was laughing all the way to the car), Surf Nazis Must Die and Near Dark and Prince of Darkness back to back to back at a theater that never threw anybody out, The Road Warrior, so many more. Even before my parents split up, I remember them taking us to a drive-in for Up In Smoke, with Reefer Madness running before it.

Unitarian sex ed in my youth (circa 1982) was so frank that it was, in fact, pornographic.

My Unitarian Sunday school class got to vote on what movie to go see as our last outing. There was one vote for Terms of Endearment and ten votes for Risky Business. We went to see Risky Business, and got ice cream afterwards.

"You know, that's not what real life is like."

I got this talk but not after seeing porn, it was after a somewhat awkward family viewing of The Man Who Fell to Earth with the whole gun-as-sex-toy scene. The movie did not, thankfully, fuel a firearms fetish for me.

That Washington Post article is very frustrating. I realize part of this was quoted above already, and I'm at least partially repeating other posters' sentiments, but I want to get this off my chest. The crux of it all is here:

There is something appealing, too, in the idea of gender neutrality — or at least rejecting gender essentialism — as a social ethos. After all, attaching specific traits to men will redound to women, too. If we say “real” men are strong, does that mean real women must be weak? If men are leaders, are women destined to follow?

I’m convinced that men are in a crisis. And I strongly suspect that ending it will require a positive vision of what masculinity entails that is particular — that is, neither neutral nor interchangeable with femininity. Still, I find myself reluctant to fully articulate one.

This gets perilously close to acknowledging the central problem: a "vision of what masculinity entails" that is

1. An aspirational model, rather than just a neutral description of what men are generally like
2. Particular to men, i.e. not just a collection of positive traits that women can have too
3. Not sexist against women, implicitly or otherwise

...is impossible. I don't mean that it's too politically sensitive to be feasible--I mean literally, conceptually impossible.

What people like Emba are saying (maybe without realizing it) is that if we don't give men a social script that presents them as naturally superior to women in some way just by virtue of being male, then a crisis-level number of them will drop out of society, lash out violently, or kill themselves. And I wish they would just accept that they believe this, admit it, and defend it, rather than dancing around it at excruciating length.

good discussion upthread.

i had weird views of sex, myself, as my folks simultaneously felt that sex ed should be up to the parents (though they didn't stop me from learning it in school), while also bristling at the idea of doing it.

so one day, my friend David tells me how sex works and they found out, and thought they had just gotten out of having to do the uncomfortable job.

so my dad brings me into his room and said "so David told you, huh?", and i say yes, and he asks "he tell you what goes where?" and I nodded, and he said "ok cool".

problem is David had told me that pregnancy occurs when a man sticks his finger in a woman's vagina