Title: Male Gender Philanthropy of XY Chromosomes: Call for Sperm Donations by Artist Gaynor Evelyn Sweeney…
(Text: Kofi Fosu Forson)
(Text: Kofi Fosu Forson)
Statement concerning JPeg for Sperm Donation:
If sperm were the true and essential element which helps form and start a family, women wouldn't need men and men wouldn't be of any reference point if not for their sperm. In the birthing process women need sperm in order to fertilize the egg. What then becomes of the masculine ideal as in providing for or entertainment of... A lesbian couple best exemplifies this as the relationship between the two female partners is exemplary of romantic, emotional and physical love. What neccessitates their future as parents is the penis. Figuratively this is represented in a dildo. It underscores the role of one female as masculine. Somehow it belittles the role of the male in a heterosexual relationship. This also makes way for adoption which overall renders the penis as toy and sperm as delicacy, if not an involvement in the life process.
A mature sperm (spermatozoon) is a complex and highly specialized cell, genetically programmed, and unique in both function and shape. Its production — spermatogenesis — involves cell divisions and reorganization of chromosomal material, which generates genetic diversity. After extensive cell modelling it eventually becomes mobile and capable of penetrating and fertilizing an egg. (Answers.com)
Sperm as a form of ejaculation is certainly pronounceable as delicacy in the modernist example of bodily functions tantamount as secretions made presentable in the abnormality of sex.
The introduction of pornography to a soon to be determined ostracized group was the culmination of what was to be the commercialization of pussy, what was vagina and is therefore to be crucified as cunt. Much has been glorified in this the nature of birth and death. There isn’t however a sense of academic representation heretofore which would have simplified sperm as something substantive recognized as fluid and only fluid responsible for the fertilizing of the female egg.
In between male and female scruples, moments are allocated for sharing in spit, shit and cum. Why would one be rejected to a Victorian courtesy when in this the modern age women drink sperm, paste it onto bread and eat it, receive it with a direction or misdirection to the face as it remains creamy and laughable, juvenile and stupid.
The operative word “fertilize” is made pertinent to sperm normally during intercourse. With the availability of sperm donors, a different norm is made functionable both as scientific and organic. The individual male’s hybridity and genetic structure makes the qualification of the donated sperm similar to an anecdote. It carries with it a history, a summation of an existence, potent in its molecular build up, refined to generate a life, furthering the cycle of he/she, I/Me… You/It!
Sperm or cum as it is known profanely is cancelable within the realms of masturbation and prevention of pregnancy. Condoms are the rage in the very exercising of sexual conscience. Governed by an excruciatingly extreme sex culture, sperm supposes the merit of water.
Thusly, we are defined by gender. The male ejaculates and makes possible the birth of a child. What if the female supposed the power of the penis? In a lesbian household the dominant lover would seemingly warrant such a title. Is the sperm in this a society torn between morality and consciousness, made ready in orgiastic lifestyles, distancing from the nuclear family necessary as an ingredient within the birth quotient?
Certainly two lovers making love for the benefit of procuring a child would accentuate the importance of the male ejaculate. Manipulating the male sex organ or “jacking off” in an otherwise rather crude manner is an acceptable form of deprivation from the intimate contact between two humans.
What this becomes is a continuous acceptance of psycho-sexual anomalies which neutralizes the importance sperm supposes.
Sperm donation is a necessitated venture made affordable by the philanthropic disposition. To give of sperm for scientific purposes merits a classification of the male as “Les Hommes Futur.”
As subcultures go much is anticipated from certain men who make futile matter of such genetic relevance. Releasing the sperm as conclusion drawn from sexual angst may result in pleasure. Absurdly, sperm is conscionably written off as waste.
What if then much of it was contained in an ongoing experiment? What would be the psychology of the donor? Is this a lucrative procedure or the willingness to gain contentment as a contributor to history or maintain a persona as degenerated?
A mature sperm (spermatozoon) is a complex and highly specialized cell, genetically programmed, and unique in both function and shape. Its production — spermatogenesis — involves cell divisions and reorganization of chromosomal material, which generates genetic diversity. After extensive cell modelling it eventually becomes mobile and capable of penetrating and fertilizing an egg. (Answers.com)
Sperm as a form of ejaculation is certainly pronounceable as delicacy in the modernist example of bodily functions tantamount as secretions made presentable in the abnormality of sex.
The introduction of pornography to a soon to be determined ostracized group was the culmination of what was to be the commercialization of pussy, what was vagina and is therefore to be crucified as cunt. Much has been glorified in this the nature of birth and death. There isn’t however a sense of academic representation heretofore which would have simplified sperm as something substantive recognized as fluid and only fluid responsible for the fertilizing of the female egg.
In between male and female scruples, moments are allocated for sharing in spit, shit and cum. Why would one be rejected to a Victorian courtesy when in this the modern age women drink sperm, paste it onto bread and eat it, receive it with a direction or misdirection to the face as it remains creamy and laughable, juvenile and stupid.
The operative word “fertilize” is made pertinent to sperm normally during intercourse. With the availability of sperm donors, a different norm is made functionable both as scientific and organic. The individual male’s hybridity and genetic structure makes the qualification of the donated sperm similar to an anecdote. It carries with it a history, a summation of an existence, potent in its molecular build up, refined to generate a life, furthering the cycle of he/she, I/Me… You/It!
Sperm or cum as it is known profanely is cancelable within the realms of masturbation and prevention of pregnancy. Condoms are the rage in the very exercising of sexual conscience. Governed by an excruciatingly extreme sex culture, sperm supposes the merit of water.
Thusly, we are defined by gender. The male ejaculates and makes possible the birth of a child. What if the female supposed the power of the penis? In a lesbian household the dominant lover would seemingly warrant such a title. Is the sperm in this a society torn between morality and consciousness, made ready in orgiastic lifestyles, distancing from the nuclear family necessary as an ingredient within the birth quotient?
Certainly two lovers making love for the benefit of procuring a child would accentuate the importance of the male ejaculate. Manipulating the male sex organ or “jacking off” in an otherwise rather crude manner is an acceptable form of deprivation from the intimate contact between two humans.
What this becomes is a continuous acceptance of psycho-sexual anomalies which neutralizes the importance sperm supposes.
Sperm donation is a necessitated venture made affordable by the philanthropic disposition. To give of sperm for scientific purposes merits a classification of the male as “Les Hommes Futur.”
As subcultures go much is anticipated from certain men who make futile matter of such genetic relevance. Releasing the sperm as conclusion drawn from sexual angst may result in pleasure. Absurdly, sperm is conscionably written off as waste.
What if then much of it was contained in an ongoing experiment? What would be the psychology of the donor? Is this a lucrative procedure or the willingness to gain contentment as a contributor to history or maintain a persona as degenerated?
No comments:
Post a Comment