Boys Should Be Banned

Discovering root causes is of utmost importance to me. As regarding the plethora of school shootings that occur every day in the United States, I have found the reactions to be surface, at best. Do we really care about our children? Or do we simply pretend to care about our children?

Let’s take a look at the primary reaction: schools have adopted no-tolerance policies toward weapons in school. This was obviously a good starting point, but it led to all manner of ambiguities, which often happens in the process of rule-making strategies. Could a non-weapon be used as one? How do we define what is and what is not a weapon? How would we respond to the perception of threat or to the perception of symbolic nature of “weapon?” In one recent example, which created an internet backlash, a seven-year-old boy chewed his Pop Tart into the shape of a gun, thereby rendering the children around him psychologically impaired due to the imminent threat of violence. The child was suspended for his unthinking action, which was entirely appropriate, but his action still left a strew of wreckage behind him.

How could the psychological damage have been prevented in the first place? A group of parents met to come to a consensus. According to Mrs. Sanders, the teacher who organized the meeting, only the children matter in this discussion. She received a standing ovation for that statement alone, and she was forced to call the meeting to order by opening up the conversation to everybody. “Everybody has something to say!” she said.

One mother (who wishes to remain anonymous) timidly suggested that Pop Tarts be banned. After all, they have no nutritional value, and aren’t particularly appetizing or exciting as a childhood snack food, and are likely to cause a bored child with a sugar buzz to “go ballistic,” as she put it. A mother of five boys countered with irritation, claiming it wasn’t her responsibility to make food exciting. “Food is food,” she said, “and a boy is just as likely to chew a peanut butter sandwich into a hand grenade.” In fact, her son had done so just the other day. It was “masterfully done art, very realistic,” and she passed around a photo of the partially-chewed food to the assembled parents, who were stunned at how much the sandwich resembled an actual, military issue hand grenade.

They didn’t come to a consensus that night, as they were distracted by a tray of cookies that one of the moms had brought, but they did come to one important conclusion: The hand grenade sandwich would have added to all of their annual medical fees owing to increased visits to therapists, as well as a likely need for medicating the children who were exposed to the threat. While eating, the parents casually discussed what they had done in their own homes, such as banning all toy weapons so their children weren’t raised to be desensitized to violence. The teacher made a note on her brainstorming board to gather a team of teachers willing to crusade for the ban of all toy weapons, as well as any toy that could be perceived as a toy weapon, which would involve more brainstorming. For example, could a Disney Princess be perceived as a weapon? She thought it very well could be in the wrong hands. In any case, Pop Tarts were not the problem, she wisely reminded everybody. Children should not be punished for society’s failure to train them up as peaceable individuals.

All of these steps, in my opinion, are baby steps. They are steps in the right direction, but they don’t get at the root cause of the problem. As I was wandering through the toy aisles of Wal Mart one day, I had an epiphany, which is how epiphanies generally occur. This one should have been obvious, though. The weapon toys were all housed in the boy aisles, while the peaceful people-oriented toys were housed in the girl aisles. The problem was not in the toys themselves, but in those who played with them: namely, boys. Over the course of my twenty years of research into hormone imbalances, I’ve developed the kind of biologically identical hormone supplements that could rid our society of boys for good. Rather than crusading for an ineffective measure of banning toy weapons, Mrs. Sanders would find more value in campaigning for affordable hormone replacement for all families.

As I usually do with my best ideas, I bounced this one off my good friend Dr. Hausman, author of the peer-reviewed study entitled “The Physical Properties of a Yin-Yang Universe.” At first, his response was simply, “Ow!” But after further musing, he warned that eradicating maleness from society would leave a vacuum for women to fill. “And let me remind you, women are far more devious when it comes to weapon choices. This may create a backlash you weren’t expecting.” Although his response disheartened me, I soon bounced back with a better idea: What if we could create the Yin-Yang balance in each person? What if the instinct must rise against aggressor was countered with wouldn’t you rather trade that Pop Tart for a Ho-Ho?

Since then, I’ve refined a Yin-Yang drug therapy I’ve patented under the brand name Gynatestrogen. It’s still in the testing stages, but I think Mrs. Sanders and the moms will agree that a world without boys would be a better place, especially if girls didn’t exist either. Root causes are very important to me. Think this one through, and if you agree, please contact your congressman today.



  1. I’m pretty sure that Big Pharma’s ad agency needs to be fired for this one: Gynatestrogen!

    It should be called something, like Gendrex™ or Neutrafin™ or Castreon™…

    1. I’d lean toward Castreon. I’m currently working a deal (can’t discuss details) and will suggest Castreon to the company interested in my work. Anyway, thanks for the suggestion!

  2. Ummm, The name Castreon™ is my intellectual property. I hope you are prepared to negotiate for it’s use…

    I am currently shopping that name to Monsanto for a gender-bending variety of GMO corn which is going to be huge.

    1. Half the human race, which God made, ruins everything because….why, again? It was supposed to be farcical. Your obtuseness is showing.

      1. Okay, so let me get this straight. Somebody named Will stumbled over to my blog to tell me that nobody should buy Vox Day’s books, presumably because Will is offended by the things Vox Day says, which has nothing whatever to do with my post. But, on the other hand, your suggestion is quite reasonable, and I’ll keep it in mind: nobody should buy books by people Will doesn’t like.

        1. I don’t know why you’d read a book by somebody who doesn’t like you, but okay.

          I’ve never read a good book by an anti-feminist, but okay.

          1. I’m a Christian who reads books by atheists. And Jews. And, well, I read whatever I want. And I have no idea whether Vox Day dislikes me or not.

            1. You don’t have a y chromosome and are not of class Reptilia or Aves. Therefore, Vox hates you.

              There’s a huge difference between being a Jew or an atheist and being a racist or an anti-feminist.

            2. Will, I don’t know you at all because you’re a poster w/o a last name or link. I don’t know Vox Day, either, but at least he has the guts to connect his pseudonym with his actual person. That means I have the ability–if I want–to read everything he’s publicly written about women. Although I haven’t done that and don’t plan to, it’s my conclusion that he doesn’t hate women. He does seem to hate feminists, and for that, I shrug my shoulders. I don’t care. Unless he writes flat characters or is just a shitty writer, that shouldn’t matter.

              Why am I arguing about this, anyway? It has nothing to do with my post.

            3. I would reserve shitty for books that lack complexity, but whatever. Subjectivity’s a bear.

              If you would like to read something super-fantabulously awesome, I would suggest my book. Link to the right.—->

              Hey, why can’t I be shameless?

            4. “Complexity” and “quality” are on two axes. If you don’t believe me, play Afterlife.

            5. While I appreciate that you are willing to stand up for females, I don’t care for you being patronizing to me and my book tastes. As an independent female with a rational mind, I’m perfectly able to decide on my own what is worthy of reading.

            6. And yet you like a Throne of Bones. You are doing something wrong. Or you need to be exposed to good fantasy, like Paula Volsky or Tad Williams.

            7. For fuck’s sake, I read hundreds of books a year. I’m sure I could find a few more fantasies for you to bully me for liking. Let me see, The New Blazing World? As far as I know, that had the first literary platonic-soul-tea-party ever. And those are very out of style.

  3. Jill: Stop wasting your time explaining yourself on what is clearly intended to be a humor piece. If someone doesn’t “get the joke”; move on!

    Dan lacks the nuanced thinking processes necessary to understand farce and, hence, simply repeats the “mantras” of others…

  4. I enjoyed it very much but I think that we must expect people to not ‘get’ farce. A lot of people were not amused when Swift offered his solution to the Irish problem.
    There’s always going to be the guy that needs an explanation and even then shakes his head and mutters that he doesn’t get it.

    1. As a die-hard Swiftian, I appreciate the comparison. But I don’t know why you consider Swift’s take on the Irish problem to be humorous. It offered a very workable solution from an English perspective. As we all know, the English have been ruining everything for 800 years and counting… 😉

  5. Very funny. I feel I need therapy now though because firearms are scary and I am scared thinking about representations of what might or might not be firearms (the poptart gun could have been a horsy or perhaps it could be concealing a real gun under its sugary goodness, who knows?).

    The point is, is that I am scared and need holding. I am going to find my wife and explain it to her or maybe my therapist.

    I banned (unchaperoned) boys from my house for years at a time. It had something to do with raising daughters. You know Swift’s proposal was more modest but still doable.

  6. Who is that tiny redneck who always swings to your defense? Hilarious. “Women ruin everything” is also an hilarious one-liner clearly not meant to be taken literally. I thought it was clear anyway.

    1. Dan, people who don’t use last names and don’t link out to sites are anonymous. All I have from them are goofy e-mails. That would apply to you. As far as I know, you’re the tiny redneck.

      From VD, I don’t take “women ruin everything” literally. From you, it seems to be a filter you view life through. All of my posts manage to be about that, even if they aren’t.

    2. Dan,

      It is disingenuous to issue a statement and then claim, “I was only joking”.

      Especially for those of us who follow this thread and have seen your misogyny on full display.

      You are always laying blame on women, claiming they are “all the same”, have difficulty understanding the most simple things no matter how apparently “smart” they seem, can’t be trusted, etc.

      In a more charitable moment, I recognize that you probably had bad modelling of femininity by your own mother, and/or may be recovering from a difficult relationship, but give the resulting dislike/distrust of women a rest!

      In the end, they are just people like you or I, possessed of both good and bad attributes, only much better looking!

  7. jed, men and women aren’t the same, go back to sleep

    It’s objectively not to be taken literally but it’s true enough to be said. I thought this piece was dark and hilarious and only the tiniest bit more absurd than the actual reality of women running public education, so it fails utterly as farce. How many of your posts have I commented on? I just have something on my mind and you sometimes write things directly or tangentially related. But anyway I don’t want to skate any closer to becoming an utter troll so I’m going to stop.

    1. Dan, you aren’t actually saying that women aren’t people, are you?

      Oh, well, even if you are, you have to admit that there are plenty of men complicit in the stupidity of the public schools. Women do not run the schools alone. But, thank you, at least you were finally honest in telling me you didn’t think it was funny.

      1. Dan,

        Who is not awake? Have I ever stated that males and females were *identical*? No.

        Un-self-aware males and females carry out their biological and psychological programming. This is akin to the instincts possessed by animals, which operate below the level of conscious decision-making.

        Far from being inherently bad, these innate behaviors ensure our survival.

        That men and women have a layer of instinctual behavior related to their difference in biological function, I think, goes without saying.

        But, with that being said, who dislikes a bird for building a nest, or termites for constructing a mound? They are not trying to be difficult, they are just carrying out their biological programming which ensures the greatest chance of survival for themselves and their offspring.

        Self-aware persons, both male AND female, have the option of analyzing and modifying their innate behaviors at the level of conscious decision-making.

        Humanity only exists as male and female together, forming the whole. Everything else is a divide and conquer strategy.

  8. They’re passive and sidelined because men tend to want to leave things alone and women tend to want to talk and talk and add more and more rules and restrictions. It’s even in your post since there are many parents at the meeting but only women speak. Did you do that on purpose or was it subconscious? You’re right I guess I didn’t think it was funny. I still kinda liked it, but you don’t excel at humor. Do you wish you were funny? Try more deadpan Spok humor, that’s your only hope.

      1. Humor and absurdity are not supposed to be dissected like a biology project. Doing so tends to kill them. There is also not much to be gained reading between the lines unless there is actual text there.

        This is one of the funniest things you have posted.

  9. Men want to leave things alone…. That is about the funniest thing I’ve read all day! Sorry, Jill, maybe you aren’t funny, but this guy sure is! Pure comedy!

  10. “Men want to leave things alone…. That is about the funniest thing I’ve read all day!”

    Because the funniest things are true things and lies are boring.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *