As It Turns Out...

Turtles DO have gigantic wangers that they whip out when they're ready for some lovin'. However, that isn't nearly the whole story. See, turtles tend to become aggressive prior to mating. The male struggles to mount the female from behind by interlocking their back legs and biting the female on the head and front legs. But get this, the reason he struggles in doing this is that the female becomes equally aggressive trying to fend off the male so that she can actually mount him in a similar fashion (sheee's freee-kay!). Assuming the male succeeds in pinning the female down, he then drops trow and exposes his stinky, green hog and inserts it into the female (i can't find pictures of this so i still can't really imagine where it's coming from or where its going too). With insertion achieved, the male then flips himself onto his back (an activity usually deadly for our shell-dwelling friends) and remains that way for the duration of the act. During this time, the female will sometimes drag the males around until he dislodges himself.

Now, why did i tell you all this? Well, for one, i know we have all been curious about turtle sex since my insomnia incident a few days ago, but i also did it for a little perspective. Yes, perspective. Because, as is so often the case when we observe the rituals of the animal kingdom, reading about turtle sex has made me very happy to be a human.

Sure, i complain about women. Sure, they can make it tougher on us guys than it really needs to be to times. But if having sex with one of them meant that i had to forcibly mount a chick of equal strength knowing that if i failed to do so quickly, she'd be mounting me (ok, you can use the strap-on but at least take it out of the box first!), and that even if i succeed, i'm going to have to teeter in a precariously suicidal position while she drags me around the bedroom by the penis...well, i might consider the priesthood.

Ok, so now that we're all edified regarding turtle-sex, i feel i should touch on something else. But what? I mean, doesn't it all just pale in comparison with what i just wrote?

Let's see, Lulu and i went to the movies last night. We saw Munich. It was good, but a little disjointed to me. Just seemed like one of those movies that i would have enjoyed much more if i could have known a little more about the history surrounding the events. Well, the problem there is that there is no real history surrounding the movie. I mean, we all know what happened at the Olympics, but as far as the hunt for those responsible, no one really knows what happened, who was involved or whether or not they even killed all the right guys. The movie didn't help itself in this regard when the protagonists elect not to go after the surviving terrorists from the actual Olympic attack in lieu of a list of men they aren't even sure are all involved. It seemed like a bunch haphazard killing to beget more killing. Not that i have a better answer, and i'm sure that Spielberg was going for kind of a 'hopeless' feeling with the film, but when the credits rolled i felt no sense of progress, no prospect for improvement. I felt like i had just sat through 2 hours and 45 minutes boiling down to a message that everyone already knows. Jews and Arabs don't get along, they haven't since forever, and the rest of the world may not ever truly understand why.