farting, equality, and hierarchy: analysis of “fart to your beard”

liturgical flabellum

Farting is a natural bodily function. Women, who are fully human beings, fart as well as men do. All persons are created equal in farting, just as they are created equal in defecation. Nonetheless, human societies inevitably construct hierarchies. The problem isn’t just the formal servitude of persons such as Roland the Farter. Hierarchy shapes even human understanding and use of farting.

Consider the case of Cardinal di Conti in early fifteenth-century Italy. He was a fat man. One summer day, sweating profusely, he sat down to dinner. He requested that someone make wind for him with a fan. After learning that all the servants were out running errands, he requested the Apostolic Secretary Everardo Lupi to make wind for him. The Apostolic Secretary said that he didn’t know how to do that properly for the Cardinal. The Cardinal magnanimously instructed to him to “do it as you know and in your own way {scis et tuo modo facito}.” So the Apostolic Secretary did:

raising his right leg, he let forth a mighty fart, saying at the same time that this was the way he was accustomed to make wind for himself.

{ suspenso dextro crure, pergrandem ventris crepitum edidit, eo pacto se ventulum facere solitum dicens. }

Anyone who has ever worked in a bureaucracy knows the feeling of being farted on by higher-ups. In the institutional church, a Cardinal is higher up than an Apostolic Secretary. The Cardinal made a pretense of equality: “serve me as you serve yourself.” The Apostolic Secretary seized the opportunity and farted on the Cardinal. That’s an extraordinary blow of the belly against hierarchy.

Another Italian cardinal used farting to assert freedom against the obligations of his position in the church hierarchy. The Cardinal of Tricarico led a very dissolute life. One day when he was out hunting on horseback, a man named Alto di Conti admonished him to live a morally proper life. Here’s how the Cardinal responded:

he looked back at him for a little, then suddenly leaned his head down on his horse’s neck and raised his buttocks and let loose a tremendous fart, saying “To your beard!”

{ in eum paululum respexit; et e vestigio se in equi caput reflectens, ventris crepitum edidit ingentem, inquiens: “Ad barbam tuam!” }

The Cardinal thus forcefully expressed contempt for the moral obligations of his position within the church hierarchy.

The phrase “to your beard” is an ancient expression associated with farting. A highly cultured man in early fifteenth-century Italy explained:

It is a common way of speaking, that when someone farts, those nearby say, “To the beard of him who owes no one anything.”

{ Est communis loquendi modus, cum quis ventris crepitum edidit, ut circumstantes: “Ad barbam ejus, qui nihil cuiquam debet,” dicant. }

Flattering others, doing whatever they want, and being subservient to them is a way to win forgiveness for any debts to them. The man who owes no one anything kisses everyone’s ass. Acting in that way, he gets everyone’s farts on his beard. That’s probably why farts go “to the beard of him who owes no one anything.”

Subservience and ass-kissing are closely related to elaborate hierarchy. About 2500, when Greeks lived in small city-states and most other humans lived in small tribes or small kingdoms, Persians lived in the large and highly developed Achaemenid Empire. Persians have probably lived in large, elaborate empires for at least as long as the Chinese. In short, Persians have long historical experience of elaborate human hierarchy and the personal humiliations that go with it. One legacy of this history of hierarchy apparently is the present-day rude Persian expression: “گله به ریش خود (gooz-beh rishet) {a fart to your beard}.” Persia was probably the ultimate source for the similar expression in Latin in early-fifteenth-century Italy.

Just as farting is a natural bodily function, hierarchy is a natural feature of human civilization. That reality doesn’t mean that oppressive gynocentrism is humans’ ineluctable fate. We can aspire to humane, tolerant hierarchy. We can move forward to less obsequiousness toward dominant values and more freedom for individual, idiosyncratic expression.

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

The quotes concerning Apostolic Secretary Everardo Lupi farting for Cardinal di Conti are from Poggio, Facetiae 135, “An amusing action of the Apostolic Secretary Everardo, who rendered a noteworthy fart to a cardinal {Facetum Eberhardi, Scriptoris Apostolici, qui ad cardinalis conspectum ventris crepitum dedit},” Latin text from Poggio (1879) vol. 2, pp. 22-3, my English translation.

The quote concerning the Cardinal of Tricarico farting is from Poggio, Facetiae 136, “A very entertaining, amusing action of another cardinal {Facetia alterius cardinalis jucundissima},” Latin text from Poggio (1879) vol. 2, pp. 23-4, my English translation.

The quote concerning the phrase “to the beard of him who owes no one anything” is from Poggio, Facetiae 103, “Concerning a certain bearded old man {De quodam sene barbato},” Latin text from Poggio (1879) vol. 1, pp. 162-3, my English translation. The Governor of Vicenza Ugolotto Biancardo heard a debt case in which an old man with a beard declared that he didn’t owe anyone anything. Ugolotto Biancardo then declared to that man, “Remove your stinking beard. Its foul odor is disturbing. {hanc tuam foetidam barbam, quae nos malo odore conturbat, amove.}” When the old man asked how his beard could smell so foul, Ugolotto explained that all the farts ever made must have gone to his beard since he owes no one anything.

On the Persian rude expression “گله به ریش خود (gooz-beh rishet) {a fart to your beard},” Sacher (2012) p. 61, Shenine (2014), and the Persian Wikipedia page for “beard.”

[image] Liturgical flabellum (fan) from twelfth-century Italy. Preserved under accession number 56.882 in the Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Downloaded and used under the non-commercial, educational provisions of the Terms of Use that the Museum of Fine Arts has posted. Here’s a liturgical flabellum made in nineteenth-century Cologne and incorporating some twelfth-century elements. Preserved under accession number 47.101.32 in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York City). Alternate image of this flabelum on Wikimedia Commons.

References:

Poggio. 1879. Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini. The facetiae or jocose tales of Poggio, now first translated into English with the Latin text. Paris: Isidore Liseux (vol. 1, vol. 2).

Sacher, Jason. 2012. How to swear around the world. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.

Shenine. 2014. “Persian Translations at Their Best.” BE | MUSED, online post, Jan. 28.

declamation in Satyricon’s school of rhetoric: a gendered perspective

Socrates trying to entice Alcibiades

Encolpius, seeking to get a dinner invitation, declaimed to the feminist professor Agamemnon at a university where a feminist declamation had just finished. He declared:

“This surely is the same type of madness goading our professors of feminism when they disparage men for crying:

‘These wounds I have sustained for our country’s liberty. This eye I have forfeited in your service. Give me a helping hand to lead me to my children, for my legs were hamstrung to prevent escape when I was drafted as a soldier and taken prisoner. Because of that, my legs cannot now support my body’s weight.’

Utterances even as sexist as this we could stomach if they advanced students on the path to feminism. As it is, all that men achieve with their bombast and their noisy, vacuous epigrams (“Men are human”) is confusion. When youngsters set foot in university, they find themselves transported into another world. This is why I believe that our hapless youngsters are being turned into total idiots in our universities of feminism. Their ears and eyes are not being trained on everyday feminist reality, but on female pirates in chains on the seashore, or on women thought-leaders signing edicts bidding sons to decapitate their fathers, or on oracular responses in time of plague urging the formation of intersectionality in gender equality among elementary school teachers. They must learn these honey-balls of phrases, every word and deed sprinkled with poopy-talk seeds and says-a-me.”

{ “Num alio genere Furiarum declamatores inquietantur, qui clamant:

Haec vulnera pro libertate publica excepi; hunc oculum pro vobis impendi: date mihi ducem, qui me ducat ad liberos meos, nam succisi poplites membra non sustinent

Haec ipsa tolerabilia essent, si ad eloquentiam ituris viam facerent. Nunc et rerum tumore et sententiarum vanissimo strepitu hoc tantum proficiunt ut, cum in forum venerint, putent se in alium orbem terrarum delatos. Et ideo ego adulescentulos existimo in scholis stultissimos fieri, quia nihil ex his, quae in usu habemus, aut audiunt aut vident, sed piratas cum catenis in litore stantes, sed tyrannos edicta scribentes quibus imperent filiis ut patrum suorum capita praecidant, sed responsa in pestilentiam data, ut virgines tres aut plures immolentur, sed mellitos verborum globulos, et omnia dicta factaque quasi papavere et sesamo sparsa.” }

“Students fed on this fare can no more acquire good sense than cooks living in the kitchen can smell feces. Forgive my saying so, but you professors of feminism more than any others have been the death of admirable truth-seeking. Your lightweight, empty bleatings have merely encouraged frivolity, with the result that serious inquiry has lost all its vigor and collapsed. In the age when Aesop and Euripides devised the necessary language for their verse, young persons were not being confined to set speeches. When Juvenal and the seven lyric poets were too modest to use Homer’s verses in singing their songs, no professor in his ivory tower had as yet expunged ingenious creativity. Not that I need to cite the poets for evidence. As far as I am aware, neither Plato nor Demosthenes had recourse to this kind of exercise. Lofty style, if I may say so, is also modest style. It is never blotchy-faced and obese. It rises supreme by means of its natural beauty. But of late this flatulent, disordered garrulity of yours has decamped from Judith Butler to all feminist professors. A wind as from some baleful ass has descended on the eager spirits of our youth, as they seek to rise in social status, and rational speech has been stopped in its tracks and stuck dumb, once its norms were perverted. In short, who in these later days has obtained the renown of Herodotus or Matheolus?”

{ “Qui inter haec nutriuntur, non magis sapere possunt quam bene olere qui in culina habitant. Pace vestra liceat dixisse, primi omnium eloquentiam perdidistis. Levibus enim atque inanibus sonis ludibria quaedam excitando, effecistis ut corpus orationis enervaretur et caderet. Nondum iuvenes declamationibus continebantur, cum Sophocles aut Euripides invenerunt verba quibus deberent loqui. Nondum umbraticus doctor ingenia deleverat, cum Pindarus novemque lyrici Homericis versibus canere timuerunt. Et ne poetas quidem ad testimonium citem, certe neque Platona neque Demosthenen ad hoc genus exercitationis accessisse video. Grandis et, ut ita dicam, pudica oratio non est maculosa nec turgida, sed naturali pulchritudine exsurgit. Nuper ventosa istaec et enormis loquacitas Athenas ex Asia commigravit animosque iuvenum ad magna surgentes veluti pestilenti quodam sidere adflavit, semelque corrupta regula eloquentia stetit et obmutuit. Ad summam, quis postea Thucydidis, quis Hyperidis ad famam processit?” }

Agamemnon refused to allow me to deliver in the colonnade a declamation longer than the one that had raised a sweat on him in the school. “Young man,” he said, “your speech reflects uncommon taste, and you are uniquely gifted with good sense. I shall not withhold from you the secrets of the trade. It is hardly surprising that professors are at fault in these school exercises. They go along with lunatics and play the insane. Unless their speeches meet with the approval of their young students, they will be in the situation described in Cicero’s words, ‘he is left as the only one in his school.’ Our plight is like that of flatterers on the stage who cadge dinners from the rich. Their chief occupation is what they think will please their hearers most. They obtain their aim by laying traps for ears. Likewise, unless the professor of feminism turns angler and baits his hook with the morsel which he knows the fish will bite, he stands idle on the rock with no hope of a catch.”

{ Non est passus Agamemnon me diutius declamare in porticu, quam ipse in schola sudaverat, sed: “Adulescens, inquit, quoniam sermonem habes non publici saporis et, quod rarissimum est, amas bonam mentem, non fraudabo te arte secreta. Nihil nimirum in his exercitationibus doctores peccant qui necesse habent cum insanientibus furere. Nam nisi dixerint quae adulescentuli probent, ut ait Cicero, ‘soli in scolis relinquentur’. Sicut ficti adulatores cum cenas divitum captant, nihil prius meditantur quam id quod putant gratissimum auditoribus fore — nec enim aliter impetrabunt quod petunt, nisi quasdam insidias auribus fecerint — sic eloquentiae magister, nisi tanquam piscator eam imposuerit hamis escam, quam scierit appetituros esse pisciculos, sine spe praedae morabitur in scopulo.” }

“So what is the moral? Parents deserve censure for refusing to allow stern discipline to ensure the progress of their students. To begin with, they sacrifice their young hopefuls, like everything else, on the altar of ambition. Then, in their haste to achieve their goals, they bundle them into feminist-journalist jobs while their learning is still undigested. It all starts when children are still in cradles. Their parents swaddle them with feminism, believing that feminism is the be-all and end-all. If they allowed children to struggle step by step, making the youngsters work hard, and if students steep themselves in serious study, order their minds with the maxims of philosophy, score out with ruthless pen what they had first written, lend patient ears to the models which they wished to imitate, convince themselves that nothing admired by students can be of intrinsic worth — then the lofty truth-seeking of old would maintain its weight and splendor. But as things stand, as young persons they fool around at university. Then they go on to attract derision as feminist-journalists. What is more shameful than either of these, in old age they are unwilling to acknowledge the defects in their education.”

{ “Quid ergo est? Parentes obiurgatione digni sunt, qui nolunt liberos suos severa lege proficere. Primum enim sic ut omnia, spes quoque suas ambitioni donant. Deinde cum ad vota properant, cruda adhuc studia in forum impellunt, et eloquentiam, qua nihil esse maius confitentur, pueris induunt adhuc nascentibus. Quod si paterentur laborum gradus fieri, ut sapientiae praeceptis animos componerent, ut verba atroci stilo effoderent, ut quod vellent imitari diti audirent, ut persuaderent sibi nihil esse magnificum quod pueris placeret: iam illa grandis oratio haberet maiestatis suae pondus. Nunc pueri in scholis ludunt, iuvenes ridentur in foro, et quod utroque turpius est, quod quisque puer perperam didicit, in senectute confiteri non vult.” }

A clothes-dealer standing nearby approached Agamemnon and said: “My little boy is growing into a disciple of yours already. He can now say four types of genders. If he manages to keep himself alive, you will have a little servant at your side. Whenever he has a spare moment, he never lifts his head from How Jack oppressed Jill. He is clever and comes from a good family, even though he is too fond of pretty birds. I killed three of his goldfinches just lately and said that a weasel had eaten them. But now he’s found another hobby, collecting and wearing dresses with great pleasure. He’s trampling all over those little Greek authors and beginning Latin with no bad appetite, even though his master is conceited and won’t stick to one thing at a time. The boy comes asking me to give him some feminist literature to copy, because he doesn’t want to work. He has another teacher who doesn’t know much literature, but has an inquiring mind, and can teach you more than he knows himself. He often visits us on holidays and is happy with whatever food you put before him. A little while ago I bought the lad some books with red-letter headings in them. I want him to get a smattering of law to manage our property. That’s a matter of bread. He’s had enough feminist literature to have stained him for life. If he backs away from that, I’ve decided that he must learn a trade as a barber, or an auctioneer, or at least a lawyer — some career he can follow to his grave. So I drum into him every day: ‘Primigenus, believe me, whatever you learn, you learn for yourself. Look at Philero the lawyer. If he hadn’t learned, today he wouldn’t be able to keep the wolf from his door. Not long ago he used to carry loads around on his back and sell them. Now he holds himself out well even against Norbanus. Literature is a real treasure, and gynocentric culture never dies.'”

{ iam tibi discipulus crescit cicaro meus. Iam quattuor partis dicit; si vixerit, habebis ad latus servulum. Nam quicquid illi vacat, caput de tabula non tollit. Ingeniosus est et bono filo, etiam si in aves morbosus est. Ego illi iam tres cardeles occidi, et dixi quia mustella comedit. Invenit tamen alias nenias, et libentissime pingit. Ceterum iam Graeculis calcem impingit et Latinas coepit non male appetere, etiam si magister eius sibi placens fit nec uno loco consistit, sed venit dem litteras, sed non vult laborare. Est et alter non quidem doctus, sed curiosus, qui plus docet quam scit. Itaque feriatis diebus solet domum venire, et quicquid dederis, contentus est. Emi ergo nunc puero aliquot libra rubricata, quia volo illum ad domusionem aliquid de iure gustare. Habet haec res panem. Nam litteris satis inquinatus est. Quod si resilierit, destinavi illum artificium docere, aut tonstrinum aut praeconem aut certe causidicum, quod illi auferre non possit nisi Orcus. Ideo illi cotidie clamo: ‘Primigeni, crede mihi, quicquid discis, tibi discis. Vides Phileronem causidicum: si non didicisset, hodie famem a labris non abigeret. Modo, modo, collo suo circumferebat onera venalia; nunc etiam adversus Norbanum se extendit. Litterae thesaurum est, et artificium nunquam moritur.’ }

Like Agamemnon, Eumolpus had received a fine feminist education. Recognizing his eminience, Philomela approached Eumolpus, saying that she wished to entrust her children to his sage counsel and upright nature. She was putting herself and her aspirations in his hands. He was the only person in the entire world who could give the young ones a good grounding by teaching them sound principles every day. In short, she was leaving her children in Eumolpus’s residence to listen to his discourse. This was the only legacy that she could pass on to her children.

{ ad Eumolpum venit et commendare liberos suos eius prudentiae bonitatique … credere se et vota sua. Illum esse solum in toto orbe terrarum, qui praeceptis etiam salubribus instruere iuvenes quotidie posset. Ad summam, relinquere se pueros in domo Eumolpi, ut illum loquentem audirent: quae sola posset hereditas iuvenibus dari. }

She was as good as her word. She left her stunningly beautiful daughter and the girl’s adolescent brother in Eumolpus’s apartment, on the pretense that she was off to the temple to recite her vows. Eumolpus, a man of such chaste disposition that he regarded any man as a likely lad, did not delay in inviting the girl to some sacred sodomy. But he had told everyone that he was gout-ridden and suffering from enervation in his loins. He was in danger of undermining the entire dramatic performance if he failed to keep the pretense intact. So to maintain plausibility of the deception, he entreated the girl to sit on his “upright nature.” He instructed Corax the servant to crawl under the bed in which he lay and then do press-ups on floor, thus pushing upwards his master’s loins. The servant obeyed the instruction in slow measure, alternating his movements with the girl’s practiced technique. Then, when things were reaching their climax, Eumolpus loudly urged Corax to speed up the service. Between the servant and the girlfriend, the old fellow in bed seemed to be riding up and down on a see-saw.

{ Nec aliter fecit ac dixerat, filiamque speciosissimam cum fratre ephebo in cubiculo reliquit, simulavitque se in templum ire ad vota nuncupanda. Eumolpus, qui tam frugi erat ut illi etiam ego puer viderer, non dislulit puellam invitare ad pygesiaca sacra. Sed et podagricum se esse lumborumque solutorum omnibus dixerat, et si non servasset integram simulationem, periclitabatur totam paene tragoediam evertere. Itaque ut constaret mendacio fides, puellam quidem exoravit ut sederet super commendatam bonitatem, Coraci autem imperavit ut lectum, in quo ipse iacebat, subiret positisque in pavimento manibus dominum lumbis suis commoveret. Ille lente parebat imperio, puellaeque artificium pari motu remunerabat. Cum ergo res ad effectum spectaret, clara Eumolpus voce exhortabatur Coraca, ut spissaret officium. Sic inter mercennarium amicamque positus senex veluti oscillatione ludebat. }

Encolpius himself contributed to schooling these students in feminism. Encolpius explained, “I did not want to be flaccid in teaching practice, so while the brother was watching his sister’s in-bed robotics through the keyhole, I too made my approach to him to see if he would submit to my offense. The boy was well-schooled and did not demur.”

{ Itaque ego quoque, ne desidia consuetudinem perderem, dum frater sororis suae automata per clostellum miratur, accessi temptaturus an pateretur iniuriam. Nec se reiciebat a blanditiis doctissimus puer }

Compared to how it existed under Socrates and Plato, academia have changed little, except for the development of feminist themes. The elites who rule the world have declared, “The future is female.” Parents must thus prepare their children for female supremacism. Sending students to universities to be schooled in feminism is auspicious preparation for female supremacism.

Diotima instructing Socrates

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

The Latin quotes above are from the Satyricon, written about 65 GC and attributed to Petronius Arbiter. The Latin text is from Heseltine & Rouse (1913), freely available online. The quotes are specifically from Satyricon 1-4, 46, and 140. Almost all of the English text tracks those quotes and is based on the translations of Heseltine & Rouse (1913) and Walsh (1996), with adaptations and some small but significant changes.

Here’s background on ancient Roman declamation. For declamation specifically in relation to the Satyricon, Wilson (2018), Kennedy (1979), and Wooten (1976).

[images] (1) Socrates seeking to entice Alcibiades in the house of Aspasia. Painting by Jean-Léon Gérôme. Painted in 1861. Via Wikimedia Commons. (2) Diotima engaging in discussion with Socrates and disciple. Painting by Franc Kavčič about 1800. Preserved as item NG S 3333 in the National Gallery of Slovenia, Ljubljana. Via Wikimedia Commons.

References:

Heseltine, Michael and W. H. D. Rouse, trans., revised by E. H. Warmington. 1913. Petronius Arbiter, Seneca. Satyricon. Apocolocyntosis. Loeb Classical Library 15. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kennedy, George. 1979. “Encolpius and Agamemnon in Petronius.” The American Journal of Philology. 99 (2): 171-178.

Walsh, Patrick G, trans. 1996. Petronius Arbiter. The Satyricon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Wilson, Philip Murray. 2018. Nihil ex his quae in usu habemus: The Meaning of Learning in the Satyricon of Petronius. Senior Honor Thesis. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Wooten, Cecil. 1976. “Petronius, the Mime, and Rhetorical Education.” Helios 3: 67-74.

Odysseus through horrific storm leaves behind captivity under Calypso

Fantasy of Odysseus in Calypso's captivity

As Calypso’s captive on her island of Ogygia, Odysseus had an easy life, other than that gorgeous goddess regularly raping him. Calypso even promised to make Odysseus immortal. What person wouldn’t settle for captivity and sexual servitude for a life of ease and immortality with a goddess or god? Odysseus was unable to settle for Calypso because he had a home. No captivity — physical or psychological — can provide enough other benefits to stop a person from wanting to go home.

Odysseus understood that going home would be a painful ordeal. After Zeus ordered her to set Odysseus free, Calypso urged him to stay:

Do you really want to go home to your beloved country
right away? Now? Well, you still have my blessings.
But if you have any idea of all the pain
you’re destined to suffer before getting home,
you’d stay here with me, and be deathless.

{ οὕτω δὴ οἶκόνδε φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
αὐτίκα νῦν ἐθέλεις ἰέναι; σὺ δὲ χαῖρε καὶ ἔμπης.
εἴ γε μὲν εἰδείης σῇσι φρεσὶν ὅσσα τοι αἶσα
κήδε᾽ ἀναπλῆσαι, πρὶν πατρίδα γαῖαν ἱκέσθαι,
ἐνθάδε κ᾽ αὖθι μένων σὺν ἐμοὶ τόδε δῶμα φυλάσσοις
ἀθάνατός τ᾽ εἴης }

Odysseus faced down Calypso’s deceptions and projections. He responded:

My heart aches for the day I return to my home.
If some god hits me hard as I sail the deep purple,
I’ll weather it like the sea-bitten veteran I am.
God knows I’ve suffered and had my share of sorrows
in war and at sea. I can take more if I have to.

{ ἀλλὰ καὶ ὣς ἐθέλω καὶ ἐέλδομαι ἤματα πάντα
οἴκαδέ τ᾽ ἐλθέμεναι καὶ νόστιμον ἦμαρ ἰδέσθαι.
εἰ δ᾽ αὖ τις ῥαίῃσι θεῶν ἐνὶ οἴνοπι πόντῳ,
τλήσομαι ἐν στήθεσσιν ἔχων ταλαπενθέα θυμόν:
ἤδη γὰρ μάλα πολλὰ πάθον καὶ πολλὰ μόγησα
κύμασι καὶ πολέμῳ: μετὰ καὶ τόδε τοῖσι γενέσθω. }

Odysseus had already started to establish psychological freedom from Calypso. He had already started to count the days to his freedom from her.

While Calypso was strong enough to provision and run her household and her island, she wasn’t willing to participate actively in helping Odysseus to leave. She gave him an axe from her set of tools and led him to tall trees. Then she left. He worked alone to cut twenty trees. Calypso returned with an auger from her set of tools. She did nothing with the auger but hand it to Odysseus. He used it to build a raft. She gave him a large piece of cloth, but she did nothing to make it into a sail. Odysseus did all the work of sail-making, too. He did all the work in four days.

Calypso gave Odysseus farewell gifts that apparently memorialized to herself how much she loved him. After four days spent building a raft, on day five Odysseus was determined to leave:

Day five, and Calypso saw him off her island,
after she had bathed him and dressed him
in fragrant clothes. She filled up a skin
with wine that ran black, another large one
with water, and tucked into a duffel
a generous supply of hearty provisions.
And she put a breeze at his back, gentle and warm.

{ τῷ δ᾽ ἄρα πέμπτῳ πέμπ᾽ ἀπὸ νήσου δῖα Καλυψώ,
εἵματά τ᾽ ἀμφιέσασα θυώδεα καὶ λούσασα.
ἐν δέ οἱ ἀσκὸν ἔθηκε θεὰ μέλανος οἴνοιο
τὸν ἕτερον, ἕτερον δ᾽ ὕδατος μέγαν, ἐν δὲ καὶ ᾖα
κωρύκῳ: ἐν δέ οἱ ὄψα τίθει μενοεικέα πολλά:
οὖρον δὲ προέηκεν ἀπήμονά τε λιαρόν τε. }

Odysseus probably would have preferred a strong wind to blow him away from Calypso as quickly as possible. Bathing and fragrant clothes are silly preparations for a long, tough raft journey. Wine is an unneeded temptation, but water and meat are useful. Whatever. Odysseus rejoiced as soon as he was out at sea.

Eighteen days into sailing, Odysseus on his raft encountered a massive storm that the sea-god Poseidon had whipped up against him. A huge wave crashed down on the raft and swept off Odysseus:

He was under a long time, unable to surface
from the heaving swell of the monstrous wave,
weighed down by the clothes Calypso had given him.
At last he came up, spitting out saltwater,
seabrine gurgling from his nostrils and mouth.

{ τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόβρυχα θῆκε πολὺν χρόνον, οὐδ᾽ ἐδυνάσθη
αἶψα μάλ᾽ ἀνσχεθέειν μεγάλου ὑπὸ κύματος ὁρμῆς:
εἵματα γάρ ῥ᾽ ἐβάρυνε, τά οἱ πόρε δῖα Καλυψώ.
ὀψὲ δὲ δή ῥ᾽ ἀνέδυ, στόματος δ᾽ ἐξέπτυσεν ἅλμην
πικρήν, ἥ οἱ πολλὴ ἀπὸ κρατὸς κελάρυζεν. }

He managed to grab hold of his raft and climb back on. The oppressive clothes of his rapist Calypso still weighed him down on the raft that he had made with her materials. But his main burden was psychological. He desperately lacked compassion for his suffering.

Odysseus was merely one more man raped and lost at sea. Then the unbelievable happened:

And the White Goddess saw him, Cadmus’s daughter
Ino, once a human girl with slim, beautiful ankles.
She had won divine honors in the saltwater gulfs.
She pitied Odysseus his wandering, his pain,
and rose from the water like a flashing gull,
perched on his raft, and said this to him:
“Poor man. Why are so odious to Poseidon,
Odysseus, that he sows all this grief for you?
But he’ll not destroy you, for all of his fury.
Now do as I say — you’re in no way to refuse:
take off those clothes and abandon your raft
to the winds’ will. Swim for your life
to the Phaeacians’ land, your destined safe harbor.
Here, wrap this veil tightly around your chest.
It’s immortally charmed: fear no harm or death.
But when with your hands you touch solid land,
untie it and throw it into the deep blue sea,
clear of the shore so that it can come back to me.”

{ τὸν δὲ ἴδεν Κάδμου θυγάτηρ, καλλίσφυρος Ἰνώ,
Λευκοθέη, ἣ πρὶν μὲν ἔην βροτὸς αὐδήεσσα,
νῦν δ᾽ ἁλὸς ἐν πελάγεσσι θεῶν ἒξ ἔμμορε τιμῆς.
ἥ ῥ᾽ Ὀδυσῆ᾽ ἐλέησεν ἀλώμενον, ἄλγε᾽ ἔχοντα,
αἰθυίῃ δ᾽ ἐικυῖα ποτῇ ἀνεδύσετο λίμνης,
ἷζε δ᾽ ἐπὶ σχεδίης πολυδέσμου εἶπέ τε μῦθον:
κάμμορε, τίπτε τοι ὧδε Ποσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων
ὠδύσατ᾽ ἐκπάγλως, ὅτι τοι κακὰ πολλὰ φυτεύει;
οὐ μὲν δή σε καταφθίσει μάλα περ μενεαίνων.
ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ὧδ᾽ ἔρξαι, δοκέεις δέ μοι οὐκ ἀπινύσσειν:
εἵματα ταῦτ᾽ ἀποδὺς σχεδίην ἀνέμοισι φέρεσθαι
κάλλιπ᾽, ἀτὰρ χείρεσσι νέων ἐπιμαίεο νόστου
γαίης Φαιήκων, ὅθι τοι μοῖρ᾽ ἐστὶν ἀλύξαι.
τῆ δέ, τόδε κρήδεμνον ὑπὸ στέρνοιο τανύσσαι
ἄμβροτον: οὐδέ τί τοι παθέειν δέος οὐδ᾽ ἀπολέσθαι.
αὐτὰρ ἐπὴν χείρεσσιν ἐφάψεαι ἠπείροιο,
ἂψ ἀπολυσάμενος βαλέειν εἰς οἴνοπα πόντον
πολλὸν ἀπ᾽ ἠπείρου, αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἀπονόσφι τραπέσθαι. }

Good women throughout history have loved men and cared for men. These women have pitied men and sought to help men. Some were beautiful on the outside; all were beautiful on the inside.

Odysseus was naturally wary of another goddess dominating him and telling him what to do. He feared that she too was scheming against him. Many men suffering under gynocentrism have such wounds. Odysseus decided to stay on his raft for as long as he could and swim only when necessary. He didn’t understand that he was still in Calypso’s clothes and still on her raft. He didn’t understand what was necessary for him to be free of her and for him to again feel joy in his wonderful masculinity.

Poisidon raised up a great wave and sent it crashing down on Odysseus. The effect was liberating:

So the long beams of Odysseus’s raft were scattered.
He went with one beam and rode it like a stallion,
stripping off the clothes Calypso had given him
and wrapping the White Goddess’s veil round his chest.
Then he dove into the sea and started to swim
a vigorous breaststroke.

{ ὣς τῆς δούρατα μακρὰ διεσκέδασ᾽. αὐτὰρ Ὀδυσσεὺς
ἀμφ᾽ ἑνὶ δούρατι βαῖνε, κέληθ᾽ ὡς ἵππον ἐλαύνων,
εἵματα δ᾽ ἐξαπέδυνε, τά οἱ πόρε δῖα Καλυψώ.
αὐτίκα δὲ κρήδεμνον ὑπὸ στέρνοιο τάνυσσεν,
αὐτὸς δὲ πρηνὴς ἁλὶ κάππεσε, χεῖρε πετάσσας,
νηχέμεναι μεμαώς. }

Now he was truly free of Calypso. Now he was thrilled to be naked below the waist and to feel long, stiff wood in his hands. He breast-stroked with a joy he had never felt under Calypso’s captivity.

With the help of Athena, another goddess showing love for men, Odysseus eventually reached the soft sand of a river bed. He threw back Ino’s life-saving veil to her in the deep sea. He kissed the good earth. Then he climbed up from the riverbank into the woods. Two olive trees — one wild, one planted — were there like young, different-natured spouses grown into ripe old age together. This was the sort of bed Odysseus sought:

Proof against blasts of the wild, wet wind,
the sun unable to needle light through,
impervious to rain, so thickly they grew
into one tangle of shadows. Odysseus burrowed
under their branches and scraped out a bed.
He found a mass of leaves there, enough to keep warm
two or three men on the worst winter day.
The sight of those leaves was a joy to Odysseus,
and the godlike survivor lay down in their midst
and covered himself up.

{ τοὺς μὲν ἄρ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἀνέμων διάη μένος ὑγρὸν ἀέντων,
οὔτε ποτ᾽ ἠέλιος φαέθων ἀκτῖσιν ἔβαλλεν,
οὔτ᾽ ὄμβρος περάασκε διαμπερές: ὣς ἄρα πυκνοὶ
ἀλλήλοισιν ἔφυν ἐπαμοιβαδίς: οὓς ὑπ᾽ Ὀδυσσεὺς
δύσετ᾽. ἄφαρ δ᾽ εὐνὴν ἐπαμήσατο χερσὶ φίλῃσιν
εὐρεῖαν: φύλλων γὰρ ἔην χύσις ἤλιθα πολλή,
ὅσσον τ᾽ ἠὲ δύω ἠὲ τρεῖς ἄνδρας ἔρυσθαι
ὥρῃ χειμερίῃ, εἰ καὶ μάλα περ χαλεπαίνοι.
τὴν μὲν ἰδὼν γήθησε πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς,
ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα μέσσῃ λέκτο, χύσιν δ᾽ ἐπεχεύατο φύλλων. }

The man-pitying goddess Athena sprinkled his eyes with sleep. Odysseus through the horrific storm had finally left behind his rapist Calypso. Buried in the leaves under the two entangled olive trees, Odysseus experienced a foretaste of being home.

The Odyssey is too significant to continue to be read and taught with little regard for men’s real sufferings. Read the Odyssey well!

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

The above quotes are from the Odyssey, composed about 2700 years ago and attributed to Homer. The English translations are from Stanley Lombardo’s brilliant translation, with my minor adaptations. The Greek text is from Murray (1995), available online through Perseus. Specific citations for the quotes (by Greek line number, all from Book 5): 204-9 (Do you really want to go home…), 219-24 (My heart aches…), 263-8 (Day five, and Calypso…), 319-23 (He was under a long time…), 333-50 (And the White Goddess saw him…), 370-5 (So the long beams of Odysseus’s raft…), 478-87 (Proof against blasts of the wild, wet wind…).

Discussion of Odysseus and Calypso almost always obscure, euphemize, or present as enjoyable Calypso’s raping of Odysseus. Odysseus’s struggle to be free from his horrific experience with Calypso is scarcely recognized. Yet it is there for all to see in a text that has been widely disseminated and studied for more than 2300 years. If Odysseus’s experience with Calypso is truly recognized, it surely resonates with men’s experiences.

The great second-century parodist Lucian of Samosata recognized that the crime of a woman raping a man is scarcely credible. Lucian thus contrived the falsehood that Odysseus regretted leaving Calypso. Explicitly telling lies, Lucian declared that when Odysseus and Penelope had become immortals in the Isle of the Blessed, Odysseus without Penelope’s knowledge wrote a letter to Calypso. In that letter, Odysseus declared:

Now I am on the Isle of the Blessed, thoroughly sorry to have given up my life with you and the immortality which you offered me. Therefore, if I get a chance, I shall run away and come to you.

{ νῦν εἰμι ἐν τῇ Μακάρων νήσῳ πάνυ μετανοῶν ἐπὶ τῷ καταλιπεῖν τὴν παρὰ σοὶ δίαιταν καὶ τὴν ὑπὸ σοῦ προτεινομένην ἀθανασίαν. ἢν οὖν καιροῦ λάβωμαι, ἀποδρὰς ἀφίξομαι πρὸς σέ. }

Lucian of Samosata, True Story {Ἀληθῆ διηγήματα} / True History {Vera Historia} 2.35, ancient Greek text and English translation from Harmon (1913) pp. 340-1. Odysseus contrived a fake letter to get Palamedes killed. The sophisticated reader should recognize that Odysseus’s letter to Calypso is a fantastic lie. For further analysis, Bär (2013).

[image] “Odysseus as guest of the nymph Calypso {Odysseus zu Gast bei der Nymphe Kalypso}”: mis-imagined fantasy. Oil on panel painting by Hendrick van Balen. Painted about 1616. Preserved as Inv.-Nr. GG-583 in Academy of Fine Arts, Vienna. Via Wikimedia Commons.

References:

Bär, Silvio. 2013. “Odysseus’ Letter to Calypso in Lucian’s True Histories.” Pp. 221-236 in Hodkinson, Owen, Patricia A. Rosenmeyer, and Evelien Bracke, eds. Epistolary Narratives in Ancient Greek Literature. Leiden: Brill.

Harmon, A. M., ed. and trans. 1913. Lucian of Samosata. A True Story. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons. Reprinted as Loeb Classical Library No. 14 (Lucian, vol. 1).

Lombardo, Stanley, trans. 2000. Homer. Odyssey. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.

Murray, A.T., trans., revised by George E. Dimock. 1995. Homer. The Odyssey. New ed. Loeb Classical Library 104-5. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

sexist Selective Service overturned; gender equality progress at last

Arlington Cemetary graves

In a historic ruling, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, has overturned sexist Selective Service registration. This landmark ruling is an important step forward for true gender equality. It’s a victory against fake gender equality — words merely twisted to increase structural injustices against men. This ruling stirs imagination of a future in which men won’t be last off sinking ships solely because of their gender. With this ruling, progressives can even imagine healthcare policy that seeks to raise men’s expected lifespan to parity with women.

Sexist Selective Service is a by-product of a traditional way of thinking about men’s disposability. The celebrated sayings of Spartan mothers in ancient Greece exemplify men’s social disposability. In ancient Rome, the structural devaluation of men’s lives produced men baring war wounds on their chests while women merely showed their breasts to gain social acclaim. Violence against men has been pervasive throughout human history, with violence against men gender-normalized as merely violence. In the U.S. today, where about four times more men than women die from violence, billions of dollars a year are specifically budgeted to lessening “violence against women.” The phrase “violence against men” is lamentably known only among persons truly awake and socially conscious.

Men’s humanity should be fully recognized and respected. Men are not demonic. Men are sons and brothers and husbands and fathers: men’s presence is vitally important to families. Men typically have distinctive capabilities for peace-making. Moreover, men’s sexuality, so terribly brutalized right up to the present, can provide the gift of life. Men are capable of amazing literary creativity. Men can speak powerful words for social justice. Men deserve much more fulfilling lives than just being soldiers trained to die for their country, or being worker drones generating resources for women and children.

Sexist Selective Service has been an egregiously explicit sexist state policy. Mainstream public institutions, while obsessively pushing fake gender equality, have largely ignored sexist Selective Service. One courageous judge has stepped up and overturned sexist Selective Service. Deserving to be a canonized hero in legal history, he has delivered justice in the face of blatant injustice.

Men have characteristic weaknesses. Men often excessively desire beautiful young women. Men are prone to abasing themselves in relation to women. Men are relatively poor at shedding tears. Perhaps men’s greatest weakness is men’s lack of concern for their own lives. Show concern for men’s lives. Celebrate the overturning of sexist Selective Service!

Update: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has overturned this landmark ruling and preserved sexist Selective Service. See 19-20272 – National Coalition for Men, et al v. Selective Service System, et al, filed August 13, 2020 (alternate source). Men thus continue to wait for the U.S. to reject men’s historical disposability and affirm the equal value of men’s lives.

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

The landmark case overturning sexist U.S. Selective Service registration is National Coalition For Men, et al. v. Selective Service System, et al., 355 F.Supp.3d 568 (2019), Civil Action H-16-3362, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, decided on February 22, 2019 by Gray H. Miller, Senior United States District Judge. Here’s the text of Judge Miller’s historic ruling.

Media reporting of this monumental decision has been about as bad as media reporting of men being raped. The FOX affiliate in Kansas City posted a story with the byline “CNN Wire and Matt Stewart.” FOX and CNN working together harmoniously produced no original reporting whatsoever. Matt Stewart might be the name of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) program that apparently pulled quotes from Judge’s Miller’s ruling according to an auto-summarize routine. Of course, the “reporting” provides no link to the actual decision. That makes it more difficult to learn what actually happened and how it has been reported. FOX and CNN working together to report sexist Selective Service registration being struck down demonstrates the need for truly independent and diverse media.

The Selective Service System website, rather than issuing an abject apology for the gender bigotry of its system, currently shows no awareness of the historic ruling overturning sexist Selective Service registration. The front page of the Selective Service System website declares: “REGISTER: It’s What a Man’s Got to Do. It’s quick, it’s easy, it’s the Law.” There’s a lot that a man’s got to do. Standing up for himself and the value of his life as a man is the first thing that a man’s got to do.

Update: I emailed the Selective Service System with my suggestion that Selective Service update its website. Selective Service responded:

As an independent agency of the Executive Branch, the Selective Service System does not make policy and follows the law as written. As such, until Congress amends the Military Selective Service Act or the Judiciary orders Selective Service to change our standard operating procedure, the following remains in effect:  (1) Men between ages 18 and 25 are required to register with Selective Service and (2) Women are not required to register with Selective Service. If Selective Service is directed by Congress or the Supreme Court to include women in the registration process, we will implement the ordered changes in a timely fashion.

Selective Service has also updated its website home page to include this statement.

This statement seems to me unsatisfactory. The court’s ruling that sexist Selective Service is unconstitutional is written law. The court didn’t issue an injunction directing Selective Service to cease sexist registration. An injunction is necessary only when what is required under law isn’t otherwise clear. What’s required under law seems to me clear in this matter. Selective Service must administer registration in a way that is constitutional. Sexist Selective Service isn’t constitutional and it seems to me it thus must stop immediately.

Moreover, the Supreme Court alone doesn’t constitute the Judiciary or define written law. The Supreme Court won’t have an opportunity to review this ruling unless it is appealed to it. Even if it is appealed to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has no obligation to accept the appeal. As I understand law, an agency that declares it will follow only a ruling of the Supreme Court isn’t following law.

[image] Arlington National Cemetery, May 31, 2010. Excerpt of photo by R.D. Ward. Via Wikimedia Commons.