I originally wrote this as part of a meaningless feud with a noder on e2 who shall not be named. I wrote it in a fit of anger and humor, but since writing it, I realize that (without modesty), it is one of the better encapsulations of some sick attitudes that are...well, what they are doing strains language. It is in part a satire on Heidegger, and his decendants, and is in part a serious analysis of...

Nilhism is very serious, although it can mean various things. An ontologically sealed version of the world is a form of nilhism. A month after I wrote this, a war was started, in part because someone thought that their own radical subjectivism and feelings of persecution mean they can do whatever they like.

Good, or don't be. Oh, and none of this is biographically factual.

I AM A FOOT FETISHist.

Yes, I see you turn away. The matriarchy, that all consuming eater and assimilator of male identity has trained you well. But, perhaps you still have something left in you, something that can see beyond your training. Perhaps my net of words can free you from the burden society has placed on you. Using the latest in post modern technology, and some advances in transdynamic state theory, I will explain to you why the foot, as an object of sexual desire, is the only authentic mode for a true male to define his sexuality.

Contemporary sexuality is defined by the matriarchy by a process that is teleological, and nilhistic. Supposedly, the two "poles" of sexuality are the penis and the vagina, which compliment each other in function and in physical shape. In interacting, they construct one seamless, ontological whole. They are defined by each other, and in such defining of each other, they construct a nilhism. This is what I mean by teleology, and what I mean by nilhism. This nilhism, however, borrows an illusion of being by placing this interaction into a context of progress, by subliminating the sublime essence of sex into procreation. Instead of sexuality defining itself by its existential meaning, it turns away from the immediacy of its being and embraces a mythic worldview where all functions are tied into the notion of procreation, of the carrying of a sacred "genetic line" from a heroic ancestor, into "future generations" that will carry on the project of apotheosis, carrying the seed of a "future society". Thus, the nilhism of vaginal intercourse is hidden in the rhetoric of future developments. Heteronormative intercourse, then, is the purveyor of facism, in its insistence that desire is subliminated to social function; and of racism and nationalism in its insistence that this function carry on a biological imperative of spreading the ethnic blood of the hero-king.

Now, then, lets look at its counterpart: foot sex. Does this phrase strike you as odd? It is, because in its statement, it states a question. Foot sex, how is that done? All statements are odd, because all statements ask questions. Yet some do not conceal this. Foot sex asks the questions that all human activities must ask: how is that done? And by the how doing, the why doing is naturally revealed. The object of desire is revealed in the foot. But how is it interacted with? Desire can not be written off as merely an animal urge or the fulfillment of some airtight ontological order. The object is revealed nakedly in sight, but with its very nakedness, it shows itself to be a construction: but a construction of the desirer. Thus, the male observing the foot must understand that the foot is desired by his existential self, not by his socially given role. And, in the fact that he will have to bring about sexual fulfillment with self pleasure, he understands that all pleasure is self pleasure.

Although, on the whole, I am writing about the death of any system, I must make a note: vaginal sex is even more immortalized in late capitalism and in reductionist science. Capitalism would make women objects, and denies that they are affected by the historical world. The fondness for the vagina, an organ cut off from the public space, shows women as being atomic entities, moving through the world, but seperate from it and not changed by it. The vagina is also the genitals, from the word "gen", that which comes from the beginning. The genitals derive their source from some mythic biological\mythical world. The feet, on the other hand, are shaped by interaction with a known, seen world. Foot fetishism reeroticizes historicality, as the interaction a woman has with the historical world space are traced on every bump and callous on her foot. And, of course, that the work worn feet of a working woman show her identity as a worker adds a Marxist tinge to the hedonistic act of enjoying a woman's feet.

Free yourself