34. Smith is playing poker with some friends. He believes twos are wild, and only when the game ends is he told otherwise. He plays one game in his head without realizing that he really plays a somewhat different one. Being aroused by an effeminate boy is like this.

Figure G: Look guys, I played Final Fantasy 7 here, I know he's a dude, stop fucking with me, I didn't get hired to write GAY SHIT.
35. “He plays one game in his head...” This is a queer thing to say. I do not play poker in my head.

36. Say I did have sex with a boy who initially thought was a girl. Say I decided, at the end of it all, that I’d had enough of girls, that I now found them too boring, and I would now privilege effeminate boys in my sexual entertainment. (this seems somewhat queer: is sexual intercourse like a motion picture?) I think I would have to get extremely drunk in order to admit this to myself. (“admit to myself...” - what kind of an action is this?)

37. Jones tells me: “You’re going to hell, Wittgenstein!!” I would say: “I’m sorry. I don’t connect any meaning to those words. (yet)” But I know what he means in one sense and not another. I don’t know what hell is. But I understand what he’s telling me.

38. I have read that hell is a place for guilty people. An English saying: “guilty as hell!” I know I’m guilty, but I don’t know about hell. So I understand Jones here but not there. A problem: what does it mean when I say, “I’m guilty”? For I’m not just saying I was responsible for x. I want to say: I feel a certain way about it.

39. “I’m guilty” - now a proposition describing responsibility. “I’m guilty” - now an expression. Suppose I hypothetically scapegoat a misjudgment I made onto Smith. Smith is now the one who thought the girl (with a penis) was pretty, rather than myself. I do not make myself any less responsible, but I no longer feel as guilty. This is useful sometimes for relieving anxiety, and in this case for pedagogy. (“relieve anxiety” - is anxiety like a weight?)

Figure H: You fuckers aren't even trying anymore, are you?
40. Say after the first incident, which was accidental, I now feel a lot of sexual desire for young effeminate boys. I know that this is a situation where I should feel very guilty. Where did I learn this? Parents, etc.: “This is how you know when you’re guilty as hell.”


1. What do we mean when we say, “a penis”? “A penis is the male sex organ.” But something is queer about this. It seems like an oversimplification.

2. “The penis is used to ejaculate semen into the female for reproductive purposes.” There are queer results from saying only this. Suppose you use your penis to punch letters on a typewriter in a rough way. You may also hold a rag with it while washing dishes, or use it as a kind of blunt instrument. But this has nothing to do with its being a “sex organ”!

3. I do not understand what a penis is until I know how it is used.

4. Think of a worker pointing to a series of similar hammers he has laid out: “This is the hammer I use for putting in nails, this is the hammer for removing nails, this is the one for beating out bent surfaces, this is for getting stripped screws,” etc.. Think of him not being able to pound in a nail because he has lost that one. I would say: “He misunderstands what a hammer is.”

5. I would not pound in a nail with my penis. Why not? I want to say: because this is how dicks are to be used!

Figure I: I... what? Okay, I signed on to write captions for a serious paper here by one of the twentieth century's greatest thinkers.
6. Imagine an advance in medical science enabling a healthy penis to be removed from a boy and placed somewhere else, while keeping it alive and active. I put it on a desk, on a wall, on the forehead of a horse to make a kind of unicorn, etc.. “Well then, but isn’t it still a male sex organ?” Well, now you are just getting caught up in the language. The penis is now a decoration, or a paperweight, not a sex organ.

7. Suppose I remove my penis and attach it to my fist so as to achieve greater force of penetration during intercourse. Traditional definitions would presumably have no difficulties with this, as the penis is still a male sex organ.

8. I place the autonomous pecker from the previous example on a woman in her 20s. (never mind the method) Suppose she goes out and begins having sex with all of her female friends - even that they begin to trade it amongst themselves, so that X can penetrate Y in one go and then the other way around a few minutes later. Or, suppose that they get a collection of such penises and then manage a number of normally impossible sexual maneuvers. Traditional psychological categories (homosexual, heterosexual) would be hopelessly inadequate for describing this. Or, suppose you were to take such a penis and attach it to a much younger girl, also “popping out” her vagina in the same moment. The idea is to create a young person who is a girl to all appearances, yet has “incorrect” genitalia. But isn’t this precisely what Smith perceived?

9. Is there a difference between an effeminate boy and a girl who has had a penis attached to her? Don’t we respond to the game-play in the same manner?

10. Say in the future it becomes possible to cultivate genitalia for aesthetic and related purposes. We create dicks that, for example, are 18 inches long, ejaculate semen in amounts ten or twenty times normal with force comparable to small caliber ammunition, and can be grafted onto fully grown women with little difficulty. Or, we develop artificially intelligent cocks in a lab. In such a case, a new aesthetic tradition would have to arise for the knowledge and evaluation of such.

11. I do not judge each dick individually, in the same way that I don’t understand the note of a melody by looking at it without the others.

12. Aesthetics: penises would be assessed on a number of criteria. Dicks judged in terms of their length and girth, how sharply they glisten in the light, visibility of veins and degree of throbbing, presence or lack of foreskin, etc.. How “cute” a smaller kind of dick is, judged by a different measure. Merely “sufficient” amounts of ejaculate are now inadequate: penises will have to fire like artillery batteries in amounts of at least a quart or more, with semen having the consistency of icing or half-dried glue and a taste akin to sugared milk. The refractory period is to be removed completely. A single penis will eventually cease to be enough, and two or three will be required at a minimum. All of this is to say: reproductive processes are completely beside the point here. They mean nothing in this kind of a game.

13. The mistake of biology is to understand one kind of activity and assume that it knows what a penis is. It thus arrives at nonsense when it tries to speak of a young lady who has a cock that ejaculates fifteen yards across a room. I do not say that their picture of a penis is incorrect - instead I would say: they try to do too much with it.