Social Question

DaphneT's avatar

What do you think of Eunuchs as servants of government?

Asked by DaphneT (5728points) February 6th, 2012

Just surfing and found this essay. Read about the use of Eunuchs as servants of government, and share your reaction.

My first thought is ugh! But wait, there are some advantages. I think. But what about letting women serve? That’s not as easy…

So what do you think?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

22 Answers

everephebe's avatar

I’d say let the women rule first before we go cutting anyone’s penis off.

Buttonstc's avatar

Uhhh. Let’s not go overboard on this please.

Castration has historically meant removal of the testes.

Operatic castrati, anyone?

Penis removal can be a life threatening amputation, especially in ancient times. Had they gone overboard, there may not have been any choirboys who survived. And then where would we be?

Removing testosterone is enough to accomplish the desired result. Shutting the factory off (the balls) does the trick nicely.

Hacking off the penis is REALLY overkill. Quite literally overkill. For both farm animals and humans alike.

That’s a whole lot of blood vessels there, son! Ya know, possibility of infection, gangrene. That sort of thing.

Best to keep it simple.


filmfann's avatar

Can we start with Newt? I mean, you know… Before he does it again.

everephebe's avatar

I’m beginning to think I don’t like ya @Buttonstc, penis / balls whatever I was ~.
This is a ri-dick-ulous question, not that there is anything wrong with that, but…

Buttonstc's avatar


You can count on my enthusiastic vote for YES on that one !

Where do I sign the petition?


Accuracy in these matters never hurts and might even help. Don’t shoot the messenger. LOL

Aethelflaed's avatar

Bad idea.

First, all of the times/places that were listed as having eunuchs also didn’t have the concept of human rights we do. If they had any concept of it at all, it was that the rich male citizens should have human rights. That might have played into why they thought it was cool to cut a man’s bits off before he was old enough to consent.

Second, there are two main reasons listed as why they were good: a lack of interest in starting their own dynasties (aka, having offspring), and that they were then safe for women to be around and safe to be around women. However, while birthright was a big deal back then, it is not now; very few people inherit a company because they’re the boss’s kid, and elections remove the inheritance of a title. We also have changed our cultural definitions of sex and rape, and eunuchs would no longer provide the guarantee that women/girls (and men/boys!) were not violated, nor that they could not be swayed and/or bought with various pleasures of the flesh.

So, I’m not convinced it was a great system back then, but it was definitely a product of those historical periods, that cannot simply be implemented into an entirely different culture and be expected to have the same results.

everephebe's avatar

I am familiar with what a eunuch typically is. Accuracy is fine, but so is having a sense of humor. Thanks for being pedantic and patronizing @Buttonstc (again).

Buttonstc's avatar

The fact that it’s not an effective solution for keeping pedophiles from re-offending proves your point even further, @Aethelflaed.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@Buttonstc I know, right? >:-) The fact that eunuchs were known for being on the receiving end of a lot of anal sex also proves my point.

Buttonstc's avatar


Yeesh. Lighten up, dude. What kind of bug crawled up your ass tonight? I’m not a mind reader so I have no possible way of knowing who knows what around here.

Have you suffered a sudden impairment in your ability to recognize smilies when you stumble upon them?

Pedants don’t use smilies when treating a subject toungue in cheek. Pedants don’t know the meaning of tongue in cheek.

Pardon me all to death for assuming from our previous encounters that you actually had something rresembling a sense of humor. I genuinely thought so Believe me, I won’t make the same mistake ever again.

See, it’s that darn mind reading thing again. I gave you the benefit of the doubt on that one initially and look what happened.

Damned if I do. Damned if I don’t.

If you truly find my posts so intolerable, here’s an idea. Stop reading them.

Problem solved.

Yeesh again.

Good grief.

everephebe's avatar

Lighten up was exactly my point, nice reversal. :D
“Pedants don’t use smilies when treating a subject toungue in cheek” – you’ve never met any pedants have you? :D
Speculations as to the insect up my ass can begin, someone should take bets.

everephebe's avatar

Plus, as a baker retarded means something entirely different to me than PC.

ETpro's avatar

Ha! You’d have to seal their mouths too and make sure their tongues couldn’t pass the barrier or we’d still have all the sex scandals. Maybe it would make more sense for us to develop a more laid back attitude like the French and the Italians have. Humans will be humans from time to time.

Buttonstc's avatar

In case you missed the obvious: I WAS treating it lightly from the get-go? Can’t lighten up any more than that from me.

Assuming someone is being patronizing toward you is hardly treating anything lightly on your part. It was meant jokingly. Not as a slam at what you know or don’t know. It really is that simple.

Prickly and over sensitive isn’t becoming to you so let’s just agree to part ways and be done with it already.

Again, I was not patronizing you. Simply joking around. Hence the smilies and light tone. Nothing more. The rest is your interpretation. And if that’s how you choose to continue, fine. Just leave me out of it. Thank you.

everephebe's avatar

@ETpro That’s a good point we should have non-human delegates.

everephebe's avatar

@Buttonstc I guess you’re just not that funny then.~ :p

ETpro's avatar

@everephebe You mean they are humans?

everephebe's avatar

In theory @ETpro, in theory… any other earthlings would do better (than those in congress) right?

Buttonstc's avatar

And exactly how does retarded enter into this discussion. I don’t recall anyone using the term or even alluding to it.

Humor is a relative thing. I’m perfectly willing to concede that I’m just not that funny to you.

However, just because my humor fell short does NOT mean that there was any intent to patronize or demean anybody, least of all you. You’re not a very good mind reader.

I honestly suffered the delusion that we were at least on minimally friendly terms based upon previous exchanges.

Obviously you saw things differently if my comment irked you to the point where you automatically assume I was being patronizing toward you in spite of evidence to the contrary. I didn’t put the smiley in afterward or something. It was there and you either missed it or CHOSE TO ignore it.

And you obviously have difficulty recognizing tongue in cheek when it’s been there all along.

So I’m not that funny. So sue me already. But stop assuming that I meant to insult you. That didn’t enter my mind. I figured it was just a typo or whatever.

But your interpretation is your problem. I refuse to make it mine.

I actually have a real life to live. If we ever meet again in another Fluther thread, rest assured I definitely won’t make the same mistake twice. I have zero desire to interact with you at all and am certainly not planning on it.

How about you do likewise?

everephebe's avatar

Ah, must I count on my fingers how many I need to respond to you @Buttonstc ?
:p :D : ) :P :D :p :P : )

King_Pariah's avatar

Let’s look back at ancient China… yeah, corrupted easily. Next!

Buttonstc's avatar


No more fingers necessary. I’m done. I’ve said all I need to. You may have the last word if it’s important to you.

I have zero interest after this. That’s it.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther