Recently, you made a blog post entitled Pegs and Holes, in which you claim that the natural instincts of men are being made shameful and criminal. These instincts, it appears from your blog post, are to rape and cheat and tweet. Oddly, it seems, a lot of people weren't offended by the idea that men find it shameful to tweet, but they did take offense from the idea that it is just natural for men to rape and cheat. Shocking, I know. As if the public backlash of this weren't enough, you invited women who disagreed with you to come and argue with you on your blog, the point of which I can't quite figure out, since you seem to be intent on belittling these writers for taking you to task for saying that society shames men for their sexually predator behaviour (which you claim is natural), while society rewards a female one.
The problem here, Scott Adams, is at your very base understanding of humanity. See, in your original post, you write, "If a lion and a zebra show up at the same watering hole, and the lion kills the zebra, whose fault is that? Maybe you say the lion is at fault for doing the killing. Maybe you say the zebra should have chosen a safer watering hole. But in the end, you probably conclude that both animals acted according to their natures, so no one is to blame." All very good, I suppose, except of course, being part of the human race, this analogy for gender difference is one that is a touch flawed. See, unlike the lion and the zebra, I am part of humanity, so when I show up to the water hole, the lion looks at me and slinks away. The zebra leaves in a gallop. It doesn't matter if I am male or female when I appear, because in the giant food chain, I, a human, sit at the top. I possess the ability to eat both these creatures while taking over the watering hole and building a shop there that sells lion and zebra burgers. This is because I, unlike the lion and the zebra, possess a higher intelligence that allows for the civilization I am part of to grow and build and change the world. Last I checked, the lions hadn't built an engine, and the zebras weren't growing crops. It's shocking, I know, but that is what separates us from the animal kingdom.
Furthermore, you made your post in response to the events surrounding Anthony Weiner, the US senator who took a shot of his dick, and then mistakenly tweeted it to thousands, rather than privately to a young woman. You also, given your response later, made the post in response to the rape allegations against IMF Director, Dominique Strauss Kahn. In reference to that, you wrote, "I don't think he first had an urge to do some violence and decided that his penis was the go-to weapon of choice." I'm a bit unsure if you're saying that he did rape the woman, or if you're saying something else. Regardless, this interest to defend two powerful men signifies an intellectual choice on your part, and speaks to your beliefs in regards to the kind of things that they did. That's your choice, of course, being a human being you're allowed to have whatever opinion you wish; that also means that many others can see such behaviour as completely and utterly unacceptable. I, as a fellow human being, think both men behaved unacceptably and did not, and do not, think either should be forgiven.
The reason for this is because I believe in respect for your fellow human beings. As I am capable of an evolved intellect, as I am part of an ever growing and evolving society, I can recognise that both these men have been disrespectful to women. That, mind you, is putting it politely, especially in the case of the IMF director, should he found guilty. But I am not here to argue their cases, but rather to refute yours, and my point is that your original post failed to show any respect firstly to women and secondly to men. By claiming that "society has evolved to keep males in a state of continuous unfulfilled urges, more commonly known as unhappiness," you have made the large sin of not giving the people who share your world, either known or unknown, any respect. It may be that you are unhappy. It may be that your urges are unfilled. It may be that you wish you were Hugh Hefner, which is about the only reason I can figure for you making any reference to him in this discussion, much less claiming that Hefner has had an unhappy life of relationships. But, ignoring that, either you may or may not be happy, you may or may not wish to tweet your balls across the web, and either way, you don't speak for me.
I am happy, as much as any individual in this complex and diverse culture of ours could be. I suspect that part of the reason I am happy is because in life, I ensure that I treat anyone, be they male or female, be they American, Chinese, or Spanish, or from anywhere else, with the respect that every living person deserves, and the respect that I demand people treat me with. In short, I try not to disrespect my fellow human beings.
Perhaps you ought to try it.