Jeremiah Tolbert

I believe Utah, or at least Moab, should appro­pri­ate the tourist tag line “Moab is for Lovers.”  What’s sexy about Virginia?  Because it has the word “vir­gin” in it?  Are they the world’s cap­i­tal pro­ducer of nov­elty con­doms?    Moab, and Arches National Park in par­tic­u­lar, is inher­ently a very sex­u­ally sym­bolic place.   It’s for lovers with the sense of humor of a 4th grader.  And I think that’s all of us.

Look, you’ve been read­ing this blog, so you’ve seen the pic­tures.  The phal­lic nature of many of the sand­stone for­ma­tions is unde­ni­able.  Some of them are quite explicit in imi­tat­ing the shape, and aren’t sim­ply taller than they are wide (the Men’s Club stan­dard require­ment to use some­thing as an allu­sion to a penis is defined as sim­ply as that).  I double-​​checked this obser­va­tion with my wife to make sure that it wasn’t sim­ply a trick of the mas­cu­line mind.  No, no.  There are penises every­where in Arches National Park.

But Arches National Park is any­thing but phal­lo­cen­tric.  It’s got plenty of vagi­nal allu­sions in the land­scape as well.  Its very name­sake evokes a cer­tain female organ.  Not quite so ele­gantly, I sup­pose, but if you really squint and stretch your metaphor­i­cal brain, it kind of makes sense.

I don’t want to say that the land­scape acted as an aphrode­siac, but– the land­scape acts as an aphrode­siac. For uh, other cou­ples that, we, uh, saw doing it?

Moab is miss­ing out on an entirely dif­fer­ent tourist tac­tic.  “Moab is for lovers–huh huh, it totally looks like a giant penis.”

Call me, Moab Tourist Board!

Share This:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Tags: arches national park, humor, lovers, moab, travel