It’s the Monday after a holiday, and that can only mean one thing: Raph and I are at each other’s throats regarding a question about scrotums. And not just any scrotums: the synthetic scrotums that deeply lost people hang from the back of their trucks to suggest that their trucks are male and have the organs that mammalian life uses for reproduction. Yes, . It seems there are two very divergent kinds, and our own Raphael Orlove and I disagree which are worse.

That image up top pretty well shows the difference between the two: one is the more common form of Truck Nutz, the official version, the one that attempts to replicate the look of an actual, biological scrotal sac, a thin, loose bag of skin leaden with a pair of testes.

The other, which uses actual metal nuts, is a more roundabout approach, a visual pun of sorts, much like how the ancient Egyptians would sometimes substitute the “loaves of bread” glyph with the “feather” glyph in offering formula images, since they were visually similar, but the feather added an extra layer of symbolic meaning.

When the “truck nuts” are shown as actual nuts, as in nut-and-bolt nuts, the association with testicles is still clear to the average viewer, but it takes a bit more thought to get there. It’s a bit more tongue-in-cheek, and, as an extra bonus, this type is usually home-made so no more money is funneled to Big Nutz.

As you may guess, I prefer the more oblique actual threaded nuts truck nuts, while Raph, bafflingly, prefers the more naturalistic scrotal-sculptural ones.

He’s sticking to his guns, somehow, but I know he’s got to be wrong here: those plastic scrotes are far worse than the pair of nuts on a chain, aren’t they? Back me up here!

Or, if you’re on Raph’s side, fine, whatever, tell me that, too. Even though you, and Raph, are so very, very wrong.