There is very little that can be considered one of my triggers than getting stood up. Particularly getting stood up by gay men. And I honestly don't know what it is either about me, or about gay men, that makes it so overwhelmingly easy to make it continue to happen as frequently as it does.
I certainly understand that this may not be as much of a function of gay men in general as simply what gay men I've been in contact with, some signals that I am giving off, or some other functional relation that I have yet to discover. And yet, I still can't for the life of me figure out what it is that is driving this constant problem.
But let me assure you, that it is, in fact, a constant problem. I've been stood up on plenty of first dates, first times meeting with people who are interested in friendship, and both of those are actually somewhat understandable. I've also been stood up on second and third dates, and by people who I've been hanging out with more frequently.
I also tend to consider myself reasonable. With enough prior communication, and at least a semi-plausible reason or excuse, I'll forgive pretty much anything. Heck, forget semi-plausible, I'll even take a "I really don't feel like hanging out with you tonight. I'm feeling much more insterested in doing x instead." Even if x happens to be hooking up with some random trick that the person has never met before and will never see again after. So long as they're honest about it. Generally, I always put my friendships first, and while sex is great, there is nothing about it that can ever trump a friendship.
This is one thing I've learned is very different with me from the majority of the rest of the gay male community, however. In my experience, for most gay men, there is nothing that trumps sex. And most of the times that I've been ditched by friends, it has been for some random trick or another. Admittedly, as I said above, it's a hot-button topic for me. But we also all know how far in advance most tricks are set up. Right the heck now. So my question always is, "if we had plans, why did you suddenly go start looking for a random hook-up half an hour ahead of time?" Then again, maybe part of my problem is that I have yet to actually verbalize that question in the face of such cancellations.
I've also discovered that holidays are actually another hot-button for me. Thus this post. There is nothing quite like waiting around for over 5 hours for a couple of friends who made plans with you, and announced 1 hour before your plans that they were at a party and therefore asked you to call before you leave "just in case they aren't there." To call and find out they are still at the party and are drunk is one thing. It's annoying, but ok, it IS the 4th of July after all, right? Two hours later, calling again and being told that they'll call whenever they're getting ready to leave is pretty outright rude. But whatever, I ended up finding a trick of my own. After finishing with that, and coming back home, however, I came to the conclusion that further waiting was not only not an option any more, but that I was willing to be pretty harsh in explaining that I wasn't willing to wait any more. Scratch one more friendship.
Of course, in the face of that, the holiday card came up a few other times in my last relationship, and it was Thanksgiving that played the trigger for that relationship ending. There's nothing like leaving home to spend the night away from your kids to be with the men you love, only to have them unfold an air mattress and announce that that's where you can stay to make a man feel truly appreciated. Right?
The thing that I understand the least, actually, is how or why, and in what realm of the universe, do any of these people believe that what they're doing is ok? And what boggles my mind even more than that, is that ALL of these people in some way or another have determined that this type of behavior is ok. Otherwise, it wouldn't be such a prevalent problem!
This is what makes me believe that I'm the one who is somehow sending out signals that this type of behavior is somehow acceptable. I tend to be pretty open about my own issues, feelings, or positions with people, and so I would scratch that off of the list of options for it. I also have had enough of a problem with this situation in particular that people know it's a problem for me before they do it, as well, so I'd say that rules out another possibility.
What other possibilities exist, I either don't know, or are far too self-deprecating to mention. This would bring me to the possibility of it being more about them again, rather than me. Partially, them knowing that it's an issue may mean that they are attempting to self-sabotage things before they even get started, so as to head off any future issues, or to prove that the friendship/relationship/whatever-it-would-have-been was doomed to failure from the start. Maybe it's a result of some internal self-esteem problem, and proving that nobody is ever going to continue to love somebody or be friends with somebody unconditionally, because look how much this person got angry over a single incident of missing out on plans...
I really don't know what it is. And maybe part of it is that I don't want to know, either. Back to those self-deprecating options. The fact is, I'm still completely baffled, and with every new incident that comes up, the stronger and stronger my reactions to that behavior have been getting. But may goodness help the next guy who stands me up at the last minute. And for their sake, it had better not be on a holiday...
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Sex, Love and Friendship
For a very long time, I've thought that the words sex, love and friendship are WAY too general to be considered particularly helpful in many people's lives. Particularly more so within my own life, but whenever I feel as if I'm simply too far gone from the traditional bounds of relationships, friendships and sexuality, I'm reminded by every sitcom, romantic comedy, and drama that I watch, exactly why I'm not so different from everyone else in that sense after all.
For every romance that we see, there is confusion, a need to identify boundaries, to determine the true feelings that each person has for one another, and a series of possibilities. There is always the mystery of who the protagonist will "end up with" and what exactly will their final relationship be to the one(s) who were their other possibilities?
The fact is that love, romance, and sexuality are far too complicated to be able to fit into the mold that our culture has attempted to box them into. So why, then, do we continue to box ourselves in? Partially, I think of it as a sort of inertia. There were good reasons for having delineated separations between friendships and relationships due to issues such as disease, inheritance, etc. ages ago, which developed the familial structures that are centered around marriage with a singular exclusive partner, and because that has been the structure that has been in existence, diversion from this paradigm has been slow. Granted, there have been a great deal of changes, merely from the fact that we can consider that people no longer marry for political or economic reasons (at least not always), and that marriage is considered, at least in theory, to be based upon love.
There is another reason, I believe, as well. And that comes simply from my experience of the complexities that are involved with diverging from this cookie-cutter model existence. When one diverges from already-existing models, you are left without default options. Once everything becomes possible, then truly everything IS possible. In the minute that happens, more than ever, one must truly be in touch with themselves and their own feelings, and they need to be able to communicate those feelings to others, as well. It seems simple enough, and no matter how often I believe that I've achieved the requisite level of self-awareness, transparency, and communicativeness, I find more boxes and more shadows within myself.
I consider this. I am quite possibly one of the most sex-positive individuals that I know. I have moved well beyond the recognition that as much as we culturally view sex as something dangerous that needs to be controlled. And I have done more than my fair share of breaking down that stereotype and opening myself up to proving that sex is something that is positive, affirming, and full of potential. Sex, just like relationships, can take a multitude of forms and possibilities, and all that we are required to do is to be open to those possibilities.
But for all of the sex-positiveness that I so often exude, I have yet found multiple inconsistencies within myself. Small things that reflect a certain reservedness or timidity in the face of certain sexual encounters, or even potential sexual encounters. I will be the first to say that, while sex is certainly possible to be devoid of a great deal of emotional entanglements, as the vast number of one-night-stands can imply, the fact is that sex is still simultaneously an extremely powerful emotional tool.
It is this potential for emotion within sex that finds me more reluctant to open the door to sexual overtones within certain of my friendships. With one friend, for example, there had been a sexual tension between us for a very long time. However, from primarily my own choice, I had decided years ago that it was far too much of a risk to engage in a sexual relationship with that friend. That friendship has remained to this day one of my most bolstering friendships. It is a friendship where we understand one another, have the ability to talk for hours, days actually, without ever running out of things to talk about, and where we can emotionally rely upon one another. There is nothing that we cannot share with one another about our vulnerabilities, insecurities, or fears.
Except that it is false. There is one topic that still remains a bit of a smokescreen, and that is something that I only have discovered in the past few weeks. As both of us have re-entered "single" life within the past 6 months, and each of us has entered therapy, it has become highlighted for each of us that we have a bit more of a connection with one another than a standard friendship, and quite honestly that fact terrifies me. I cannot help but find it odd that it does frighten me as much as this, as well, because of the fact that I have been so open to so much else in my lifetime, and yet there is something about this single friendship which the potential of changing one of the basic dynamics of it fills me with a tremendous amount of anxiety.
At the same time, I am also meeting a number of new people. After ending my last relationship about 6 months ago, I found myself not only out of a relationship, but strongly lacking in my number of friendships, as well. And in meeting most new people, for once, I found that most people were interested in sex far more than they had any interest whatsoever in friendship. I can't help but laugh at myself for the fact, as my college days when everybody wanted to be my friend and tried to date my roommate, I had secretly begged for this conundrum. And the universe apparently answered my wish in a most scathing manner. Be careful what you wish for, and all that jazz.
Despite everything, however, I have made friends over the past few months, and some of those friends I have played with, others I haven't. One of those friendships was with somebody who had numerous times expressed an interest in moving to a sexual level, but I resisted. I had convinced myself that because of the issues that he had with his own self-image and sexuality, that he needed friends who would be his friends regardless, and not because he could provide them with something, namely sex. What I'd found, however, was that I was projecting heavily upon him. It was me who wanted the friendship without a sexual bargain attached, and while the friendship has taken on a sexual component since, it was a lesson that I have certainly learned.
The difficulty that has come up since then is that I have another similar friendship. It is with a couple where there is a clear mutual attraction, but which I have drawn a clear boundary with. Coming into this situation now, I recognize that part of the reason I have been so compelled to maintain this boundary was to have the ability to be certain that our friendship was out of a genuine desire to be friends, and to have the emotional security that I associate with my friendships. Recently, it has become more clear that there is a genuine sexual interest on all sides, as well, yet I still find a reluctance to step forward and engage due to some sense that the friendship may give way before a more sex-based relationship.
And last but not least, having re-entered the dating pool, I have met somebody who I have found that I really like a lot. Ironically, while still being the sex-positive person that I am, I had decided that I liked him so much on the first date that I didn't want to have sex with him right away. We've been talking regularly, have gone out one more time since, and there is a connection like electricity between us. And yet we still haven't taken that step towards sex. And the ironic thing about it, is that it is, for me at least, entirely a function of a sense that I really like him, and that I am hoping for some more long-term potential from the relationship.
The problem is not nearly as difficult as I have made it out to be, in reality. I can still consider myself sex-positive, and love sex and all of its possibilities, and yet maintain these conundrums. The fact is that sex IS a powerful force and tool. One-night-stands are able to work because of the context in which they occur. And yet, I have known people who have begun relationships through nothing other than a singular such encounter. Fuck-buddies, friends with benefits, and other such relational models still exist, and sex is a strong force within those friendships. Sex is bigger than many of us make it out to be, probably because we're all a little bit afraid of what that fact implies. But sex is simultaneously far more beautiful than any of our detractors would have us believe, and it does not need to be controlled and restricted at all costs.
Sex is nothing to fear, but it needs to be respected. It is like fire. It has a myriad of uses, its potential for use is nearly limitless, and it is truly a wondrous thing. But just like fire, we need to be mindful of where it is, and what exactly it is doing, or we may find that we can be burned by it, as well...
For every romance that we see, there is confusion, a need to identify boundaries, to determine the true feelings that each person has for one another, and a series of possibilities. There is always the mystery of who the protagonist will "end up with" and what exactly will their final relationship be to the one(s) who were their other possibilities?
The fact is that love, romance, and sexuality are far too complicated to be able to fit into the mold that our culture has attempted to box them into. So why, then, do we continue to box ourselves in? Partially, I think of it as a sort of inertia. There were good reasons for having delineated separations between friendships and relationships due to issues such as disease, inheritance, etc. ages ago, which developed the familial structures that are centered around marriage with a singular exclusive partner, and because that has been the structure that has been in existence, diversion from this paradigm has been slow. Granted, there have been a great deal of changes, merely from the fact that we can consider that people no longer marry for political or economic reasons (at least not always), and that marriage is considered, at least in theory, to be based upon love.
There is another reason, I believe, as well. And that comes simply from my experience of the complexities that are involved with diverging from this cookie-cutter model existence. When one diverges from already-existing models, you are left without default options. Once everything becomes possible, then truly everything IS possible. In the minute that happens, more than ever, one must truly be in touch with themselves and their own feelings, and they need to be able to communicate those feelings to others, as well. It seems simple enough, and no matter how often I believe that I've achieved the requisite level of self-awareness, transparency, and communicativeness, I find more boxes and more shadows within myself.
I consider this. I am quite possibly one of the most sex-positive individuals that I know. I have moved well beyond the recognition that as much as we culturally view sex as something dangerous that needs to be controlled. And I have done more than my fair share of breaking down that stereotype and opening myself up to proving that sex is something that is positive, affirming, and full of potential. Sex, just like relationships, can take a multitude of forms and possibilities, and all that we are required to do is to be open to those possibilities.
But for all of the sex-positiveness that I so often exude, I have yet found multiple inconsistencies within myself. Small things that reflect a certain reservedness or timidity in the face of certain sexual encounters, or even potential sexual encounters. I will be the first to say that, while sex is certainly possible to be devoid of a great deal of emotional entanglements, as the vast number of one-night-stands can imply, the fact is that sex is still simultaneously an extremely powerful emotional tool.
It is this potential for emotion within sex that finds me more reluctant to open the door to sexual overtones within certain of my friendships. With one friend, for example, there had been a sexual tension between us for a very long time. However, from primarily my own choice, I had decided years ago that it was far too much of a risk to engage in a sexual relationship with that friend. That friendship has remained to this day one of my most bolstering friendships. It is a friendship where we understand one another, have the ability to talk for hours, days actually, without ever running out of things to talk about, and where we can emotionally rely upon one another. There is nothing that we cannot share with one another about our vulnerabilities, insecurities, or fears.
Except that it is false. There is one topic that still remains a bit of a smokescreen, and that is something that I only have discovered in the past few weeks. As both of us have re-entered "single" life within the past 6 months, and each of us has entered therapy, it has become highlighted for each of us that we have a bit more of a connection with one another than a standard friendship, and quite honestly that fact terrifies me. I cannot help but find it odd that it does frighten me as much as this, as well, because of the fact that I have been so open to so much else in my lifetime, and yet there is something about this single friendship which the potential of changing one of the basic dynamics of it fills me with a tremendous amount of anxiety.
At the same time, I am also meeting a number of new people. After ending my last relationship about 6 months ago, I found myself not only out of a relationship, but strongly lacking in my number of friendships, as well. And in meeting most new people, for once, I found that most people were interested in sex far more than they had any interest whatsoever in friendship. I can't help but laugh at myself for the fact, as my college days when everybody wanted to be my friend and tried to date my roommate, I had secretly begged for this conundrum. And the universe apparently answered my wish in a most scathing manner. Be careful what you wish for, and all that jazz.
Despite everything, however, I have made friends over the past few months, and some of those friends I have played with, others I haven't. One of those friendships was with somebody who had numerous times expressed an interest in moving to a sexual level, but I resisted. I had convinced myself that because of the issues that he had with his own self-image and sexuality, that he needed friends who would be his friends regardless, and not because he could provide them with something, namely sex. What I'd found, however, was that I was projecting heavily upon him. It was me who wanted the friendship without a sexual bargain attached, and while the friendship has taken on a sexual component since, it was a lesson that I have certainly learned.
The difficulty that has come up since then is that I have another similar friendship. It is with a couple where there is a clear mutual attraction, but which I have drawn a clear boundary with. Coming into this situation now, I recognize that part of the reason I have been so compelled to maintain this boundary was to have the ability to be certain that our friendship was out of a genuine desire to be friends, and to have the emotional security that I associate with my friendships. Recently, it has become more clear that there is a genuine sexual interest on all sides, as well, yet I still find a reluctance to step forward and engage due to some sense that the friendship may give way before a more sex-based relationship.
And last but not least, having re-entered the dating pool, I have met somebody who I have found that I really like a lot. Ironically, while still being the sex-positive person that I am, I had decided that I liked him so much on the first date that I didn't want to have sex with him right away. We've been talking regularly, have gone out one more time since, and there is a connection like electricity between us. And yet we still haven't taken that step towards sex. And the ironic thing about it, is that it is, for me at least, entirely a function of a sense that I really like him, and that I am hoping for some more long-term potential from the relationship.
The problem is not nearly as difficult as I have made it out to be, in reality. I can still consider myself sex-positive, and love sex and all of its possibilities, and yet maintain these conundrums. The fact is that sex IS a powerful force and tool. One-night-stands are able to work because of the context in which they occur. And yet, I have known people who have begun relationships through nothing other than a singular such encounter. Fuck-buddies, friends with benefits, and other such relational models still exist, and sex is a strong force within those friendships. Sex is bigger than many of us make it out to be, probably because we're all a little bit afraid of what that fact implies. But sex is simultaneously far more beautiful than any of our detractors would have us believe, and it does not need to be controlled and restricted at all costs.
Sex is nothing to fear, but it needs to be respected. It is like fire. It has a myriad of uses, its potential for use is nearly limitless, and it is truly a wondrous thing. But just like fire, we need to be mindful of where it is, and what exactly it is doing, or we may find that we can be burned by it, as well...
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Pink Triangles, Blue Squares, and Bears... Oh My!
Ok, so maybe I can't help but continue to express my ultimate disdain for HRC time and again. They truly are the great evil within the queer community, in my mind. Not even gay Republicans get to me as much as HRC does.
Here's the thing. I liken HRC to the Democratic Party. These are the people who are SUPPOSED to be on our side. And yet, every time there's a major decision to be made, and you just think logically to yourself: "What could the worst possible outcome of this be?" You will always come up with the solution that both of those organizations give. It's exactly how I knew that Cardinal Ratzinger was going to be the next Pope two months before the old Pope died. "Who could possibly be the worst candidate for the papacy?"
Now don't get me wrong on the whole Democrat thing. It's really not like I like the Republicans any better. But to some extent, at least the hardcore right-wing Republicans have a stance that makes sense. You know, it's like ultimate evil. You see somebody running around trying to cause as much damage as they possibly can, and at least you know where they stand, you know? There's no guessing that they ARE, in fact, out to get you. So they have coherent policies and mission statements that are all centered around trying to get you. It makes sense in a logical fashion in that way.
The Democrats, however, don't make any sense to me. Like the fact that, a few years ago, they ceased putting money into outreach programs for the queer community and the black community. They pretty much figured that queers and blacks will vote for the Democratic candidate anyway, so why spend money trying to court their votes? At the same time, they left the fundraising committees doing work in those communities in place. So we're not good enough to be courted for our votes, but yet you'll leave infrastructure in place to take our money? Gee! Why don't I just go and vote for YOU!
My friend David, back in the last election, or maybe it was the one before now. Man, time is really passing by quickly here... Anyway, David had once stated that the Republican party does well because their dialogue is always centered around "energizing their base," which means catering to all of the zealoutrous absolutist Christian nutjobs who, as stated above, are really and truly in politics because that's how they can get at us. In the meantime, the Democratic party has always taken the position, election after election, that "We need to appeal to the center."
I like to think of this as a card tower, if you will. One side of the tower is leaning heavily to the right. Instead of counterbalancing by having the other side lean to the left, it instead ALSO leans to the right. You know, to fill in the middle just a bit. What exactly happens to that tower?
It's why I still continue to see American political discourse shifting consistently and inexorably towards the right. The reason is because there's no leftist political discourse whatsoever. Our positions just aren't being heard, at all, because they've been left on the side as having been deemed irrelevant. But when people such as myself who want to join a political party because we, I don't know, actually want to believe in the actual standpoints and goals of that party, decide to defect from the Democrats and join in with the Green party... Suddenly we're Public Enemy number 1 for the Democrats! Suddenly it's OUR fault that they lost. Because, you know, all of those people in the center who keep on saying "I just didn't like that Democratic guy. I could never tell where he really stood on any issues" weren't giving some sort of indication of where the fault of political discourse within the Democratic agenda lies...
Anyway, done with that analogy. Back to me hating on HRC. And before you get your panties in a bunch saying how biased I am for having been a strong Task Force supporter for so many years, then sure. Of course I'm biased. However, the facts remain the same. How is it that an organization can consistently make poor decisions like making back-room deals to allow for the exclusion of the Trans community in bills like ENDA, and yet face such little financial pushback from our own community? Sadly, it's because of one of two things, either of which is just as scary as the other, from my perspective.
One is that people just really don't know, and perhaps don't care to know, what it is that most of the organizations on the political field today actually DO. They don't really know who HRC is, or who the Task Force is, but since HRC has their own little store and market around their cute little blue-and-gold equal sign that they put on everything, then they win the PR war. The Task Force's color pallet hasn't quite caught up yet.
The other thing is that people know, and yet don't care. Or that they actually believe that the Trans community is disposable enough to be written out of legislation. The whole "let's get ours" crowd. Granted, I'm very far from the idealistic young political queer that I was in college. I don't have that belief in the possibility that we, as queer people, have the opportunity to be better... Well, actually, I do still. I just recognize that the vast majority of the queer community excels at allowing good opportunities to pass them by.
Yes, I know. I'm very jaded. But if you're regularly reading this, then you love me for it. Or this is your last trip to read my blog before you realized that you just really don't want to have anything to do with me. In that case, please take a flyer on the way out, and we have some lovely parting gifts. Wait, what?
The Task Force, in the meantime, definitely takes a lot of heat within the community. Like all of the marriage fanatics who believe the organization should make itself a one-issue wonder and screw all of the rest of the needs of the community. Now I won't go off about marriage right now, but I'm sure that all of you are aware that as a feminist-identified, polyamorous bearish queer father of two girls who I am raising with two lesbians, it's hard for me to see how marriage might really make my life any better. Or anybody else's, really. There are just so many other OPTIONS. But again, who wants options? As I said before, the vast majority of the queer community loves to allow great opportunities to simply pass them by.
Regardless, the reason I wanted to post this blog was because of one very simple realization that just kept hitting me as I attended Pride this year. HRC hasn't changed at all. They're still using the same tactics that they always ever had. And for years, my friends and I would always either joke or complain, depending upon which mood had been striking us, that during Pride season, HRC would round up every little pretty-boy twink that they could muster, and send them out in droves with clipboards. For a very long time, it was quite effective. To some degree, it still is, though much less so lately.
Because here's the thing that I noticed. Ever since the relative mainstreaming of the bear community, I think that HRC's outreach efforts have faltered a little bit. And not just because of the fact that HRC has failed miserably on dealing with overall queer health issues, building self-esteem and pride for different body types, hasn't reached out to all of the bears who are into leather, kink and the like, or any of the other things that have caused the organization to completely ignore the bear community. But mostly, HRC doesn't seem to have its same outreach muster because, throw a goattee onto a twink, and you've still got a twink.
Sorry HRC, but this bear ain't biting...
Here's the thing. I liken HRC to the Democratic Party. These are the people who are SUPPOSED to be on our side. And yet, every time there's a major decision to be made, and you just think logically to yourself: "What could the worst possible outcome of this be?" You will always come up with the solution that both of those organizations give. It's exactly how I knew that Cardinal Ratzinger was going to be the next Pope two months before the old Pope died. "Who could possibly be the worst candidate for the papacy?"
Now don't get me wrong on the whole Democrat thing. It's really not like I like the Republicans any better. But to some extent, at least the hardcore right-wing Republicans have a stance that makes sense. You know, it's like ultimate evil. You see somebody running around trying to cause as much damage as they possibly can, and at least you know where they stand, you know? There's no guessing that they ARE, in fact, out to get you. So they have coherent policies and mission statements that are all centered around trying to get you. It makes sense in a logical fashion in that way.
The Democrats, however, don't make any sense to me. Like the fact that, a few years ago, they ceased putting money into outreach programs for the queer community and the black community. They pretty much figured that queers and blacks will vote for the Democratic candidate anyway, so why spend money trying to court their votes? At the same time, they left the fundraising committees doing work in those communities in place. So we're not good enough to be courted for our votes, but yet you'll leave infrastructure in place to take our money? Gee! Why don't I just go and vote for YOU!
My friend David, back in the last election, or maybe it was the one before now. Man, time is really passing by quickly here... Anyway, David had once stated that the Republican party does well because their dialogue is always centered around "energizing their base," which means catering to all of the zealoutrous absolutist Christian nutjobs who, as stated above, are really and truly in politics because that's how they can get at us. In the meantime, the Democratic party has always taken the position, election after election, that "We need to appeal to the center."
I like to think of this as a card tower, if you will. One side of the tower is leaning heavily to the right. Instead of counterbalancing by having the other side lean to the left, it instead ALSO leans to the right. You know, to fill in the middle just a bit. What exactly happens to that tower?
It's why I still continue to see American political discourse shifting consistently and inexorably towards the right. The reason is because there's no leftist political discourse whatsoever. Our positions just aren't being heard, at all, because they've been left on the side as having been deemed irrelevant. But when people such as myself who want to join a political party because we, I don't know, actually want to believe in the actual standpoints and goals of that party, decide to defect from the Democrats and join in with the Green party... Suddenly we're Public Enemy number 1 for the Democrats! Suddenly it's OUR fault that they lost. Because, you know, all of those people in the center who keep on saying "I just didn't like that Democratic guy. I could never tell where he really stood on any issues" weren't giving some sort of indication of where the fault of political discourse within the Democratic agenda lies...
Anyway, done with that analogy. Back to me hating on HRC. And before you get your panties in a bunch saying how biased I am for having been a strong Task Force supporter for so many years, then sure. Of course I'm biased. However, the facts remain the same. How is it that an organization can consistently make poor decisions like making back-room deals to allow for the exclusion of the Trans community in bills like ENDA, and yet face such little financial pushback from our own community? Sadly, it's because of one of two things, either of which is just as scary as the other, from my perspective.
One is that people just really don't know, and perhaps don't care to know, what it is that most of the organizations on the political field today actually DO. They don't really know who HRC is, or who the Task Force is, but since HRC has their own little store and market around their cute little blue-and-gold equal sign that they put on everything, then they win the PR war. The Task Force's color pallet hasn't quite caught up yet.
The other thing is that people know, and yet don't care. Or that they actually believe that the Trans community is disposable enough to be written out of legislation. The whole "let's get ours" crowd. Granted, I'm very far from the idealistic young political queer that I was in college. I don't have that belief in the possibility that we, as queer people, have the opportunity to be better... Well, actually, I do still. I just recognize that the vast majority of the queer community excels at allowing good opportunities to pass them by.
Yes, I know. I'm very jaded. But if you're regularly reading this, then you love me for it. Or this is your last trip to read my blog before you realized that you just really don't want to have anything to do with me. In that case, please take a flyer on the way out, and we have some lovely parting gifts. Wait, what?
The Task Force, in the meantime, definitely takes a lot of heat within the community. Like all of the marriage fanatics who believe the organization should make itself a one-issue wonder and screw all of the rest of the needs of the community. Now I won't go off about marriage right now, but I'm sure that all of you are aware that as a feminist-identified, polyamorous bearish queer father of two girls who I am raising with two lesbians, it's hard for me to see how marriage might really make my life any better. Or anybody else's, really. There are just so many other OPTIONS. But again, who wants options? As I said before, the vast majority of the queer community loves to allow great opportunities to simply pass them by.
Regardless, the reason I wanted to post this blog was because of one very simple realization that just kept hitting me as I attended Pride this year. HRC hasn't changed at all. They're still using the same tactics that they always ever had. And for years, my friends and I would always either joke or complain, depending upon which mood had been striking us, that during Pride season, HRC would round up every little pretty-boy twink that they could muster, and send them out in droves with clipboards. For a very long time, it was quite effective. To some degree, it still is, though much less so lately.
Because here's the thing that I noticed. Ever since the relative mainstreaming of the bear community, I think that HRC's outreach efforts have faltered a little bit. And not just because of the fact that HRC has failed miserably on dealing with overall queer health issues, building self-esteem and pride for different body types, hasn't reached out to all of the bears who are into leather, kink and the like, or any of the other things that have caused the organization to completely ignore the bear community. But mostly, HRC doesn't seem to have its same outreach muster because, throw a goattee onto a twink, and you've still got a twink.
Sorry HRC, but this bear ain't biting...
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Trust and Respect
My apologies on this one, as it's a bit more serious and less light-hearted as the other two... so if you're looking for some humor, you might want to skip this entry...
One of the primary values I maintain as a leftist is that every person in the world is deserving of respect. Every human being possesses an intrinsic value that doesn't diminish or dissipate based upon any of the terms and conditions that most of the rest of the world might utilize to write somebody off. The prime tenet is that life is a journey, and that everybody is on their own place within that journey.
What this implies is that people make mistakes, maintain ignorance, and often will do things that are less than savory, but that so long as they learn and grow from their mistakes, and consistently become better people as they develop, then they are at least moving in the right direction. Hope is alive and well in the world.
As part of my perspective of giving every person respect and recognizing their intrinsic value, I believe that every person is deserving of trust, as well. All too often, I've found that people's defense mechanisms are the very things that cause hurt and pain to so many others. It's their own lack of trust of others that so often causes them to become untrustworthy themselves.
The problem then becomes what to do when somebody proves themselves to be untrustworthy. I will be the first to admit that my policy has always caused me a bit more pain and frustration that I could likely have otherwise avoided. However, it has also allowed me to make a great deal of friendships that I otherwise would never have made. And I believe that, even in the cases of people who have hurt me, I have been able to have a positive impact upon their lives by giving them that degree of trust and respect.
The problem I'm encountering now is one of continuity. If everyone is on a certain place on their journey, there is a certain degree that people who have been untrustworthy can become more trustworthy in the future. In general, one would think that so long as you see any degree of change in an individual, then they should then be worthy of trust once more.
It's not as simple as that, however, as any of us with life experience can tell. Once you've been burned, it's difficult to simply put your hand back on the stove. Such is the case with a former friend who has been staying with us the past few days. A person who seemed extremely selfless, progressive, and understanding that turned out to be selfish, manipulative, and malicious and who we therefore cut out of our lives.
For some reason, Julie invited the person to have contact with us for a business matter, but who then started to have more social contact with us, which turned from a couple of days trip to the area into a more than week-long stay. I have to say I haven't been happy about the situation in the first place, and we're now on the day of the trip to the beach. Sara and Julie are taking the kids and the dogs, leaving me alone in the house. Except that this person is also still here, and that I have no particular desire to have this person remain in the house once Julie and Sara are gone.
Has she been riling up drama while she's here, refusing to help, or draining our resources? No. However, the history of her role has made me extremely wary of her presence, and I am having incredible difficulty maintaining my composure as the confusion of the day is continuing to progress. And on top of everything, there has not been a single private moment throughout the entire week that I have had any opportunity to bring up my concerns.
I'll be leaving for work in about an hour, and many of these issues will work themselves out in time. But my internal questions remain. How much do I trust, and where is the fine line between giving every human being their intrinsic respect and merely opening yourself up to becoming a doormat?
One of the primary values I maintain as a leftist is that every person in the world is deserving of respect. Every human being possesses an intrinsic value that doesn't diminish or dissipate based upon any of the terms and conditions that most of the rest of the world might utilize to write somebody off. The prime tenet is that life is a journey, and that everybody is on their own place within that journey.
What this implies is that people make mistakes, maintain ignorance, and often will do things that are less than savory, but that so long as they learn and grow from their mistakes, and consistently become better people as they develop, then they are at least moving in the right direction. Hope is alive and well in the world.
As part of my perspective of giving every person respect and recognizing their intrinsic value, I believe that every person is deserving of trust, as well. All too often, I've found that people's defense mechanisms are the very things that cause hurt and pain to so many others. It's their own lack of trust of others that so often causes them to become untrustworthy themselves.
The problem then becomes what to do when somebody proves themselves to be untrustworthy. I will be the first to admit that my policy has always caused me a bit more pain and frustration that I could likely have otherwise avoided. However, it has also allowed me to make a great deal of friendships that I otherwise would never have made. And I believe that, even in the cases of people who have hurt me, I have been able to have a positive impact upon their lives by giving them that degree of trust and respect.
The problem I'm encountering now is one of continuity. If everyone is on a certain place on their journey, there is a certain degree that people who have been untrustworthy can become more trustworthy in the future. In general, one would think that so long as you see any degree of change in an individual, then they should then be worthy of trust once more.
It's not as simple as that, however, as any of us with life experience can tell. Once you've been burned, it's difficult to simply put your hand back on the stove. Such is the case with a former friend who has been staying with us the past few days. A person who seemed extremely selfless, progressive, and understanding that turned out to be selfish, manipulative, and malicious and who we therefore cut out of our lives.
For some reason, Julie invited the person to have contact with us for a business matter, but who then started to have more social contact with us, which turned from a couple of days trip to the area into a more than week-long stay. I have to say I haven't been happy about the situation in the first place, and we're now on the day of the trip to the beach. Sara and Julie are taking the kids and the dogs, leaving me alone in the house. Except that this person is also still here, and that I have no particular desire to have this person remain in the house once Julie and Sara are gone.
Has she been riling up drama while she's here, refusing to help, or draining our resources? No. However, the history of her role has made me extremely wary of her presence, and I am having incredible difficulty maintaining my composure as the confusion of the day is continuing to progress. And on top of everything, there has not been a single private moment throughout the entire week that I have had any opportunity to bring up my concerns.
I'll be leaving for work in about an hour, and many of these issues will work themselves out in time. But my internal questions remain. How much do I trust, and where is the fine line between giving every human being their intrinsic respect and merely opening yourself up to becoming a doormat?
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
The Power of Bjork
Ok, so I've been having a difficult couple of days with the kids. I love my kids, don't get me wrong, but anybody who has children will understand that love them all you might, kids can be very, VERY difficult.
Well, as Julie and Sara are preparing to bring the kids to the beach for the week, it was my job to take Dayton, my soon-to-be-4-year-old, to school. You would think this would be an easy task, but not when she's already assigned the task to Sara. This means that leaving with her entailed 2 fully separate temper tantrums and half of a car ride of screaming and crying. Which of course carried over into her 1-year-old sister, who of course is willing to cry just because somebody else is crying.
Often, car rides are filled with either Diego the Animal Rescuer, Laurie Berkner, the Sound of Music, or some other kid-friendly music. But today, I decided that the screaming was enough, and I just wanted something that I might enjoy listening to.
While Bjork may not always be my first choice, I do enjoy Bjork. And, it being Sara's car that I was taking, it's not like I had one of my primary choices immediately at hand. So Bjork it was.
Little did I know how ingenious of a decision this was! Once Dayton and Saunder piped down enough to actually hear the music, and I started getting some sanity back, I heard Dayton pipe up with a quick little question: "What is she singing about?"
Now, I do really like Bjork. But you've gotta admit. You don't know what in the heck she's saying any more than I do. Part of her appeal is the fact that she's a bit of a lunatic and she's almost totally incomprehensible.
What made this great was, it not only distracted the kids enough through their confusion, but it allowed me to answer pretty much any way that I wanted. I got to start making it up for every song. I even got to include a nice little lesson about how big girls go to the potty and don't wear diapers any more. It was fantastic! I'm making a mental note that, from now on, I'm listening to more artists with unintelligible lyrics. Maybe I'll be able to give some messages about sleeping in your own room and learning to share...
Monday, June 16, 2008
Of Epics and Activism
Those of you who may be reading this may be wondering: Who the hell are you and why should I be reading this crap just because you've got an internet connection and a keyboard?
All I can really say to that is, you're the one reading it, so I guess you've already found your reason. I'm typing this because I want to.
Overall, I am looking forward to this stint of blogging as somebody who has been going way too long outside of the realm of writing, and needing a fast, easy method to continue doing so. Honestly, the hardest thing I found for creating this blog was a title for the blog itself. I was looking for something witty, but still me. Unfortunately, most of what I came up with was either witty, but not witty enough, or witty, but then didn't really describe me at all. Or it described me, but wasn't witty at all, and finally, the witty and described me, but then seemed to come across as far too self-aggrandizing or self-deprecating. Which, honestly, is a very strange dichotomy.
It seems as if there's a very fine line in the world between over-bloating your own ego, and participating in self-negation. In general, I think that all of us participate in far more self-negation than we recognize, but I think that would be a topic for a whole new entry. And this is already starting to get long, before I've even gotten onto the particular topic for THIS entry.
So why Activism for Epics? Couldn't I have found another combination of witty and descriptive? Is this truly the crux of my creative potential, and if so, why are you bothering to read it if I'm so bereft of creative genius? Whatever. It's your 10-20 minutes of life to do with what you want to by reading or not reading this. You chose to take a peek inside of my head, I raise all disclaimers now to anything you find in there that you don't like.
Obviously, you'll probably notice that I consider myself an activist, and identify particularly strongly as such. I'm about as far-left as you can get, politically, and will frequently argue with people about even the very definition of what it means to be ON the left, as well. Because of course everybody brings up all of these supposed examples of left-wing societies and governments that don't work, until you look at them and notice that their entire structure seems about as left-wing as the Married Christian Military Fatherhood League. But whatever. The point is, I'm a leftist. And I'm proud of it.
The epics part is kind of a dual thing, here. I am a total nerd. I like playing Dungeons and Dragons, subscribe to World of Warcraft, and I even collect comic books. Yes, that's right. Absolut Dork would just have a picture of me trapped within a bottle. Probably wondering how I'd been tricked into getting into a bottle that had no actual vodka in it, and being very disappointed.
Now, if you're also a dork, then you'll forgive me right now for describing to the normals what epics are. And if you don't, then fine, don't forgive me. See if I care. Anyway...
Many of these games, particularly the computer games, have items that make your character better. For some reason, in all of these things, wearing different clothes makes you stronger, faster, smarter, etc. Why the fashion industry hasn't gotten in on this, I don't know. I just wouldn't be surprised if in one of the next seasons of Project Runway, Heidi Klum doesn't assign the designers to create the new tiered raid set for a World of Warcraft character. I can just imagine Tim Gunn asking "but just remember that the player will have to be able to click on things on the other side of those monstrous shoulderpads... make it work!"
Regardless, so clothes are magic. And they make you better than you could be without them. So being naked is a bad thing. Which makes me believe that the Catholic Church may actually be funding all of these gaming companies. I'm just saying...
Some magic clothes are better than others, however. You have common clothes, uncommon clothes, rare clothes, and finally, you get epic clothes. Epic clothes are the ones that everybody wants, but generally, fewer people are able to get them. It's a status thing. People whine and cry when too many people are able to afford the new Dolce and Gabana or Prada stuff, because it makes them feel less special.
Now, the other thing, however, is that I am a writer. Duh, as if me writing a blog doesn't, de facto, make me a writer. Anywho, the more traditional notion of epic relates back to the sagas of a constant struggle either to survive in a harsh world, or a battle between good and evil. And they're stories.
So thus comes my title, Activism for Epics. I've been through a lot in my times as an activist thus far, and have a great deal of time yet to come, and am passionate enough about my beliefs to think of a great deal of my work to be a part of the struggle between good and evil besides. And using a little bit of a nerd reference never really hurt anybody. Well, unless you count being beaten up and humiliated in grade schools and high schools throughout the nation, or having to deal with developmental experiences of wedgies and swirlies. But other than that, nerdy references haven't really had THAT much of a negative impact on people... I think...
For those of you who have read this through, and haven't gone running screaming or pounding mercilessly on your keyboard to get to a different site, thanks for reading. And I'll be looking forward to posting more stuff here to waste your time and mine, as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
