eve

i woke up in christmas eve
trumpet in the tunnel deep
here it comes new year with speed
anyway
the past is all just make believe
the poets keep repeating things
trains delay but they will move
love delays but it's still love

saying less

the more i do, the less i want to say. i am seeing a sharper view of reality in my new position in the after-school program, but when i come home all i want to do is talk about other things, to not relate what i'm seeing to a broader picture, to watch the leaves change, to play guitar, to move on. i realize that i complained so much before because of my uncertainty, and now that i am more certain in general about things, whether they are good or bad, i complain less. i speak less. i write less.

but what i do say, i want it to count. and what i read and observe has meaning when it didn't before. i don't want to waste my time. kant would call that liberation. (at the risk of using excessive profundity... i'm only using this blog as i would use sleep: to organize my thoughts and make permanent certain neural paths)

marriage is so theoretically weird

my first reaction to married couples who appear happy with each other is mild surprise and puzzlement. my parents are happily married, don't get me wrong. but i've never been in a relationship that lasted more than a year, and knowing what i know about the inherent difficulties of two humans maintaining a long term relationship (with economic, social, cultural, religious, familial and other elements) a marriage that lasts shocks me more than a marriage that ends.

so often i feel that divorce should be celebrated as much as marriage.

anyway i'm not comfortable with my lukewarm philosophical understanding of marriage. i know these things:
1. the human species is not biologically monogamous
2. the human species is not biologically heterosexual
3. the nuclear family has no biological basis. the village raised the child.
4. the commonly held notion of love/romance began during the industrial revolution and until then american marriages were just like any other: business arrangements.

marriage, you stand on shaky ground. the ground of modern cultural assumptions based on economic trends.

but it's really appealing. (yes, i am a product of my culture)

blank don't equal smart.

the y chromosome is significantly smaller than the x. is this reasonable evidence that women are better than men? no. so why is it that i often feel that guys, the vast majority of whom are taller than me, judge my intelligence by my size/gender?

that's not exactly the right illustration. i just get this feeling that while my inclination is to try to be reasonable and listen closely to the person i'm speaking with, often straight men take this to mean i'm not really sure of what i'm saying. that i'm being cute.

is this feeling justified in a majority of cases? is it entirely a delusion on my part? am i assuming the worst of the straight men i interact with? i've had too many experiences in which the straight man i was speaking with had a different agenda that i think i've become better at spotting them.

how sad it is that people rarely engage in meaningful conversation. and sadder still that the genders can't exchange ideas honestly without there being some alternate motive. the honest exchange of ideas must include the full participation of all parties involved.

but as women, what is our method of trust regarding straight men? we have to be discerning in some way. the ears of others are not in our control, only our own mouths. so what information are they hearing, and how different is it from what we intended?

i want to be perceived as intelligent, not cute, when i'm discussing serious matters, which i would rather discuss more often. but intelligent is synonymous with off-putting when the society is anti-intellectual.

good night

patriarchy gives us hate, so let's move on

my patience for humanity has sunk into a puddle these past few days. mainly because of a movie that has come out that encourages rape.

oh, i should mention that the guy who made the movie doesn't think the legal definition of rape applies to him. i'm just gonna guess it's because he's white. white guys can't be rapists right? i mean, rapists are like black vampires, who attack (white, the only victim that counts) women in dark alleys. that is if you think rape even happens. "rape" implies that women need to give consent. but objects don't have free will.

here's the thing: culture of terrorism=culture of rape=culture of greed=patriarchy.

you want patriarchy? get out of my country, find an island, hopefully with a temporarily inactive volcano, for you and your hateful friends to punch each other in the face all day on.

that all being said, i absolutely appreciate so much in my life. and i have to make so much effort to not give in to fear. i want to live an exciting life, to experience variety. i appreciate the people in my life.

appreciating my enemies and obstacles is a goal i have as a buddhist, but holy motherfucking crap that's a tough goal.

misogynists are extreme narcissists, they cannot imagine a woman enjoying her life without a man. but when you're that narcissistic, why not just date yourself? i mean, if men are the better gender you should be gay, and if you are the best person on the planet why waste time with other people? in other words, go fuck yourself. pathetic.

i am rambling, i'm at my wits end. i have to overcome these fears i have as a result of the complexities of the examined female life.

madness!

saw one of those ads on facebook. it said "is mad men sexist?" obviously, wanting you to have your knee jerk reaction, prompting you to click and share your half baked thoughts. so i did. except mine are fully cooked, thank you very much. yes, i judge myself well.

it just made me appreciative of the show, though. mad men is feminist literature. it's humanist. i must remind myself of sources of hope when so many sources of hopelessness vie for attention.

hate, pity, compassion (sexism, disablism)

a new movie is out. it's called i hope they serve beer in hell or some bullshit.

i don't need to get into how obviously terrible it is. don't read about it, don't watch it, i say this for your own sanity. i have certainly read enough to need some serious self-therapy. deep breaths. repeating to myself "this does not signify the lowest point in human history".

i am trying to do mental metamorphoses: the hate boils up, "i hate this man who did this, i hate what he says about women and people with disabilities", but i try to turn it into pity: "this man, and the women who support him, have deep psychological issues and their lives will never rise above the lowest form of barbarism" and i can bring true pity for them out of my mind. but compassion? compassion is so difficult.

but how can i ever talk about compassion if i can't have it for all people, no matter what terrible things they do?

this is a bourgeois white guy, the perfect storm of oppressor-hood, personified. he feels no responsibility, he feels no purpose for his life. he is a robot.

he makes me want to hate men.

but i am able-bodied and i vehemently support people with disabilities. i am many things that people could blame me for, because of my associations with oppressor identities, and i can't judge all men by the actions of the worst of them. men can be compassionate.

men can be compassionate. keep saying that to yourself when you read rape statistics or read about this movie. there are good men out there.

this guy really hates people with disabilities. lots of people do. and it can come in the form of pity or stupid jokes. either way, it's hate, it's dehumanization. but people who are comfortable with their hate are truly deserving of pity. i hate/pity this man.

people who are different, who struggle, are lucky. i guess pierre teilhard de chardin said we are spiritual beings on a human journey. our spiritual aspect needs challenge to develop. humans who have it easy, who can oppress other people out of negligence or active hate, are thoroughly disadvantaged and are pitiful. unless they learn.