The STATUTE of Liberty

When Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi sculpted “La liberté éclairant le monde” (Liberty Enlightening the World) or what is commonly referred to as, the “Statue of Liberty,” it was as a commemoration of the centennial celebration of the Declaration of Independence. It was also a remarkable ideological as well as technological achievement. The copper skin of the figure was wholly supported by an internal structure of iron, designed by Alexandre Gustave Eiffel. Yes, the engineer responsible for the Eiffel Tower. But, what I believe is all the more remarkable is how the history of the statue has been more telling than the symbols in its composition. I now look upon the monument as a sort of national “picture of Dorian Gray.” There are many parallels in the maturation of the young nation of the United States of America to the central figure in Oscar Wilde’s novel.

The concept that drove the forging of the statue was the idea of Liberty as a progression away from slavery, oppression, and tyranny. The grandest hopes of a free society were entrusted to what the founding fathers referred to as the grand experiment. The United States was to be a republic of independently governed states where democratic principles would guide and sustain it. So, within the elements of the statue are such things as the left foot trampling broken shackles while the right foot steps beyond them. There are seven spikes upon the crown to represent both the seven seas as well as seven continents demonstrating that the principles of Liberty should encompass the whole earth. The raised torch is to show enlightenment while the tablet clutched in her arm represents knowledge. To be sure, all of these things are indeed noble. They are also lofty and ambitious objectives so one does not consider that such accomplishments would be easy. However, it would not appear that any of those things indicated by the statue are either regarded or are possibly any longer noticed much less remembered.

I am a staunch supporter of capitalism. Yet, I do not subscribe to the notion that it is a fundamental tenet of the Constitution. The Preamble to the Constitution refers to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. It guarantees none of those and it is very appropriately phrased that happiness is a pursuit and not a right to be expected, much less, demanded. What causes me to take issue with the current public mindset is that I sense that “we the people” have upset the balance of reason in favor of selfish pursuit. It is why I believe that when a nation loses its fundamental grasp of the principles, beliefs and convictions intended by its founders and subsequent generations that there becomes a “Statute of Liberty” and that statute has limitations.

And from this point forward in this essay is my concern as best as I have presently developed the analogy. When first delivered to the shores of America, the statue was in crates and needed to be assembled. There were mistakes made in the assembly that were not detected for nearly one hundred years. There were no mistakes in the design or the pieces as forged but in the understanding of the complexity of the instructions and the foreign language used to explain the process. The torch arm was actually attached improperly. Nevertheless, because the design work was so well thought out and so painstakingly constructed - even the foibles of the common man could not disrupt the integrity of the whole. When new, the figure was a shiny copper without any of the green patina that is now far more familiar in the minds of the world looking on her form. The flame of the torch was a solid and complete representation covered in gold leaf. It reflected the sun and shone brilliantly. For many years Liberty towered above other manmade achievements.

Over the course of time the statue became an iconic figure and many added their own symbolic elements to its meaning and purpose . . . even losing sight of its initial intent.
In the 1930’s it was decided that rather than reflect light, externally, the flame of enlightenment needed to be amended and cut full of holes to allow more light, internally. This was one of the first efforts that weakened the underpinnings and allowed the storms of the descending decades to penetrate the edifice and rot the framework. At this same time it was also decided that artificial light was needed to enhance the appearance of the visage of the statue. More holes were cut beneath the arm supporting the torch to place lamps to shine upon the face, and this further weakened the structure. More decades transpired and because the outward appearance of the statue seemed “fine” no one concerned themselves with any examination of the supporting internal works until it was noticed a few years after the bicentennial that Lady Liberty appeared to be “stumbling” and her torch arm was drooping.

It took a charismatic campaign to raise enough financial support to repair Liberty and make her whole, once more. There was not sufficient public interest in preservation of our heritage without the use of commercial ventures and entertainment value to garner the required effort. The benefit to the many was struggled and fought for by a dedicated few. Indifference and apathy replaced patriotism and the appreciation of preserving a national institution. The nation was enjoying a prosperity boom but had no interest in investing in its own relevant past so that future generations would benefit. The picture of Dorian Liberty was showing its age.

Upon close inspection it was discovered that the whole structure was on the verge of collapse – rotting from within. The generations had taken their toll, consuming without putting anything back or exercising any maintenance. The structure had been forged of iron by hammer, hand, and sweat at its core, with a copper skin, and the whole edifice was “safely” surrounded by a saltwater basin. When the notion to alter the natural cycles of day and night with electric light was applied to Liberty Island, the current was carried beneath the water and into the statue. Galvanic corrosion resulted, where the figure became a giant battery, with the saltwater acting as an electrolyte. While everything on the surface appeared unchanged, hidden forces surged from underground channels and dissolved the entire framework that upheld the lovely skin deep illusion of a colossus. The cosmetic portion of the figure was all that remained to carry the weight of the image and it was failing under its own grandeur.

I hope the symbolism is not lost on you. There is a familiarity with the corrosion of the once new and shiny plan and purpose of my nation. On the Statue of Liberty we call it “patina” for it is more attractive a word than ”rust.” We embrace the crusty film over our emblem as it would be far too overwhelming to return a shine, again. The task seems daunting. Likewise, we neglect our infrastructure because, cosmetically, all seems good. And we argue that the crusty film we have developed on the skin of our nation helps to protect us and adds to the distinctive character we project. That is both lazy and troubling. We used to be a bright beacon of hope for other peoples of other nations. But our flame is not so bright any longer and the fire has too many holes as we look for inner light and grow dim and flicker with doubt. We have also grown tired of holding that torch high and in a forward cast. We are directionless and purposeless, I fear. Perhaps if the torch were replaced with our current desire it would be a fist full of dollars or a new cell phone? All I know is that the current light in which we are illuminated isn’t natural. The only accurate element remaining for the modern Land of Liberty is the tablet of knowledge. We exhaust ourselves pontificating, exploring, and babbling incessantly about our superior knowledge. Sadly, wisdom has been forfeit in order to make more room for ambitious learning, apparently.

And the seeking of pleasure and happiness is the new slavery and tyranny that we elect to step into with eagerness. It was somewhere, approximately fifty to sixty years ago, that “thinking” was replaced by “feeling.” No wonder we are adrift as a culture. All of the principles, convictions, and beliefs used to construct this nation are now out of sight and out of mind. We attempt assembly of a complex structure in a language foreign to us. The subjective has been substituted for the substantive. Only because the original design was so diligently calculated and devised are we still standing, today. The core is rotting; hidden beneath a familiar façade assumed to be permanent despite neglect and a failure to maintain it. But there is a statute of limitations on the liberty of ignorance and arrogance.

Read more! Don't question me [click here] - DO IT!!

There's Something In My Ire

I am going to barely contain the swearing that wants to surge from my rage from my reaction to an article I read only moments ago. This will be my first instance of a post that deliberately piggybacks an earlier entry. Excuse me; I am pausing until I come back to a simmer from a rolling boil.

In my posting, “Women SUCK – You’d think THAT would be a GOOD thing,” I highlighted instances of the feminine compulsion to control and manipulate men. A friend of mine found no fault with my thesis but argued that my tone softened as the narrative unfolded. He also rightly observed that this is the natural flow for men – we express what really offends us but try to reign in the emotion and consign our outrage to the constraints of reason. It is necessary for the preservation of the species. To not allow for the infuriating and contrary nature of women would ensure violence or extinction. Some men opt to forego the strictures of polite society and actually do physically express their inner turmoil in grappling with the necessity of allowing women to be what women choose to be. A great many men compartmentalize their feelings (and consequently women) to effect an approximation of tolerance while other men take the least tumultuous course of action and withdraw as far from the pain as practicable and avoid interaction whenever possible.

Since violence towards women is still distasteful to me (on the majority of occasions) and trying to understand and cooperatively interact with women is still a beautiful, although recognizably unobtainable dream, I am faced with defining my navigation in these turbulent waters at an agonizingly slow pace. While on my quest for the perfect gender- balanced land of Atlantis I drift back and forth between two shores – between the craggy, compartmentalized, utilitarian coastline and the barren desert island that would result from avoiding women altogether. But every now and again I encounter the eddy currents of a woman with no fear of recrimination for dashing men on the hostile juts of her cold, stone heart. So today I bring you the soul-less musings of a practiced control freak, Elise Nersesian. Ms. Neresian submitted this particular article to Happen magazine (www.happenmag.com) which then ascribed to it the misnomer of a “courtesy” passed on to me as I was assaulted by it upon reading my email. She has also written for Redbook, Stuff and other publications according to the byline. I will quote to you the entire piece as I do not wish to be accused of taking any of it out of context. I will highlight particularly galling excerpts, however.

“Your Man’s Mood Swings - By Elise Nersesian

Trying to figure out the best time to broach a touchy topic, ask your guy a favor or convince him to do something you know he’ll dread? Well, it’s easier than you think if you learn how to tune in to his body clock, says Gabrielle Lichterman, founder of Hormonology.info and co-author of 28 Days: What Your Cycle Reveals About Your Love Life, Moods, and Potential. While women, we all know, experience hormone-induced mood swings on a monthly basis, Lichterman attests that men, too, are affected by hormonal highs and lows—only their levels fluctuate daily. Want to get his hormones working for you? Read on.

If you need his help moving, fighting, or fixing something…
Ask: from 9-12 a.m.
It should come as no surprise that guys wake up bursting with testosterone. And aside from the obvious frisky factor, this surge in hormones makes him ambitious and determined, says Lichterman. This is the perfect time to ask him for a favor, particularly one that makes him feel like Mr. Fix-It. Buying a car? Indulge his competitive streak, and drag him along to help you haggle with the salesman and score a great deal. Or, cash in on his peak in spatial thinking and ask him to move your couch, or measure your closet space. He’ll feel heroic, and you’ll reap the benefits.

If you want to get him to agree to your plans…
Ask: from 3-4 p.m.
Trying to convince him to sign up for ballroom dancing lessons, commit to your new book club or otherwise agree to do something that would normally send men screaming in the opposite direction? Then this late-afternoon window is the perfect opportunity, says Lichterman, since his super-low testosterone levels will make him mellow and amenable to pretty much anything you throw on the table.

If you want to broach a touchy topic…
Ask: from 8-10 p.m.
At this hour, another hormone called oxytocin — a.k.a. the “cuddle hormone” due to its intimacy-inducing effects — is on the rise in his bloodstream, says Lichterman. That means this is a prime time to resolve a lingering spat (“It hurt my feelings when you didn’t call today”) or get a grievance off your chest (“Will you please shave your goatee?”). You’ll probably get met with nothing but a sincere apology and the promise to change his ways. Sure, his sweetness may be as much due to timing as a true desire to please, but hey, who cares as long as your wish is his command?”

Wow . . .

This article really should have been titled, “Empowering Your Inner Sociopath - Learning to Control His Psychopathic Tendencies.” It may surprise you that I actually agree with her fundamental argument. However, she left out one important time segment.

Don’t Ask: from 5-7 a.m.
This is the period of heightened sensitivity of senses and reasoning ability – which is when I read this provocative article. My olfactory system was acutely sensitized to this offensive cowshit and my mind reeled with the blatant assertions that a man’s biology explains all of his behavior and should be used against him. In yet another hypocritical act, a woman is advising others of her gender to pull an option right out of the “Insensitive, Dumb-ass, Man’s” playbook. If a man even suggests that a woman’s hormones have anything to do with her behavior or decision making processes he had better run for his life as he will find no amnesty.

The mention of hormone cycles was also evaluated under a very soft light. Ms. Nersesian’s claims are a reiteration of another woman’s theory that a woman is predictably stable over a sweeping phase that requires 28 days but a man is a highly volatile and unpredictable creature changing by the hour. This is the equivalent of claiming that the sky is green and the grass is blue. She has inverted reality with a reference to Gabrielle Lichterman’s non-doctoral thesis in a single sentence. That means I have license to counter just as succinctly.

Not only are women identified by their constant state of variableness but it is the very fact their behavior is so unpredictable that women may rightly argue that where they are in their cycle has no bearing on their current deportment. Meanwhile, it is in fact the very constancy of a man’s behavior that makes the need for an article such as this one attempting to manipulate him and change his behavior seem significant. It is because men are predictable that women complain about us being “set in our ways,” or as being inflexible and unyielding. Women want to have variety and not be “stuck in a rut” and then they look at their guy and he’s “a stick in the mud,” right?

So what this article is really trying to achieve is to find some new spin on the old problem of a woman getting what she wants. If someone dangles the carrot that men are actually flexible – it’s just a matter of timing – then there’s renewed hope of manipulating a man and bending him to your will even if it’s only temporarily. Am I making this up? Go back and read the first paragraph of her article, again. A woman’s hormone cycle needs to be viewed as a tool for empowerment while a man’s cycle should be used to plan your calendar so he will work for you to get what you want. Manipulative, and completely dismissive of a man’s opinion or whether his negative position toward your ambitions may have sound judgment to support his reluctance; But, what the hell? According to the article, “Sure, his sweetness may be as much due to timing as a true desire to please, but hey, who cares as long as your wish is his command?”

Why This Bothers Me So Much
Her attitude of getting what she wants no matter what is what burned my biscuit to a cinder. You certainly know not to allow children such leeway because they are not able to make reasonable choices. What makes us believe an adult is anything more than a child with more means to get their way? This kind of thing never used to bother me until it cost me nearly everything by subscribing to being compliant. I bought into the notion that being the guy that stood on principle and dug in my heels was some form of cruelty to the woman in my life. What being true to my convictions actually would have done is demonstrated my love and active participation by cherishing and protecting with words like, “No.” When I became complacent about choices that were being made I failed in my responsibility to keep record of the cumulative impact of every seemingly insignificant decision. When it seemed to be “no skin off my nose” whether we did or did not pursue a course of action I was surrendering my duty to guard the life we were building together – and it tore us apart. I had the moral obligation to be set in my ways and to resist change for the sake of change only. I had the power to direct our lives toward permanence but weakened my resolve for what seemed convenient and less strenuous efforts to realize our mutual goals. Because I didn’t want to be the one hurting her feelings by not trying to give her everything she wanted I lost her, instead, to failing to meet her expectations. I traded the reality of pain and effort and struggle for the easy compromise of “going with the flow”. I now have more pain than I can bear. Because she was and still is everything I ever wanted; because she already was enough for me I tried in vain to be everything I couldn’t be and became nothing that she wanted.

I know that because I did not say “No” on every occasion when that was the appropriate answer that I doomed my marriage. I had the right and obligation to be unyielding without automatically becoming unreasonable or being accused of being insensitive. She had every right to challenge my decisions as much as she had the obligation to make sure I was aware of the things of which she was innately sensitive but without resorting to manipulation and coercion.

It is a man’s role and I don’t give a damn if that offends you – to make decisions and lead a family. All of the “traditional” elements of male and female that have been defined as “roles” in a marriage are more real than hormone cycles. Men are very influenced by the heroic. Women are very influenced by being nurturing. We have a lot more to apologize for in our lives than those labels for our natural bents. Why would either gender apologize for being associated with those two things, anyway? They are good and powerful measures of virtues we wish we possessed all of the time so we should celebrate that we exercise them at all. The problem always occurs in establishing the means to exchange the value of men and women in trade. Most people would rather steal than deal.

Relationships should be based on improving our ability to interact. Each type of relationship, from parent-child or between siblings or classmates or work associates on up to political parties and national interaction, function only as far as the others involved may be trusted not to lie, cheat, steal, manipulate or otherwise bully to force their will to dominate. Dating and ultimately marriage require the greatest demonstration of trust and self-denial of all relationship types. It is no wonder that people rebel and take drastic measures to avoid playing by the rules when one allows for the priority of self. Afterall, "all is fair in love and war" has proven a sad commentary on the human race. If you miss the irony of that quote . . . the impact of love should be the opposite of war, yet, somehow we accept each as being capable of limitless destruction, pain and suffering.

People have a great deal of trouble with marriage. Actually what they have is a great deal of trouble accepting the effort and conditions of marriage. It should not be confused with the requirements of any other relationship. Recent cultural anarchy has removed the obvious value for having an institution called “marriage”: to distinguish it from lesser levels of intercourse. My choice of words was intended to really focus on what currency is being traded and at what rate of exchange. In the hierarchy of relationships, marriage, is defined as the supreme exchange and it is intended to cost both genders everything. The trade is made worthwhile by the exchange of one soul for another and the mutual sharing of all assets each brings. With the wealth of treasures that is unique to each gender it is sad that we so quickly forget the euphoria of first discovering the bargain giving ourselves to get the other truly is. We further devaluate the wealth of the experience by coveting what others appear to have or by trying to steal the benefits without the contractual obligations outside of marriage. Marriage should be viewed as a bank vault and not as a prison cell. It should be perceived as an investment and not a possession. Marriage needs to be recognized as something not obtained but always just beyond our present grasp. We need to be mutually growing, stretching, yearning and reaching to obtain.

As a man, among my assets include the provisions of a husband. Did you know that the definition of “husband” is “gardener?” When is a gardener’s work ever complete? If he is a good gardener, he is always planning and preparing for tomorrow while he’s getting his hands dirty and sometimes bloody, today. What is my objective as a gardener? My job is to prepare a fertile and safe environment to allow for the healthy and abundant, fruitful growth of my seed. To do that, I must attend to and nourish the soil that will sustain my sowing of myself into her. I will be rewarded for my efforts by beauty that is only limited to the amount of attention I have paid to her. I must be vigilant to see to her having the things necessary to bloom – light and warmth and space and protection from destructive influences. I must break up fallow ground and weed out anything that would interfere with the well-being of the garden. Some of the methods are harsh and blunt. Others require precise, sharp cuts to accomplish the best results. If I am not methodical and constantly practicing my skills the garden suffers from inconsistent care. If I neglect my responsibilities or abandon the garden entirely the consequences are the same – the garden withers and dies. I also may not allow the variance of the weather and seasons to distract me from my achieving and completing harvest. No matter the effort or how willing or resistant the garden is to fulfilling its purpose, the gardener must lovingly persist. The effort is exhausting but the rewards are fragrant and sweet and the promise of another generation of good seed is worth the labor.

That description of marriage is more than poetic it is appropriate to the real purpose for which marriage was established. My garden has run wild and I am in a world of hurt to try and restore it and nurture such a desolate landscape back to health. I don’t care. It’s worth the personal sacrifice and I willingly face the pain that such a struggle will require. So when I survey the surrounding fields and assess the negative influences that want to poison the soil and deprive me of the unspoiled beauty I once held in my hands I get angry and I actively root out any destructive element no matter how seemingly trite and harmless it may appear on the surface.

Articles about manipulating men are weeds and thorns that I can not allow. The same goes for any of my own thoughts that cloud my judgment and erode the straight furrows I am struggling to replant after the storms of divorce.

Women should try having the courage and strength to demonstrate their resilience in the face of their man’s objections with something called "trust" – not merely dismiss him as an obstacle and bulldoze over him if he fails to be persuaded by your need to have your way.

Read more! Don't question me [click here] - DO IT!!

Yes. It's big of me, too

There are some things about men and the things enjoyed by men that most women just don’t get.

As just a for-instance, the male predisposition to their fanatical devotion to a sports team immediately comes to mind as well as most references to the Three Stooges or the Marx Brothers.

Here’s a classic example with Groucho Marx, as Captain Spaulding:

Captain Spaulding: “Well whadaya say girls? Are we all gonna get married?”

Mrs. Whitehead: “All of us?”

Captain Spaulding: “All of us!”

Mrs. Whitehead: “But that’s bigamy!”

Captain Spaulding: “Yes, and it’s big-a-me too.”
- From “Animal Crackers” (1930)

Margaret Dumont, was in seven Marx Brothers movies and publicly confessed to having never understood their humor on or off the set. I find myself in a similar baffled condition with the current exploration of polygamy. I’m curious to know how women feel about the attraction such an arrangement might or might not hold because I’m scratching my head about this as a man. I don’t know if I am more disturbed or intrigued.

The cult under investigation, in Texas, is not the first time the media has taken more of an amused than sober look into this issue. Several years ago there was a gentleman that took advantage of a parcel of land at the intersection of four western states. None of the surrounding states had ever staked a claim to the territory and this enterprising individual built a homestead to accommodate his fifteen wives. Seeing as no state owned the land then no state regulations forbidding polygamy applied. He also took the presumptuous position that since he was not in a state, per se, he was not bound by federal laws, either. That’s an amazing pair of huevos on an hombre happy to take on fifteen women and the United States at the same time. These fifteen women were very similar to women interviewed on a recent Oprah exposé of a Utah community of polygamists. The dozen and a quarter wives all seemed quite sane and quite satisfied with their arrangements. In the case of Huevos Grande, all of the women were well-to-do professional businesswomen – the majority being doctors and attorneys. This completely flies in the face of public expectation. I, for one, imagined most women in such a relationship were “married” at nine years of age and then never allowed to be exposed to the public.

Boy, do I have egg on my face.

But there’s more. Mrs and Mrs and Mrs and . . . Mrs and Mrs Huevos slept in dormitory-like arrangements. I’m not kidding. They slept in bunk beds, four women to a cabin.

Wow.

They also had a calendar of chores with each woman taking turns in a sort of Sweet Sixteen rotation. I don’t know if they wore nametags or had a number branded on their persons to keep things organized but the share and share alike carried right on up to whose turn it was to sleep in the “big bed.”

You see, apparently, polygamists insist their intimate times are wholly monogamous. These men are just your average one-woman-at-a-time kind of guys.

How Do I Phrase This?
The Chinese are a very ancient and wise culture. Their written language is very informative because they use simple symbols combined in unique ways to express complex dynamics of their speech as well as human thought. They are very direct and blunt, as a result. Their expressions have been honed and refined over thousands of years. Do not question the wisdom of the Chinese. An example is in order:

This is the character for a tree:

木

Combine two or three trees and, logically, you have a forest:


The Chinese are very smart.

This is a woman:




Combine two women under one roof and you have Trouble:


The Chinese are brilliant.

Oh, Yeah. The observant among you may have taken note that the character for “woman” used in the word “trouble” looks just like the representation of “forest.” The character for “tree” has the general inference of “wood” and so is related to the qualities of something made of wood – among those: “rigid” and “numb.” The Chinese are insightful.

It would appear that the majority of polygamists innately understand the inherent dangers of only two wives. In the recent interviews that I have encountered the magic number of wives is three. So, officially they are trigamists. It makes monogramming the linens more difficult but seems to make everything else run smooth as silk. The pattern that I seem to be picking up from the few candid couples . . . No, quadruples (?) openly discussing how their relationships work is that there is the traditional monogamous marriage, first. Some time after the marriage is consummated and progressing along the normal lines there becomes a mutual desire of both the man and the woman for another woman. How does this meeting of the mons, er, minds occur??? I can not even begin to imagine initiating such a proposal without anticipating loss of function in several parts of my body thus making the whole proposal moot anyway.

It gets worse. It seems that the most likely candidate to interview for the position is the wife’s sister! This is mind blowing. Sisters are generally known to be close, but not all of the time and not about sharing the same guy. Let’s face it, sisters are usually quite competitive and there is always some psychological cruelty being exhibited from one to the other. No woman wants to follow the pack unless it’s to go to the bathroom. Women hunt alone. Women want to be an exclusive. What is going on here? Curiosity or proving you’re the “better” woman just doesn’t offer enough incentive. And for a guy to risk having more than one pissed-off woman to contend with defies rational explanation no matter how promising the sex. These guys must have evolved through the mutant DNA of the praying mantis and simply expect their heads to be chewed off after mating. Or . . . they have the instincts of a fox and have taken alpha dog to a whole new level.

The Buddy System?
Women are, typically, extremely territorial. So much so that I am surprised that most do not pee on everything they claim as a way to mark ownership. (Perhaps they do?) This awareness on my part has resulted in a few sadistic little things I enjoy in the developing stages of a budding romance. This occurs during that time where I am not supposed to be aware that all of the seemingly harmless and innocuous little out-of-the-blue questions she tosses my way are actually a calculated catalogue. But, I do know what she’s up to so I exact a small toll for such trolling under the bridge being spanned between us. During any quiet moment when she is snuggled up next to me and has taken fascination with my watch I will innocently “confess” that it was a gift from an ex-lover. If my wallet is a little tired or worn? Sure; why not? That was also a gift (even if it wasn’t). This guarantees me a delicious moment of spiteful pleasure and, within twenty-four hours, a few small gift boxes with new watches, wallets and other trinkets to replace my “old ones.” I have no say in this. No sooner has the new watch been unboxed but the “old one” is torn from my wrist, never to be seen, again. Although I have never tested this for any big ticket items like a big screen TV or a car I am nevertheless curious as to whether she would clean out my garage if I could persuade her all that stuff had sentimental attachments . . .

Knowing this about the nature of the creature I think I might pay a hefty sum of money to a polygamist to learn the ways of the master. After the introductory lessons on “What is the sound of one hand slapping” perhaps I would receive enlightenment. Deadly sushi as a steady diet is still too advanced for me. But what is beyond comprehension for me is this: The third woman to join the happy trio seems to be the guy’s office crush. I don’t know how this happens, either. These seem to be guys that routinely say “Yes’ to the fleeting thoughts that go through men’s minds to which one would normally opt for “No.” Where does, “Hey, I love you but you’re sister’s interesting, too,” and, “Oh, there’s real chemistry with a co-worker . . .” ever come into the conversation of a married couple?

Wait! I think the explanation is starting to gel for me. I want to say this slowly so that I don’t lose the concept while articulating it.

These men have brought home playmates for their woman’s multiple personalities.

Rather than turn and vent on the husband the wives can either commiserate or brow beat each other into compliance. The beauty of this revelation is so eloquent. This is an epiphany! I am beginning to be illuminated by the profound nature of this discovery. It’s so elemental; so perfect. It is the Art of War applied to marriage. This is astounding! The enemy of my enemy is my friend becomes the husband of my sister is my friend’s husband is my husband. I am in the presence of genius. I need a moment . . .

It explains everything. In the interviews the men and their wives all assured the audience that these multiple partnerships were not about the sex. The women were so peaceful. They seemed content, at ease, fulfilled. They had their children and their daily routines and their husband and each other. They also seemed fairly affluent and lacking in none of the suburban niceties Americans use to define normalcy. I tended to believe them. It’s a tag team. The wives don’t have the normal domestic frustrations because they essentially have wives, too. Many hands make light the work, don’t you know. And they can definitely relate to each other. When they’re complaining about their husband they don’t have to wonder if they’re being understood. And talk about peer pressure! Who wants to be the wife that can’t hack it and threatens to leave? She’d be torn between letting down her friends and losing position among the wives. Wow; a psychological choker chain.

Hmmm. But, it’s not about the sex? I can see this, too. One wife either draws the short straw or actually happens to be in the mood. Either way, the husband is pacified and the wives return to their business with as little disturbance as possible and no hard feelings. The other thing that was fascinating with these families was the number of children. It is not an exaggeration to say each wife had at least seven children. This is where they looked like Stepford Wives because all of them had their wits and figures about them despite the constant baby production. Yet, that answers another aspect I suppose. These women like being pregnant. These are households full of uterus (uteruses, uteri?) with an itch wanting to be scratched. Many men are adamant that they want families but not too many want large families, I suppose. I guess finding a willing guy with the “minor trade-off’ of a few other breasts to feed isn’t so bad. There are a few logistical issues here, too. Women in groups tend to get on the same cycle. You want to avoid this. So, I guess strategic impregnation keeps the clocks set to different times. And pregnant women are horny women. You polygamists are sneaky devils!

Still, this leaves questions about how children raised in this environment sort it all out. Do the moms as well as the kids have secret suspicions that dad has favorites? With so many step-siblings there have to be some brother/sister crushes and other weirdness. And the chain of authority is hard to follow. Does each mom receive the same respect and obedience? Do the wives wear uniforms with stripes denoting rank? There have to be situations where a mother does not appreciate another mother disciplining her child. When a child calls for mom how many answer?

This calls to remembrance a discussion my ex-wife and I had concerning a friend. He had lost his wife to cancer and had two young daughters. This man was a fantastic father and raised his daughters, alone, for several years but he was a virile dude and wanted a lover and a mother for his kids. For a short period of time the sister of his deceased wife came to visit. My wife and I immediately noticed that there was attraction between the two of them. Such a complicated situation really had the two of them at odds as to what to do. You could visibly see them struggle to not allow their feelings to be expressed. It was agony. My wife nearly broke my ribs to get me to shut-up when I suggested that the girls might have to start referring to her as “Aunt Mommy.’ It was funny but captured the irony inherent in the situation. How bad is the Aunt Mommy problem in a polygamist home?

This post could go on and on so I’m going to wrap it up. I had tried to research to whom to credit the quote, “Once a king always a king but once a knight’s enough . . .” because it seemed anecdotal to this discussion. Unfortunately I was unable to certify the author.

However, I did come across some great quotes that could be dovetailed into my thoughts at several junctures. It would appear that, Woody Allen, has been quite prolific in the quote department on the intricacies of sexual relations. After his marriage to the adopted daughter of his lover I thought surely I would also find ‘Whose Your Daddy?” attributed to him, but alas, my search was inconclusive. So, I will conclude this entry with a series of memorable quotes.

"Love is the answer, but while you are waiting for the answer sex raises some pretty good questions." - Woody Allen

"Sex between two people is a beautiful thing. Between five, it’s fantastic." - Woody Allen

"Sex alleviates tension. Love causes it." - Woody Allen

"Sex without love is an empty experience, but as empty experiences go, it’s one of the best." - Woody Allen

"Sex between a man and a woman can be absolutely wonderful - provided you get between the right man and the right woman." - Woody Allen

"I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy.” - Tom Clancy

“You know 'that look' women get when they want sex? Me neither.” - Steve Martin

“I believe in putting women on pedestals . . . high enough to look up their dresses.” - Steve Martin

“There are a number of mechanical devices which increase sexual arousal, particularly in women. Chief among these is the Mercedes-Benz 380SL.” - Lynn Lavner

“Women might be able to fake orgasms. But men can fake whole relationships.” - Sharon Stone

“Women need a reason to have sex. Men just need a place.” - Billy Crystal

"According to a new survey, women say they feel more comfortable undressing in front of men than they do undressing in front of other women. They say that women are too judgmental, where, of course, men are just grateful." - Robert De Niro

Read more! Don't question me [click here] - DO IT!!

Women SUCK - You'd think THAT'D be a GOOD thing

Reader Advisory: This is going to be one of those ugly, the gloves are off posts. To what I hope will be the majority of the female population - the ensuing observations won't apply. If you get offended then consider that it does apply to you; and, to everyone else - it definitely applies to you.

I use a convenient (ie, cheap) email provider that costs me nothing except that logging into and out of the service forces me to view a whole series of "articles" and insightful tidbits that are supposed to be designed to entice me. Most times I tell myself I am better off not clicking any of the links but like a car wreck, I just have to look. It's the electronic equivalent of the periodicals that greet you at supermarket check-out aisles. I understand the target audience and that all of these little hooks are hoping to reel in the female and gay consumers because that's where the majority of purchasing decisions are made. Men might corner the market on beer, chips, and pretzels and the other end of the extreme - one-time, large ticket items like a mid-life crisis pacifier but the real money and the majority of print advertising is elsewhere.

So every couple days I bite. I'm just as interested as many others in ways I might improve myself or enjoy a paradigm shift that will allow me to be more savvy or popular or get my teeth their whitest. Why not? Some articles are obviously for women by women and I know that going in. Those are read with the intent of seeing how close to or far off the mark I currently am in juxtaposition to the collective female psyche. It's a sort of mile marker on my journey through life. I'm OK with those articles. But, there is an entirely other series of subject matter that somehow always swings back to a galvanizing theme and it is those sorts of articles that have me looking for appropriate real estate for digging my shallow, mass grave sites.

These articles fall into what I call the "Three T's." In essence, they are always about the same thing no matter what the article is titled. That would be: How to Tempt a man; How to Trick a man; and, How to Teach a man. Of course these are also able to be combined in all sorts of titillating ways. After all, how many articles can one have on such subjects? Why as many as one may have for diets to stack beside the number of "sinful" dessert recipes, of course.

In two of the most recent gems that I read women were informed how to use their stuff to full advantage to get what they want. I always enjoy these articles the most due to the blatant hypocrisy. Here you have the misunderstood and, unappreciated martyr that is woman; an innocent soul with untapped potential that has always been taken for granted and ogled for her fleshy bits throughout the ages, taking notes on how to be ogled for her fleshy bits. Then there are the superwoman bitching articles. These are very hard for me to find amusing but what I find fascinating about these articles is they are always being preached to the choir. The only other soul that gives a damn beside the woman filing the grievance in the article is another woman that already agrees. Such columns aren't generated to open discourse between the sexes. They are designed to venerate the author. If anything it is an open campaign to foment ill will toward men. Ill will toward men is very popular.

Such cowshit is in great supply these days. And Ladies, I know it's unfathomable to you but cowshit smells just as bad as bullshit.

Do you really want an honest man's perspective? An honest man would and should be noticeably angry in the face of the current crap women are throwing his way. There are so many contradictory claims being made by women that a mirage has more substance. Most men try to jump through the hoops and learn the rules of the game to be with you. There are actually quite a few men that want more than sex - not something other than sex but more than sex. (Sex is really the ONLY thing men get as a reward for putting up with YOUR shit. Deal with it.) But, every man has his limit and eventually you will cheat at the game or change the rules one two many times and first he will stop playing and ultimately he'll be gone. For each man the limits are different but the limits are always there. A man in love will overlook as many of your faults as he can. That doesn't mean that you don't have any. Yes. Women have faults. Little itty-bitty ones and great big ones. I know for most women that will be a revelation.

If you're at all bright you will recognize that if it's a man you want in your life then it's HIS opinion that counts and not that of Cosmo or your girlfriend's or even a lot of your own opinion. I don't expect you will effortlessly take such a radical idea at face value. Too bad.

Let me give you a snapshot of the "modern" woman from the male perspective. (Insert appropriate mood music in background, say, "Wannabe," by the Spice Girls . . .)

Involvement on even the most surface level with the modern woman is like a hostage negotiation. A list of demands is painfully extracted and then the waiting game begins. There will be no direct communication and the woman expects to exercise control. There is no promise of a successful negotiation. There probably will be casualties. There definitely will be misunderstandings, threats and irrational outbursts. The man will be forced to admit wrongs have been committed that if not by him, personally, certainly by men at large. The woman will defend her choices and behavior using the wrongs done to her kind throughout history as ample justification - and the man would know this if he weren't, by nature, an insensitive bastard. All efforts to meet the demands in any reasonable way or reasonable amount of time will not go well for the man. He will be accused of dragging his feet or being insincere. The demands will change without predictable cause and effect. The woman will secretly make calls to her friends on the outside for guidance. It doesn't matter that her friends are not concerned with facts and are only accepting her perspective. The man will count how many bullets he has left to use before turning the last one on himself.

It seems that most relationships are doomed before they start. They are if a woman has expectations so idealistic that no man can achieve them. What are those expectations based upon? It would seem that the acid test for a woman's choices is whether or not she is happy. How fortunate for us men that happiness is not something elusive and is so concrete and permanently available! It's a good thing happiness isn't tied into our emotions, hormone imbalances and circumstances. That would be a terribly poor choice of conditions by which to govern our lives.

Surprisingly the efforts of the last few generations of the pursuit of happiness for women have been heralded in very male-sounding military terms under battle cries all relating to freedom from sexual oppression, no more enslavement to the will of men, give me an equal opportunity to make an equal living - basically, get out of the way. The convictions that followed these efforts all promised that once women were able to function without obstructions and traditional roles assigned by the whims of men and their patriarchal societies that all of the human race would benefit from the undeniable superiority of the female approach.

How's that working out for you?

Women now comprise the greater percentage of degrees awarded at the Masters and above levels. The higher paid spouse in an increasing number of marriages is the woman. As I mentioned earlier, women are exercising more of the purchasing muscle and the decisions that determine what is purchased. They have power. They have influence. They have respect.

Women also have many more health issues than ever before because they have now equaled men in stress-related (to job) illnesses such as heart conditions, cancers and diabetes. They are trying to still be "traditional" mommies but also work traditionally long work days outside the home. Men don't have as much value anymore seeing that what they traditionally were used for has been replaced by women. So women are frustrated as much today as they ever were in their sexual relationships and finding a soul-mate.

Some have realized that it isn't enough to talk about how useless men are and to do something about it. So these women have elected to be single mothers where the only contribution from a man is a tablespoon of sperm. Rather than change the "barbaric male" way of conducting business women have embraced it and made it their own. And, now women can rightfully be proud that they've closed the gap in another traditional category - the taking of human life. Only women showed their superiority by using abortion to exercise their rights.

Are you happy, now?

Happiness is the pursuit made by selfish children. We are constantly told about the follies associated with the male ego. Well girls, you might think your cowshit doesn't stink and that's why it's so popular to spread it far and spread it thick. Women are incredibly narcissistic these days. The whole culture resonates with it. We are being swallowed up in it. Every pop culture icon is female. Every excess and hedonistic tendency is tuned to resonate with the frenzied passions of a diva-obsessed marketplace. We are a day spa away from Nirvana if you believe the media.

All that this means is that the pendulum has certainly swung the other way from when women were popularly portrayed as dim-witted, silly little things that were nothing more than amusement and capable of only performing menial tasks to be useful. Now men are regarded as simplistic, awkward, stupid and oafish pets.

Has anybody besides me had enough?

This whole goddess/princess trip that women have sold their souls for is a travesty. We were a pathetic, Me-first society. Now we're a Me-Only cesspool. No wonder relationships don't have a chance. Look, everybody has experienced the transition from falling in love with the "I'll do anything for you/Be anything you want" attitude. We learn the painful lessons that being someone else's doormat like that teaches us. We grow smarter but also colder and more aware of protecting ourselves at the expense of isolating ourselves instead. Have a little more value in yourself, Ladies. Really. I think that's what is behind so much of this. You don't have to sell yourself. You don't have to use trickery. Men don't need to be convinced you have worth. You need to drop the conceit and the deceit.

Don't tell me you don't know what I'm talking about. It isn't that women lie. Women become their lies. That's what so pisses me off about those Three T's articles. At the heart of it all women want to exert influence and control. Rather than employ brutish and confrontational methods you use subliminal, subtle, psychological ploys. It is not by accident that words like scheming and conniving are instantly identified with feminine articles. Everyone lies but only women have elevated it to a science. Men make up lies after the fact. It makes them incredibly vulnerable to discovery. Women not only pre-plan their lies but conspire with their female friends so that everyone is on the same page and their stories will match. Women know when they are going to lie and cheat and have a justification for why before hand. They are so involved in the perpetuation of lies that perception becomes reality and they believe their own lies to be absolute truth. These switches women possess to compartmentalize their conscious create frightening labyrinths. Invariably, a woman is going to get caught in her own web.

I have a daughter who is only thirteen. We are separated by a great geographic distance but I took a lot of solace in the fact we seemed so close, otherwise. A few weeks ago I became party to my daughter taking a fundamental step into womanhood. She knows my concerns about boys. She knows that I want her to be safe and not lose herself while getting her heart broken navigating through unchartered waters. I have no double standard in these matters. My two sons are being told that they have no right to treat any woman differently than the way I expect their sister to be treated. In light conversation I just casually asked if she were interested in any boys. For the first time in our relationship she broke my heart. Rather than tell me the truth she told me what she knew I would want to hear. She has now learned how to lie to a man that she loves by justifying her actions as in his best interest. I want to die. I shouldn't have been so naive as to expect her to behave any differently but it still wrenched something pure from me. What I'm asking is don't do this to yourselves or do it to us. No little secrets. No lies of omission. No veil of silence.

I used to think women only wanted something when they COULDN'T have it. Now, of course, I realize I was wrong. Women want what they DON'T have . . . Because of this they're seldom happy. There is always an unsatisfied hunger. You know it is funny in a really unfunny way that women seem to want control and authority but not the blame and responsibility. Men are still good for blame. Somehow there are supposed to be men that can rescue the I-can-do-it-myself princess. If any man gets close to rescuing her from herself then she runs like hell.

A fundamental difference between boys and girls is this: Boys live for the moment and aren't too concerned beyond that. Meanwhile, Girls are never content with who they are in the moment. When they are little they want to be big. As soon as a girl is old enough to convey any of the dynamics of human expression she is on a quest to demonstrate her mastery. It's another need for control. Boys are fun. Girls are serious. The fun element never leaves men and it's a good thing because that's what makes life tolerable. The serious thing, in girls, cascades and escalates into critical. Women are sold on the superiority of sobriety. The cost is high. They're not happy. Men accept that their contribution is to make women laugh. Women grudgingly "accept the responsibility" of "helping" men "grow up." So men grow out of the moment and into always looking to the possibilities of the future. Women are too occupied with the need to take care of obligations to catch their breath. They start to look back (with a critical eye) to evaluate everything in a historical perspective. "It WAS BETTER that way . . ." What generally happens is that neither Men nor Women are living in the Now. He's off in a glorious future and she's back where it was good. My favorite example of this is what I call "The Mirror Test." A woman looks into a mirror and exclaims, 'Oh, worse than I thought." A man looks in the mirror and shrugs, "Huh. Better than I thought."

It would take actual effort and discipline and maturity on the part of both men and women to live in and enjoy the moment. I believe it's called selflessness. I think everybody that tried this would be . . . well . . . happy.

Alright. I have filed my grievances concerning bad, terrible, awful women. I hope that even if I angered you that you realize I'm not picking a fight. I'm frustrated with how absurd getting along has become. As a peace offering I am trying to be candid - not mean or insulting. I was entirely honest. You might even have gained some insights.

As a public service I offer women some real truth and direct recommendations:

Any man you can change already lost your interest and your respect and isn't going to have anything to offer of any substance since you're calling the shots. If he doesn't come out of the box the way you like - keep looking. He's not going to change and you'll eventually realize that, anyway. If it scares you that you may never find the right guy then YOU have to deal with two possibilities: 1) You're afraid to be by yourself; 2) You need to change things about yourself or get some realistic expectations.

If men are really evil incarnate to you (and I know some do qualify) and you think women are better please consider the numerous truly miserable and even hostile and bitter lesbians that would be the alternative. Things are not always ROSIE . . .

If you are keeping score - you both lose.

If the sex is good but nothing else is then why are you settling for a below average experience?

Being vulnerable and open is an incredible personal risk. It's also the hottest, most irresistible thing a woman can do. Find someone where it's an investment and not a gamble.

Be Yourself. (Not like in women's magazines where even your own mother can't recognize you.) Really. Yourself.

Desperation leads to compromise which is just another name for lying to yourself and him.

Happiness is a choice - not a destination.

Expectations KILL. Not every kiss, cup of coffee, and moment together can transport you to an out of body experience. Despite the advertisements you do know even bath oils and candles can't pull this off. And they're supposed to. Right??

Get over yourself, first.

The Male ego is incredibly fragile and so insatiable for attention. - So? If you know things about men to be true what is the big friggin' deal about just accepting it and making a little space for it instead of putting everything important to him or about him that WON'T CHANGE out in the garage?

In a relationship try not to become a snake swallowing its own tail.

There is so much more and I'm sure something else will set me off in the near future. So expect this kind of saber rattling another time.

Read more! Don't question me [click here] - DO IT!!

My life do me like a MOTOWN song

" . . .

Hang ups, let downs

Bad breaks, set backs

Natural fact is

I can't pay my taxes

Oh, make me wanna holler

And throw up both my hands

Yea, it makes me wanna holler

And throw up both my hands . . ." **

My life really is a compilation of Motown songs. I can not delineate just how much is subliminal influence and how much is pure coincidence but I have been observing the signature impact on my life for some time.

Music is the underpinning to the core of my being. In fact, my epitaph (should they find my body or not merely dump me in a reinforced, plastic lawn bag) will likely be an old Elton John/ Bernie Taupin piece, “This Song Has No Title (Just Words and a Tune).”

Many people claim such an intimate link between music and their souls and some I would actually believe and acknowledge as authentic. Mine is certified. I grew up before digital music and also when people actually played instruments and wrote original material and did not merely sample someone else’s creativity. There was this thing known as A-N-A-L-O-G. That is significant on so many levels and I will give it its proper rant another time. Sufficient for this diatribe is that analog is a continuous passage of time. Digitized anything is a quantization which is a rate of bits and pieces with gaps and missing stuff. There is so much irony in how much stuff those born in the “digital age” miss and are not even cognizant.

Now, I am by no means a techno-phobe as I was personally involved in designing and introducing such products as . . . oh, the desktop PC and data over voice telephony that made the Internet far more real than anything in Al Gore’s imagined contributions. These are digital products. Some valid music has been and is being made with digital equipment and the sonic possibilities are remarkable. It’s just too bad no one has stepped up to demonstrate this AND, for the purposes of my argument, digital recording techniques lose too much in the translation from the analog world in which we live. This is not a lone, crazy man’s opinion. Recording studios are spending large chunks of money to find, restore, and adapt analog amplifiers and effects processors into their LED and LCD clustered studios to breathe life into their products.

Anyway, more to the point of this post is that I am so tuned into the music that usually within a note or two I know what the song is by the ambiance and atmosphere captured on the recording. I feel and hear the breath of acoustic instrumentation. I sense the dynamic coloring of the microphones used and to what recording media it was transferred. I just do. I am just a person extremely attuned to such things in my environment. I do this without deliberate effort.

I have the same awareness when I walk past a woman, by the way. From as far away as five feet I detect the pheromones being radiated from the back of her neck and know where she is in her ovulatory cycle. No cologne or anything else masks this from me. I just take note of it as casually as registering the color of her car if she were driving past. I have even told women that they are pregnant before they or their test stick knew it. This has been tested on several occasions by skeptical, female friends and colleagues. I have never taken advantage of this knowledge. If women have a sixth sense then I claim a sixth “scent.” Oh, to dissuade any women from being horrified about “smelling” (I know this is a huge area of fanatical concern for women to freak out about) Don’t worry. This specific scent is not offensive regardless of what day it is.

Relax.

As long as you are creeped out or even perversely intrigued I will share a few other bits of candor with you. I shave dry and pull off bandages meticulously and slowly. I also sleep with my eyes open and in such a shallow state of unconsciousness that I carry on conversations (which I do not recall when awake) in which I have been known to sit up and ask and answer questions. Now you know so much about me. Pleased to meet you. And, you are . . . r-u-n-n-i-n-g . . . away . . . hmm. Fine.

Somehow I will steer this back to the music.

All of this sensory perception is probably related to my Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity and a cherry on top. The things that regulate “normal” people’s thought processes do not work in my case. It creates all sorts of interesting possibilities for really poor human interaction. But it also makes me sensitized to things that the body usually has mechanisms for dulling the reception. That’s right – I’m calling YOU dull. For example, I can feel my hair grow. This is one of the recognized oddities associated with ADD. But as far as music is concerned these same failed mechanisms allow me to really sense music so deeply. I really also believe I am very sympathetic to the souls of the musicians and artists. It is just second nature for me to have a song lyric at my finger tips that is appropriate for whatever situation I encounter. There are often times where I will be examining my mood or trying to determine how something is affecting me and I will suddenly become aware of the soundtrack playing in the background of my thoughts. Invariably, my subconscious interjects what my conscious mind has yet to fully realize.

So since I am so trusting of music and the meaning it has for me I am taking a look at how dangerous that just may be. This has nothing to do with backward masking and satanic messages. There is, however, a very subtle power in the things expressed in music. Am I allowing too much influence? Many times I have heavy philosophical arguments with the stereo because of my strong reaction to either the real or implied intent of the lyrics. It is very easy to allow an idea that would otherwise meet critical evaluation “slip past the guards” because it’s packaged in a catchy tune. Now since my formative years occurred in the era just before AM radio ceased to be relevant I was basically weaned on the Beatles and Motown. Therefore my tutors in how to be a man and to face the world into which I found myself growing up presented my instruction in three minute bursts. The impact of all of my teachers was pretty much history by 1974. That means that between the ages of two (when I asked for and received my first Beatles album, in 1964) and my twelfth birthday I was immersed in the sage counsel of John, George, Paul and Ringo; Sam Cooke; Jackie Wilson; Smokey Robinson; Aretha Franklin; the Supremes; The Temptations; The Spinners; Gladys Knight and the Pips; Otis Redding; and, Marvin Gaye. There were other influences but these certainly predominate.

Consequently, I have filtered my understanding of life and love through the words and fisheye lens of the music I probably sing in my sleep. I know I sing it in the shower as I prepare to face the world each day. You know, if I examine this too closely I may well be horrified. Music is so personal and it isn’t hard to imagine that I have personified what I’ve listened to all of these years.

I became acutely aware of this is in just the previous several months. Just turning on the radio was too painful. Even before my marriage crashed and burned I had become depressed and stopped doing anything creative. I stopped writing altogether. I wouldn’t even pick up a guitar or keyboard. I just . . . couldn’t. At the time I could not account for this. After the divorce I sort of allowed for such behavior but had no insight. Music is so intimate but it isn’t exclusive – it’s inclusive. A song puts it all out there. Whatever the writer or performer is experiencing gets broadcast with the knowledge that they are making themself naked (meaning: exposed, vulnerable) to the world. It’s a desperate pleading. It’s a cry of anguish and for help and for understanding and recognition all rolled together. I realized why I couldn’t listen to the music. Music is to be shared and I have no one to share it. I would be begging to be heard by someone deliberately not listening. I couldn’t take the rejection. I couldn’t share my life with anyone.

I also recognized that I shifted from listening to viewing. I turned down the sound and started watching movies. Movies allow you to eavesdrop into another person’s world without needing to make a personal investment. You can live vicariously without living at all. I think it’s why pornography can suck the soul right out of you. You can imagine whatever selfish pleasure you need to without regard for anyone at all. You can reward yourself when no one else will. Then you can pretend you have some affirmation and solace. I now observe other people – synthetic people – actors – pretending to have romances and find love and live. Music allows no such voyeurism. You have to participate in music.

It is unfortunate that the music that shaped my thinking mostly involves pleas for forgiveness, break-ups and begging for second chances. But, that also happens to be where I find myself.

I ain’t too proud to beg, sweet Darlin’ . . . ***

Footnotes:
** Marvin Gaye - Inner City Blues (Make Me Wanna Holler)
*** The Temptations – Ain’t Too Proud to Beg

Read more! Don't question me [click here] - DO IT!!