There is a very big difference between emotional intimacy- let's call it romance- and physical intimacy- lust, for lack of a better term. Sorry folks, I know I don't usually come BANG out of the gate like that, but stick with me here.
People tend to loop the two together into a single idea, a relationship as common terminology insists. Actually, we have come a far way to separate the two into two different, albeit related concepts.
Because they are inherently related. Movies like Friends with Benefits and No Strings Attached (Which came out within a couple months of one another, what a nightmare) assure us viewers that physical relations can't stay JUST physical- that eventually, emotions kick in.
But is that true?
I don't know. Listen guys, cards on the table here, never been in either kind of relationship. BUT I'm pretty good at making things up and pretending to be an expert at them, so let's see how I think I would feel about it.
People raised in this day and age think that it is wrong to only like someone for their body. Why? Well, they might respond, because someone is so much MORE than their body. I agree with that, but that doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't like someone exclusively for their body. If you liked someone exclusively for their personality, and found them repulsive physically, why is that okay, and even considered a good thing?
You can like someone exclusively for their body. It's okay. Lust is a natural thing that affects pubescents and post-pubescents, and it's no use trying to fight it. Does that mean walk around naked and proposition everyone? No! Really, don't do that. That would make people uncomfortable.
That means that it is okay to be interested in people for their body. It's okay to experiment, kiddo.
Full disclosure, I don't experiment. But it's totally cool if you want to.
And now is the point when you know what this is talking about, for some of you. But don't get mad, just let me finish.
Romance is very different. Romance is the "d'awww" stuff that makes teenage girls [supposedly] swoon, and usually ends with two people holding hands and walking into the sunset. This type of intimacy is glorified. Why? Because it isn't sexual.
Sometime way back when, people had a falling out with sexuality. Maybe they were having a rock-paper-scissor battle, and sexuality lost to WWE as a socially acceptable and morally acceptable topic.
Eh, but I spend too much time trying to fight the battle for humans to be comfortable with their sexuality. Most of the people reading this won't go past saying "Crap entry is crap". Which may be true. I've made some real stinkers. Whatever, read it and weep. I'm hoping to have another entry up before next Friday, but don't rely on me.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
2.15.2012
Dear Miss Symanski
You probably don't remember me. If you remember me at all, my face and personality have likely blended with the faces and personalities of the other fourth and fifth graders you taught. To you, I was likely just a face in the crowd.
It wasn't reciprocated, however. This is natural, because while a teacher may have upwards of 150 students, students rarely had more than 3 teachers per year in elementary school. So, I remember you.
It was my third grade when I knew you. You taught art at my elementary school. Never being particularly interested in the subject, your class wasn't one I looked forward to immensely. And that's okay.
I'm writing this- whatever you'd call it- because you recently committed suicide. After living since 2005 with paralysis from shoulders downward, you decided to end your life. No one would give you leave to do it, however, so you starved yourself. Two months it took you, but on December 1st, 2011, you left this world.
Why is this coming so late? I only heard about your death yesterday morning. It shocked me to my core that this happened, and that it had happened to you.
I'm going to be totally honest with you and say I don't remember much about your personality. I was in third grade, so I could be spared a little blame. I do remember liking you, for whatever reason.
As you know, in June 2005, you were paralyzed in a diving accident. There wasn't much direct impact on my life from this, except that you were replaced as Art teacher by a variety of substitutes. I can't remember if the principal addressed it all, but I remember hearing about it.
"Miss Symanski had an accident," was probably what I heard. "She accidentally dived into a three-foot pool. Now, she's going to be okay, but she's going to have to be in a wheelchair for the rest of her life. This shows how careful you have to be, okay?"
I probably said okay.
That was when you left my life. You didn't re-enter until what must have been 2008.
My mother had been searching the Internet when she came across an article about you, about how you still painted despite being injured. The picture included (One that has stuck in my mind, for whatever reason: A woman in a wedding dress, with clocks all around her, and you painting it with a brush in your mouth) shocked me, and showed me that you, even after a horrifying accident, could continue to do what you loved.
I drafted you a letter that I wanted to write you, explaining how much you inspired me.
As you and I both know, I never sent it.
Which brings me to the day of February 14th, 2012. Valentine's Day. My mother read aloud to my sister, while I was there, about your demise. I was shocked and horrified.
You are the first person I knew who committed suicide. Not that a judge you for it, but it certainly puts a human element on it.
You came to be a symbol in my mind. Someone who could do what they wanted, no matter the situation, no matter the trouble. Some might think that you committing suicide would take that away. It did not.
Starving yourself to death? I don't know if the other options were unavailable, but that was a painful way to go. Such dedication to a cause is admirable.
After I heard about your death, I started thinking of all the things I could have done. A million different ways to have kept you alive, none of which were feasible. I wanted to save you from the pain, I wanted to help you.
It turns out you didn't need my help. You saved yourself.
So I wrote this letter, which I'm going to post on the Internet. I wish I had had the courage to send it to you myself.
Christina Symanski, where ever you are now, rest in peace.
From,
A former student who now goes by Joshua Valett.
It wasn't reciprocated, however. This is natural, because while a teacher may have upwards of 150 students, students rarely had more than 3 teachers per year in elementary school. So, I remember you.
It was my third grade when I knew you. You taught art at my elementary school. Never being particularly interested in the subject, your class wasn't one I looked forward to immensely. And that's okay.
I'm writing this- whatever you'd call it- because you recently committed suicide. After living since 2005 with paralysis from shoulders downward, you decided to end your life. No one would give you leave to do it, however, so you starved yourself. Two months it took you, but on December 1st, 2011, you left this world.
Why is this coming so late? I only heard about your death yesterday morning. It shocked me to my core that this happened, and that it had happened to you.
I'm going to be totally honest with you and say I don't remember much about your personality. I was in third grade, so I could be spared a little blame. I do remember liking you, for whatever reason.
As you know, in June 2005, you were paralyzed in a diving accident. There wasn't much direct impact on my life from this, except that you were replaced as Art teacher by a variety of substitutes. I can't remember if the principal addressed it all, but I remember hearing about it.
"Miss Symanski had an accident," was probably what I heard. "She accidentally dived into a three-foot pool. Now, she's going to be okay, but she's going to have to be in a wheelchair for the rest of her life. This shows how careful you have to be, okay?"
I probably said okay.
That was when you left my life. You didn't re-enter until what must have been 2008.
My mother had been searching the Internet when she came across an article about you, about how you still painted despite being injured. The picture included (One that has stuck in my mind, for whatever reason: A woman in a wedding dress, with clocks all around her, and you painting it with a brush in your mouth) shocked me, and showed me that you, even after a horrifying accident, could continue to do what you loved.
I drafted you a letter that I wanted to write you, explaining how much you inspired me.
As you and I both know, I never sent it.
Which brings me to the day of February 14th, 2012. Valentine's Day. My mother read aloud to my sister, while I was there, about your demise. I was shocked and horrified.
You are the first person I knew who committed suicide. Not that a judge you for it, but it certainly puts a human element on it.
You came to be a symbol in my mind. Someone who could do what they wanted, no matter the situation, no matter the trouble. Some might think that you committing suicide would take that away. It did not.
Starving yourself to death? I don't know if the other options were unavailable, but that was a painful way to go. Such dedication to a cause is admirable.
After I heard about your death, I started thinking of all the things I could have done. A million different ways to have kept you alive, none of which were feasible. I wanted to save you from the pain, I wanted to help you.
It turns out you didn't need my help. You saved yourself.
So I wrote this letter, which I'm going to post on the Internet. I wish I had had the courage to send it to you myself.
Christina Symanski, where ever you are now, rest in peace.
From,
A former student who now goes by Joshua Valett.
2.14.2012
You know, that one day after Desperation Day
Yesterday, on Facebook, the ever-growing tumor on humanity's face (I have one! <3), I saw a lot of posts about Valentine's Day. Like a lot. Most of them were the traditional ones this time of year: "It's a holiday created by the greeting card companies, MAN" and "Forever Alone!!!!", not to mention the annual list of cards featuring either disturbingly gushy or depressing subject material.
But the one that stood out to me the most was this one. I'm going to pretty up the grammar and cut out here and there, but here's what it said, "And when your boyfriend dislikes you because all of the food he gave you made you fat, then maybe you'll realize that you should treat your girlfriend great every day, not just on a Hallmark created, show them you love them daily."
I understand some of the problems that people have with the day, like the aforementioned, "treat them with love every day!" thing. It's a great idea, in theory. But that also means that we should get rid of Mother's Day, Father's Day, Labor Day, President's Day, MLK Jr. Day, birthdays and all of those other holidays that celebrate individuals or ideas. Should we get rid of veteran's day because we should appreciate them everyday, not just one day?
No! Of course not! While I don't disagree about treating your partner with respect and affection daily, it's nice to go out of your way once and a while and do something special. Valentine's Day is a great day to remind people how great couples can be.
Now, I speak directly to a certain type of person: the person that directly insults Valentine's Day. Not the ones who make jokes like the one in this title, no, those people are just unfunny. I'm talking about people who bash on those who celebrate it, saying things like, "You know you are celebrating a massacre, right?"
Let these people have their fun. Just because you aren't with somebody on that holiday, doesn't make it crappy. And even if you are with someone, and don't believe in it, don't make everyone else suffer because of it (just your partner). I see it akin to, on someone's birthday, reminding them of the time they spent in the womb and that you are celebrating, "the first time you touched your mom's vagina" (I swear to God I've heard someone say this before)
I've never been in a relationship, certainly not on Valentine's Day. But that doesn't mean I can't let others enjoy it.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
But the one that stood out to me the most was this one. I'm going to pretty up the grammar and cut out here and there, but here's what it said, "And when your boyfriend dislikes you because all of the food he gave you made you fat, then maybe you'll realize that you should treat your girlfriend great every day, not just on a Hallmark created, show them you love them daily."
I understand some of the problems that people have with the day, like the aforementioned, "treat them with love every day!" thing. It's a great idea, in theory. But that also means that we should get rid of Mother's Day, Father's Day, Labor Day, President's Day, MLK Jr. Day, birthdays and all of those other holidays that celebrate individuals or ideas. Should we get rid of veteran's day because we should appreciate them everyday, not just one day?
No! Of course not! While I don't disagree about treating your partner with respect and affection daily, it's nice to go out of your way once and a while and do something special. Valentine's Day is a great day to remind people how great couples can be.
Now, I speak directly to a certain type of person: the person that directly insults Valentine's Day. Not the ones who make jokes like the one in this title, no, those people are just unfunny. I'm talking about people who bash on those who celebrate it, saying things like, "You know you are celebrating a massacre, right?"
Let these people have their fun. Just because you aren't with somebody on that holiday, doesn't make it crappy. And even if you are with someone, and don't believe in it, don't make everyone else suffer because of it (just your partner). I see it akin to, on someone's birthday, reminding them of the time they spent in the womb and that you are celebrating, "the first time you touched your mom's vagina" (I swear to God I've heard someone say this before)
I've never been in a relationship, certainly not on Valentine's Day. But that doesn't mean I can't let others enjoy it.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
2.10.2012
Ecstasy (or Bliss, though I like the drug better than the chocolate. Hypothetically, of course)
So, long story short, I wrote something not entirely compulsory for my English class. I'm not going to go deep into backstory territory here, but I feel like I owe ya'll something. Only rudimentary knowledge of Fahrenheit 451 is helpful, not required. I did some editing and will have a short afterword, but here it goes:
On Friday, the Do Now on your board consisted of three parts, but the part that stood out to everyone in the class [I admit, I presume; for me at least] was the first. “What is happiness”, you asked us, a class of fifteen and sixteen year olds. After much debate over which characters were happy and which ones were not, that part of the question got a little bit overshadowed.
I spent a lot of time thinking about that question this weekend. The definition I wrote on my paper, one that I now consider incorrect, is “an intense feeling of satisfaction”. Satisfaction isn’t happiness; satisfaction leads to contentedness. So, as I sat on the bus on my ride home, I pondered, “What is happiness?”
Before I came to a definite conclusion about happiness, I realized that the questions you had asked us wasn’t one that couldn’t be answered. Maybe you never intended an actual answer when you asked them, but it seems unfair that there should be questions like that in an English class,and not in Philosophy. I believe that I should clarify that the unanswerable question was whether or not the characters were happy.
Happiness is not a permanent state. I believe that is where your question and I split off the most; your question implied that happiness was a binary state, that one could either be happy or unhappy, with no middle ground. Clarisse IS happy, the class decided; but what did that mean?
I think of happiness as more of a short-term status effect, almost like a “high”. In fact, “high” would be the perfect word to describe the phenomenon. Instead of a constant state one could be in, happiness is a flash, a short time of ecstasy to be countered, almost immediately, with pain and displeasure.
The assumption that Clarisse was happy seemed and seems silly to me. In a society like the one they live in, no one can be happy. Happiness is defined by its contrast. Something can’t be fast unless there is something slow to which a comparison could be made. Similarly, in a society where sadness is obsolete and non-existent, how could anyone be happy?
Speaking of the prospect of someone being happy, fake happiness is another thing that was brought up during the class discussion. People seemed unanimous in their decision that Mildred was fake happy; she believed herself to be happy, but she wasn’t. According to my above description of happiness, these people would be right; she has no contrast, so she can’t be more than normal at any time.
This upset me, because I don’t believe in fake happiness. If one believes themselves to be happy, they are. Not the kind of “believe-I’m-happy” that Guy indulges, because he has doubts about himself and his happiness. Mildred honestly believes, with all of her heart and soul, that she is happy; so why can’t she be?
Much like the characters in the Matrix, everyone in their society believes what they are wanted to believe. Guy’s civilization is taught that they are happy all the time, so they are. Neo’s civilization is taught that the Matrix is the real world, so it is. If you asked someone in the Matrix whether the world they lived in was real, everyone single one would have said yes. Does that mean that the Matrix isn’t real, that nothing that goes on there is real? Morpheus asked Neo what was real, and no true answer was given.
As I round the first page and run, with no sign of stopping onto another, my classmates are undoubtedly wondering why I spent so much time of my life on this, and whether or not I really had anything better to do this weekend. To that I say.................
I’m hoping someone in this room will take something away from this. Look at what a book like Fahrenheit 451 can do to a poor kid like me. I’m hoping one of you, at least one of you, will think the next time a seemingly easy question like that is asked.
Think like Guy Montag. Think different.
Quite the doozy (sp?), huh? Yeah, I composed the letter because I felt like I needed to write it. Normally, I'd let it ooze murkily out of your computer screen, rather than broadcast it to my English class, but change is nice sometimes.
This one definitely reads better out loud, so maybe I should record it with my silky smooth voice. Nah, that takes some of the mystery out of this site. Even though 98.765% of my readers know who I am.
2.04.2012
'Til Death (or Love's Side Effect)
Kim Kardashian. This girl hasn't exactly been dealt Aces in the great card game of Life. Father had passed away, her mother got married to a man with step-children, became a big time celebrity because a video of her fornicating got leaked, now permanently resting at B-level celebrity status. More recently, however, the gal got married to a total asshole, and got divorced 72 days later.
Whenever people harp on this girl for a lot of her flaws, I really can't say much. The sex tape? Yeah, 100% her fault, though she made the best out of a bad situation. Her reality shows? Yugh. But I don't have to watch them.
But when people are like, "There are things that have been in my fridge longer than Kim Kardashian's marriage lasted.", I get really pissed off. SHE MADE A GODDAMN MISTAKE. This is probably one of the worst things that has happened to her. How would you like it if on the day your father died someone you hardly knew came up to you and said, "At least now the rest of us get to eat at Thanksgiving, AMIRITE?". Now image that from millions of people you don't know.
Cut the jokes, cut her some slack. For this at least.
Now I'm not going to say that it was this incident that engendered my thoughts on marriage, but it's convenient that I get a good opener like that.
I'm not sure how to feel about marriage.
Now, chances are, you know someone who has, at one point, been married. Whether it be a parent, guardian, brother, sister, cousin, grandparent, friend, or teacher, you have known someone of that persuasion. If you ask ninety-eight percent of married couples why they got married, they will say it was because they loved one another. Unless you are my dad, in which case you would say, "We have a lot in common. For example, we both believe our Soulmates are out there somewhere."
Why does love automatically lead to marriage? As sitcoms have made me VERY aware, once you have dated someone for over a year or so, people ask you, "So when are you going to tie the knot?" Why is automatically assumed that people want to get married?
I've heard marriage defined as a permission slip from the Church to have sex. A little crass, but that's certainly how it began. If you weren't married, you could not copulate. (I wonder how many different words I can use to describe intercourse in this post?) That wasn't WHY people got married of course: they got married to be able to have kids and be supported.
Nowadays, marriage seems to be more of a tradition than anything real, other than tax changes. Brad Pitt (Very respectable actor) and Angelina Jolie (Very wide-mouthed actress) haven't been married, but their day to day interactions wouldn't be much different from your average married couple. Besides all of the African child rescuing, and all that money, and stuff.
That being said, would I be opposed to getting married if my lady-friend insisted on it? No, I would not. (I would, however, be opposed to changing my religion. If being Jewish [culturally] doesn't jive with you, I'm sorry, we are done here.)
I think marriage doesn't do much good. For some reason, people stop being all lovey-dovey once they get married, probably because things become routine. I don't want that to happen to me. I want to be happy with my partner, maybe not every second of every day, but just... happy. Not bored.
Also, marriage shackles people in. I'm not Barney Stinson (though I wish I had his face. I don't like my face as much as I like his) so don't get me wrong, but it just adds this layer of 'YOU AIN'T GOING NOWHERE, PUNK' that just would feel wrong. That's what its there for, I guess, to make sure that small squabbles don't permanently mess up a relationship, but it also makes people feel restrained.
People grow apart, and some people get divorced. It sucks, but it happens. The divorce process can be so long and drawn out and contemptuous that the two individuals, who used to be so in love, can barely tolerate the other! When I split up with a girl, I don't want it to be like that.
It's also not monogamy that makes marriage weird for me. When you enter a relationship, it should be monogamous, at least in my eyes. Extra-relationship affairs aren't something that I'd consider, not that people tend to consider these things much before doing them.
Now, I'm not married. Actually, technically I am. In fourth grade, I married my best male friend Jonah, and last year I was forced into a polygamous marriage with a Becky and an Emma.
Point is, I've never actually experienced any of these things that I'm preaching. But that's true for a lot of what I talk about. So am I wrong?
Probably. But that's how I feel now. What was that quote I heard once? "It is better to speak your mind and change it tomorrow than to have a consistent outlook but keep it silent"? No, but something of that persuasion.
Unfortunately, people seem to equate long-term relationships with marriage. It looks like I may be forced to go through with the "I do". But the above is how I feel about it. Unless of course my future wife is reading, in which case,
JOKE POST! Lololololol, the entire thing was a joke!
Whatever.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett.
Post Script
I've got a little surprise cooking, that I'd like to reveal to the public March 15th. So be there!
Whenever people harp on this girl for a lot of her flaws, I really can't say much. The sex tape? Yeah, 100% her fault, though she made the best out of a bad situation. Her reality shows? Yugh. But I don't have to watch them.
But when people are like, "There are things that have been in my fridge longer than Kim Kardashian's marriage lasted.", I get really pissed off. SHE MADE A GODDAMN MISTAKE. This is probably one of the worst things that has happened to her. How would you like it if on the day your father died someone you hardly knew came up to you and said, "At least now the rest of us get to eat at Thanksgiving, AMIRITE?". Now image that from millions of people you don't know.
Cut the jokes, cut her some slack. For this at least.
Now I'm not going to say that it was this incident that engendered my thoughts on marriage, but it's convenient that I get a good opener like that.
I'm not sure how to feel about marriage.
Now, chances are, you know someone who has, at one point, been married. Whether it be a parent, guardian, brother, sister, cousin, grandparent, friend, or teacher, you have known someone of that persuasion. If you ask ninety-eight percent of married couples why they got married, they will say it was because they loved one another. Unless you are my dad, in which case you would say, "We have a lot in common. For example, we both believe our Soulmates are out there somewhere."
Why does love automatically lead to marriage? As sitcoms have made me VERY aware, once you have dated someone for over a year or so, people ask you, "So when are you going to tie the knot?" Why is automatically assumed that people want to get married?
I've heard marriage defined as a permission slip from the Church to have sex. A little crass, but that's certainly how it began. If you weren't married, you could not copulate. (I wonder how many different words I can use to describe intercourse in this post?) That wasn't WHY people got married of course: they got married to be able to have kids and be supported.
Nowadays, marriage seems to be more of a tradition than anything real, other than tax changes. Brad Pitt (Very respectable actor) and Angelina Jolie (Very wide-mouthed actress) haven't been married, but their day to day interactions wouldn't be much different from your average married couple. Besides all of the African child rescuing, and all that money, and stuff.
That being said, would I be opposed to getting married if my lady-friend insisted on it? No, I would not. (I would, however, be opposed to changing my religion. If being Jewish [culturally] doesn't jive with you, I'm sorry, we are done here.)
I think marriage doesn't do much good. For some reason, people stop being all lovey-dovey once they get married, probably because things become routine. I don't want that to happen to me. I want to be happy with my partner, maybe not every second of every day, but just... happy. Not bored.
Also, marriage shackles people in. I'm not Barney Stinson (though I wish I had his face. I don't like my face as much as I like his) so don't get me wrong, but it just adds this layer of 'YOU AIN'T GOING NOWHERE, PUNK' that just would feel wrong. That's what its there for, I guess, to make sure that small squabbles don't permanently mess up a relationship, but it also makes people feel restrained.
People grow apart, and some people get divorced. It sucks, but it happens. The divorce process can be so long and drawn out and contemptuous that the two individuals, who used to be so in love, can barely tolerate the other! When I split up with a girl, I don't want it to be like that.
It's also not monogamy that makes marriage weird for me. When you enter a relationship, it should be monogamous, at least in my eyes. Extra-relationship affairs aren't something that I'd consider, not that people tend to consider these things much before doing them.
Now, I'm not married. Actually, technically I am. In fourth grade, I married my best male friend Jonah, and last year I was forced into a polygamous marriage with a Becky and an Emma.
Point is, I've never actually experienced any of these things that I'm preaching. But that's true for a lot of what I talk about. So am I wrong?
Probably. But that's how I feel now. What was that quote I heard once? "It is better to speak your mind and change it tomorrow than to have a consistent outlook but keep it silent"? No, but something of that persuasion.
Unfortunately, people seem to equate long-term relationships with marriage. It looks like I may be forced to go through with the "I do". But the above is how I feel about it. Unless of course my future wife is reading, in which case,
JOKE POST! Lololololol, the entire thing was a joke!
Whatever.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett.
Post Script
I've got a little surprise cooking, that I'd like to reveal to the public March 15th. So be there!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)