Randomly Tuesday: LA, origins of the species, etc.

More random stuff for a Thursday afternoon:

  • My new snack obsession. I find myself shopping a lot at Trader Joe’s now that there’s one in my neighborhood, even for things like produce and meat. It’s amazing how much more pleasant shopping at TJ’s is when you don’t have to do it at one in San Francisco.
  • Hear hear to the assertion that contrary to popular belief, LA is “one of the most urban cities in the world” and also to the recognition that LA is in fact a very densely populated place.
  • Speaking of LA
  • Despite the fact that I’ve just never gotten that whole “bear” thing (the gay one), one thing I very much believe is that the whole scene was largely inspired by this show. Anyhow, I may have to own the DVDs now that they’re available.
  • Did I mention that this was really cool?

At some point soon, I’ll expand on my exciting weekend in Tennessee, summer vacation plans, and more. But that time is not today.

Woof

At least they don’t say “Now you know how to speak ‘Bear’.”

I think I mentioned once before in this space how much it used to bug me when fags of a certain persuasion would come up to me and say “woof” in an effort to tell me they thought I was attractive. I was never able to find it particularly flattering to be barked at. And I don’t think I would be able to do so now either.

Not that it’s been much of an issue lately anyway.

OK. Back to work.

Marriage, chicken, etc.

So about this whole Chick-fil-A thing…

I’ll have to admit they make a damned good chicken sandwich. It may be the best fast food sandwich in America. But I wouldn’t buy one now if they were the only restaurant in town. I fully understand that any number of other fast food chains (or their franchisees) have similarly deplorable politics and are probably contributing funds to the dark side as well. But what strikes me about the Chick-fil-A issue is the sheer belligerence of the company’s CEO and the chain’s followers as well as the illogic arguments and fallacious reasoning many of them have invoked in an effort to justify their support–and to mask the real reasons for this support.

Can we please dispense with the notion that this is some sort of “free speech” or “First Amendment” issue right off the bat? With the exception of efforts by a couple of blowhard mayors who spouted off some nonsense they have neither the authority nor the legal standing to enforce, there has been no violation whatsoever of Dan Cathy’s freedom of speech. None. He has faced no legal consequences at all for his ill-advised comments. And he won’t–which is pretty much the definition of free speech.

The problem is that those earnest freedom fighters who queued up to express their support–not necessarily for Cathy’s statements, they always stress, but for his right to make these statements–don’t quite get the concept. Cathy had his say. He exercised his free speech rights without legal retribution. However, the right to free speech does not protect him from the consequences of that speech nor does it preclude people from disagreeing with what he has said and from using their own free speech rights to express that disagreement–which is exactly what Cathy’s detractors have done. And guess what: it’s completely legal and ethical and appropriate for them to react this way, no matter how much it outrages Mike Huckabee.

When I hear an ardent Chick-fil-A supporter babbling on and on about Cathy’s free speech rights, I can’t help thinking back fifty years to the days when segregationists in the South used “states’ rights” as code for their own discriminatory beliefs. Code words like this obviously play better in the media. Worse yet, they also allow the folks who use them to engage in a pattern of denial that much of their motivation is in fact based on prejudice and bigotry rather than on some strict interpretation of the Constitution.

More simply put: Anyone who expresses a belief that Dan Cathy and his $4.5 billion dollar corporation are being persecuted over a free speech issue either does not understand the concept of free speech or is using this as an excuse to mask a personal issue with same-sex marriage. In some ways, I actually have more respect for the people who at least own up to their real motivation than I do for the cowards who cloak their disapproval with idiotic statements like, “I’m not against gay people. I’m just standing up for the First Amendment.”

And let’s get real here: This isn’t just about same-sex marriage, although it would be enough if it were. This is about a long term pattern of donating money to anti-gay groups. Does anyone really believe we would be having this national conversation if it were revealed that Cathy were supporting white supremacist or anti-Semitic groups? How about if he’d come out against interracial marriage? Desegregated schools? Of course we wouldn’t. It’s a sad fact of life that Americans are far more likely to find excuses to support anti-gay bigots than other types.

It takes an issue like same-sex marriage to demonstrate the prejudiced attitudes that so many “tolerant” people still hold. Every time I read a  rant from someone who has “no problem with gay people” except when it comes to “redefining” marriage to include same-sex couples, I want to gouge my eyes out. Here’s the deal: If you are not willing to extend all the rights you enjoy to your “many gay friends”, then you do have a problem with gay people and you are prejudiced, no matter how many claims you make to the contrary. At least have the balls to admit it. This is why I believe the drive toward same-sex marriage, while not the biggest issue currently facing us (federal anti-discrimination legislation comes to mind), is still a very important one; it has excited the masses and it forces people to confront their real prejudices and insecurities. And the fact that the CEO of a major corporation feels that he can make statements like this without a backlash demonstrates perhaps why there has been such a backlash.

Although many of my friends are affected, I have no horse in this race. Turns out I’m apparently not very good at being married and it’s not something I’m likely to try again. But I’ll be damned if I’ll offer any financial support, even the price of a five-dollar meal, to any chickenshit (pun intended) corporation that plans to use part of that money to deny me any basic human right, even one that I don’t intend to assert. Dan Cathy has the right to think and say whatever he wants and to give money to whichever crackpots he chooses. He does not, however, have a right to my continued financial assistance in doing so. And he won’t get it. And those who would support him based on “free speech” or whatever other code word won’t get any respect from me, either. Not that they probably care…

Order through chaos

It’s hard not to love a bookstore with a “history of technology” section.

More random stuff for a Saturday morning, all of which would probably be more appropriate to some closed-system social networking platform, but fuck that:

  • This might explain so may aspects of my life, from my career choice to why my marriage state-unsanctioned relationship failed.  And why I always crave cookies but often don’t find them satisfying. Or it might not. (Thanks, Dan C.)
  • Much true, this. And it’s somehow related to the fact that I find knowing lots of stupid Excel tricks has helped me more as a librarian than any other tech skills.
  • I don’t shop at Penney’s (I mean “JCP“) as much as I used to, but I could start again, especially if it would piss off these morons.

S-A-T-U-R-D-A-Y Night

Spending my Saturday night setting up my new phone. It’s sort of like watching paint dry. But I’m still excited.

A friend just texted me that apparently all the rock and roll drag queens of my misspent youth will be at the big queer bar in Greensboro tonight, including Atlanta’s (and formerly Greensboro’s) very own Lily White. For a brief second I considered going just to see some old friends. Then I contemplated the logistics of driving thirty miles each way (a drive I already make five days a week) in the cold (19F tonight) after being up and busy since 7AM (I was scrubbing the toilets by 8:30) and bed started seeming much more appealing. And after the last time I did so, I  sort of promised myself I’d never walk into a North Carolina queer bar again, anyway.

The new phone is now functioning nicely and I am in fact going to bed. I really don’t intend to do much of anything when I wake up either. I finished most of my grant stuff on Friday and celebrated that night by taking myself out for lasagna at Cagney’s. Today was about errands and taking care of things. I will continue the celebration tomorrow by not working (for the first Sunday in three weeks), not thinking about family stuff, and maybe not even leaving the house. Siri and I may spend some time together, but that’s about it. I’m rather looking forward to it.

 

Randomly Wednesday

Since I’m unlikely ever to move back to California nor to be married, yesterday’s ruling has no personal impact on me. But it may impact a lot of people I know. And it’s kind of cool that a federal court–albeit probably the most liberal federal court there is, in a rather narrow ruling–has now actually ruled in favor of same-sex marriage.

I’m mildly worried that the this path to the Supreme Court may be starting a bit early. That might lead to an premature and unfavorable ruling which would cause problems for years to come (sort of a Plessy v.Ferguson for the 21st Century). But I’ll go ahead and be excited anyway. The time will come soon. However, let’s also not lose sight of the fact that even the most basic nondescrimination legislation is still not in place in a lot of states–my own, for example.

More exciting news for a Wednesday night:

  • Happy discovery: Coming off my AT&T family plan doesn’t necessarily mean losing my grandfathered unlimited data plan. Cool, eh?
  • Grant application season craziness is almost over. Will they be crazy enough to give me a quarter of a million dollars? We’ll find out in June.
  • Got approved to so a presentation at ALA in Anaheim this summer. Anyone wanna go to Disneyland?
  • I continue to hate Bank of America. But that’s not news.

Fidelity, monogamy, honesty, etc.

I read an interesting article in today’s New York Times Magazine on the concept that  “fidelity” perhaps need not be the primary focus of a successful relationship. Frankly, I’m not sure that any sane person has ever suggested that it should be the primary focus, although it clearly is a significant focus for many (and probably most) couples.

The author primarily focuses on Dan Savage’s assertions that (1) monogamy is difficult, (2) it is important to understand that sometimes the sexual needs of one or both partners can best be met outside the relationship, and (3) honesty is vitally important. In general, I agree on the latter two points, if not necessarily on the first–and here’s how I arrived there:

Longtime readers will remember that this site was originally a very different animal than it is today. It was pretty much built on the foundation of my own personal sexual revolution as I paraded through the back rooms, sex clubs, and dark alleys of San Francisco’s South of Market Area. To use a polite term, I considered myself something of a sexual libertine. I still do. Long term relationships. cohabiting, and–Great Pumpkin forbid–marriage were not on the agenda.

And then I met Mark. Suddenly I found a kind of love that I’d never experienced before, and likely never will again. Seemingly overnight, all the rules changed. The funny thing is that I never really thought of myself as “being monogamous”. In fact, that’s not a conscious choice I ever would have made and it was most certainly not some sort of “moral awakening” or whatever. The fact is that after a time, I just didn’t really feel like pursuing anyone else. It wasn’t hard. It wasn’t difficult. It just was. Was I still attracted to other men? Of course. Did I get rid of all my porn? Yeah, right. Pursuing other boys sort of ended for me the way that heavy drinking had a few years earlier: I just woke up one day and realized I didn’t really do that anymore. And this is why I suggest that, at least in my case, monogamy was not at all difficult, mainly because it was not a choice I made but something that sprang naturally for me out of my feelings for my partner.

That said, I understand that this is not how it works for everyone. And that’s important here when we consider how couples deal with extramarital coupling. I would never suggest that my relationship experience is–or should be–a model for anyone else. Relationships are built of individuals who have a nasty habit of having a whole world of different needs and wants. Who the hell am I to tell another couple how they should relate to themselves or anyone else? That’s way above my pay grade. And that’s what irritates me so much about some proponents of polyamory and open relationships, with their smug assumptions that their way is the only “correct” option for all of humanity and that anyone who disagrees or has a different experience is just too fucking stupid or unevolved to know any better. In short, they’re every bit as didactic and judgmental as fundamentalist Christians who offer heterosexual monogamy as the only model.

But I digress. Savage is not going down this “one true way” path and I very much respect him for it, although he is quick to remind us that “men were never expected to be monogamous.” He’s probably correct in this, but advancing such a purely evolutionary argument leaves him open to the obvious criticism that men were also never expected to be homosexual. It’s important to recognize the “nurture” in this equation as well as the “nature.” As Judith Stacey said in the article, “Monoga­my is not natural, nonmonogamy is not natural. Variation is what’s natural.”

All in all, though, I find myself agreeing with most of what Savage says, at least on a personal level. Like him, I am skeptical that the concept of polyamory would ever work in my own relationships. While I might have been upset by a partner having a random sexual encounter here and there, I could probably have understood and coped with that. But I know that I would never have been able to tolerate a partner having long term, ongoing sexual and romantic relationships with other people. If a sexual need needs to be addressed outside the relationship, that’s one thing, but if a relationship need isn’t being satisfied inside the relationship, I think there’s a problem. But I recognize that not everyone would agree on that. In my case, though, it just wouldn’t be fair to me or to my needs; it would be too much wear and tear on my emotions. And it would probably be no picnic for the partner who wanted multiple relationships, either, as he’d have to either hide them from me or live with how miserable they were making me.

And therein lies what I think is the biggest issue: the fact that there is too often both a discrepancy between what the partners want and a lack of communication about it. This too often makes compromise and even further communication impossible. When one partner presents an ultimatum, the other is almost genetically pre-programmed to reply with another ultimatum–or even worse, to throw his own needs out the window in an effort to “save the relationship.” Either one is a dead end and is all but guaranteed to cause (probably fatal) problems that might not have occurred if there had been a mutual dialogue at an earlier point.

I don’t actually believe that most couples make sexual fidelity (I really hate that term) the primary issue in their relationships as Savage suggests, although most do make it a pretty big one. And I agree that individuals in a strong relationship will generally deal better with this issue–as they will with any issue–than those in one that’s already troubled. Whatever solution works for them (on fidelity, finances, priorities, whatever) is OK as long as it’s mutual and as long as it’s discussed before it becomes something toxic.

I remind you, however, that as a recent “person of divorce,” my take on how to manage a successful relationship might be somewhat suspect and worth ignoring completely…

Respectfully…Back off!

It disturbs me a bit that several friends and coworkers have suggested that I should get “paired off” again soon. I know they mean well, but really, ummm, no.

Seriously. NO.

I think anyone who’s known me a long time realizes that being a solo act is my natural state. This is not to say that friendship or sex is out, although the latter isn’t really seeming very appealing right now (and no one’s offering anyway). But romance or–Great Pumpkin forbid–a long-term relationship pretty much are out. Understand that Mark is a very special person and, I made a very special exception for him because it was what I wanted. The fact that he was so different inspired me to “break the rules”, which is why I was so quick to go completely exclusive, why I considered cohabiting for the first time ever, and why it hurt so incredibly much when it ended. I was not looking for a relationship in 2001 and I’m not looking for one now.  I met a very specific person and that led to a very specific type of relationship that’s not likely to be replicated.

It’s not like going out and buying a new puppy when your dog dies. I don’t  particularly want to “date” now. In fact, I never liked “dating” very much–I was more into “random fucking”–but the act of courtship and even the effort required to engage in it both seem about as appealing to me as an all-day MRI (and no one’s offering anyway).

Please don’t suggest that I sample the local “gay nightlife”. It consists of exactly one disco that doubles as a drag show venue a couple of nights a week. In short, it’s every Southern ghetto queer bar I ever hated in my twenties and thirties all wrapped up in a package that fills me with nothing but fatigue and a sense of impending doom now that I’m in my forties. Having spent a supremely miserable couple of hours in a smaller version of the same bar one Saturday night about six months ago, I can tell you that this scene appeals to me only slightly more than that vacation in Libya I’ve been dreaming of for so long.

I know your heart is in the right place, but please just be my friend and feed me unhealthy food or take me to a movie. Buy me a cute, young rentboy if you must. But please don’t tell me how you’d like to fix me up with your gay brother/cousin/friend with whom I probably have nothing in common and to whom I’m probably not even remotely attracted. And if you assume for some reason that I’m a “bear” or that I’m into that whole scene, please understand when I start growling at you. I’ve met a lot of new people in the past few years and I realize I’ve not made clear to many of you my whole philosophy on sexual orientation so I understand your confusion and I will try not to be my (naturally) crabby self. But I may fail once in a while.

Me, Myself, I

For better or worse, I’ve always been a solo act. That’s my nature, and it took an extremely special exception to induce a temporary deviation from that state. It seems unlikely to me that there will be a repeat anytime in the foreseeable future. Hence my (very polite) rebuff to a (very well-meaning) coworker who suggested I start dating and sampling all that exciting gay nightlife in Winston-Salem.

As far as I can tell, the sum total of Winston-Salem’s “exciting gay nightlife” consists of one big disco that doubles as a venue for drag shows on Friday nights. In short, it’s every Southern ghetto queer bar I ever hated in my twenties and thirties all wrapped up in a package that fills me with nothing but fatigue and a sense of impending doom now that I’m in my forties. Having spent a supremely miserable couple of hours in a smaller version of the same bar about six months ago, I can tell you that this scene appeals to me only slightly more than that vacation in Libya I’ve been dreaming of for so long.

I’m a little torn right now. I’ve never in my life felt as alone as I do right now. I have some very good friends in my life and they’ve been a really big help to me in the past few months. But they’re not here. There’s no one here to listen to me talk about my insecurities, my regrets, and just how shitty I feel about everything that’s going on in my life right now–and it’s not just the breakup. No hugs, no crying on anyone’s shoulder, almost no human contact at all. I speak to my parents and my coworkers all the time, but only in the most superficial way (see first paragraph above) and always through my brave, happy face. In fact, I haven’t even told my parents about Mark and me yet, for a number of reasons. And yes, I understand that I boxed myself into this isolated little corner.

To be honest, a big part of me sort of wants to be alone right now. It’s hard work talking about this stuff and it also opens me up to having to listen to other people’s stuff. And I need to feel a little self-absorbed right now. But yeah, I need to build some local friendships.

The last thing I need in my life right now, though, is to be hanging around late at night in some wretched queer bar of the damned, sipping a Coke, choking on bad cologne smells, and listening to some of the worst music ever recorded.

What I probably need even less than that is to be “dating”. I never enjoyed that when I was voluntarily single and I don’t imagine I’d find it any more appealing now that I’m involuntarily so.

Not, mind you, that I expect to be fielding many offers to begin with…

 

 

From the air

Random intrestingness from 30,000 feet:

Free wifi and a first class upgrade (thanks, m’luv) make air travel almost tolerable.