Wednesday, April 25, 2012

trying on a new, sainted carnality

i confess that i do worry about not feeling sufficiently conflicted between my carnality and my aspirations towards "holiness."  A quiz post by Steph prompted the reminiscence of a 3-day weekend idyll i spent with 2 goofy guys from Eglin AFB quite a long time back.  all the requirements postulated by Margaret Cho for "good gay sex" were met.....nothing at all competitive....very playful and a lot of fun.....only soreness that lingered was from all the laughter.    i guess i'm too much a Kantian or something since i suppose that since there were no violations of any categorical imperatives everything is ok.  yeah, i know.....more of that "cheap grace" stuff.  now, the instance i recounted earlier with the hunky redheaded hawtness does present a problem because i acted out of an unhealthy mix of boredom and anger and the guy was used as a means to an end and not necessarily the one he was willing to be complicit with.  using another human bean as a rag to wipe my dick is something i hope is categorically beneath me as i hope it to be unworthy and beneath everyone else who aspires to be a human bean.  so, there ARE conflicts but i don't think they are, for me, where a lot of folks believe they SHOULD BE.  tho' i'm old enough to really put the expectations of OTHER folks a dead last in the cue for my considerations (if at all).  the earlier circumstance with the 2 guys was not a situation that "would make the Baby Jeebus cry."  instead, i am reminded of a poem by Rumi or Hafiz about the poet and God being like two great fat men dancing together on a small boat, laughing riotously as their bellies collide.  where there is joy, delight, and fun G-d is......i think it unfortunate and perhaps a sad smallness of soul that too many Christians only look for G-d in times of mourning, strife, and difficulty.  why should He be shut out, so?  now, my acting out of boredom and anger with the redhead a few days ago.....yeah, that was not good and falls into the category of things that would "make the Baby Jeebus cry."  it was stupid (not a safe place), risky, unworthy, base, and unkind.  sadly, that moment would likely preclude the development of any positive interaction with him in the future.  (BLZBubba told me who he was and he sounds like he would be nice nice husband material EXCEPT i could never, i believe, feel comfortable around the guy given the circumstances of our first "meeting.")  it is hard to regain respect for someone who allowed me to be so unnecessarily unkind to him.  hah!  i just tried to foist one of those ugly "blame the victim" arguments.  .......i need to take a cup of tea break on this one.....oy.  i cannot believe i just wrote i could even for a moment seriously hold together the thought that his role as willing victim could MAKE me behave badly.  wow, what next....agreement with the whole Homosexual Panic Defense murderers of gayfolks like to foist upon juries?!?!?!?!  what a slippery slope!  any complicity he had in allowing himself to be so misused by me is purely internal to his own negotiations with his interior calculus of need and affects me, not at all.  for a second, i feared i was crafting a defensive argument to the tune of "his willingness and complicity in enabling my acting so basely evaporates, sublimates, and negates any agency upon my part."  what.  a.  crock.  of.  shit.   (the kettle's on and the moment was necessary to get back to me-self, Lawd.) the part for me is the fact that i, out of anger, boredom, worry over my mojo, and i admit a bit of depression, was (and am) capable of taking another person and being unkind, demeaning, and diminishing.  an insult to the imago Dei.  i, as a predatory opportunist, capitalized on a circumstance that presented itself to me.  if i were more successful at being "a nice person" i would have introduced myself, found out his name, and maybe have invited him to join me on my ramble and maybe to join me at the juice bar at the Nat.  M. says that i interpret it too much as lost opportunity.  yeah, i can see i can imagine the frustration on the part of that band of angels that precede us for trifling away their efforts to make good things happen for us because we cannot overcome the grips of our monkey-brained-ness.  Genesis warns us that sin crouches at the door.  i rather think it is like a cloak or jacket we too easily can put a habit (behaviour not nun's garments).  but i'm not up to discussions on sin because then i wax soteriological and soteriology is more than i can do, today.  i mean the pot of tea is good, but for soteriologic exegesis i require vodka or gin.  rum's good, too.

For our own private reasons
We live in each other for an hour.
Stranger, I take your body and its seasons
Aware the moon has gone a little sour

For us.... 

I am aware of your body and its dangers.
I spread my cloak for you in leafy weather
Where other fugitives and other strangers
Will put their mouths together.                                          ------Thomas James.

unfortunately, James's poem title would suggest that i turn to poetry for justification when all i mean for it is perhaps's funny to think that in the process of recollection, memories become refined.  the recollections of the fun weekend with the military guys are in 70's vintage Kodak process....where light is always golden and colours are saturated.  the grace-less trick is recollected in the black & white of a Bruce Weber photo-shoot or music video.  (i'm still waiting on my copy of Miroslav Volf's book on the theological necessites of remembering correctly and remembering well in the process of forgiveness....i couldn't afford the express delivery and i've been notified it is on back order tho' the bookseller's site indicated the item was in stock.  *sigh*)

[the photo is my not so subtle gesture towards 'more visual interest' and to bring up that i have a preference for 'vintage' homoerotica and am a fan of Wilhelm von Gloeden's photography]